70 million dollar lawsuit and my footage at DVinfo.net

Rich Rosen · May 25th, 2004, 09:48 AM

I shot 30 hours of footage this past summer with the spoken not written permission of a young rock and roll concert promoter about a concert he was putting on that didn't happen. All during the shooting he gave me exclusive and intimate access and kept saying "we're partners on this right" so I stupidly assumed there would be no release problem. Now he's had a change of heart which means the documentary is dead. But he does want the footage for his 70 million dollar lawsuit against the people who cancelled the concert.

Question is....I put about 90 hours into the shooting. Now he wants the footage for his legal and monetary benefit and the hell with my film. What should I charge?
Thanks.....

Jeff Donald · May 25th, 2004, 10:12 AM

Do yourself a favor and talk to an attorney, before you have any more conversations with your "partner."

Rob Belics · May 25th, 2004, 01:49 PM

All he needs is a subpoena and he's got your footage. Don't even think of getting paid for it. Won't happen.

Peter Moore · May 25th, 2004, 01:51 PM

I agree completely. This sounds like something I wouldn't rely on an Internet message board for advice on. :)

Keith Loh · May 25th, 2004, 01:56 PM

In fact, it would look bad for his case if he did pay you for the footage before acquiring the 'evidence'.

Christopher C. Murphy · May 25th, 2004, 02:07 PM

Hey Rich,

Isn't that the footage you accidently erased? Or was it the footage that you captured, edited and accidently left open on your network....and now it's flying around the globe being looked at for free by everyone?

I personally make it a rule to erase all clients footage when non-payment reaches 30 days (ok, not 30 days...but, eventually if i see no payment after a long while). Hey, it's my tape...and tape ain't cheap.

What do all you guys do?

Murph

Law Tyler · May 26th, 2004, 11:28 AM

Oh yeah, it is just like the computer algorithm I came up with, that a large company wanted me to testify to in court against a 3rd-party who was suing them for patent infringement. Since my public communication of the algorithm occured prior to the patent date, they think I can kill the other party's case.

Guess what, I did not hear the phrase "expert witness", gee, hard to remember something I came up with and tossed away more than a decade ago.

Why do these people think that we will put ourselves in the hot seat, being insulted by the other party's lawyers, subjected to perjury charges, just so they can save a few million dollars and we getting nothing for our trouble?

Rich Rosen · May 26th, 2004, 08:29 PM

When I sent him an email asking for what I would have gotten if I was hired to shoot the footage his one word reply was "weak"
and my one word reply back was "trust".

He has now threatened me with a supeona. One lawyer has told me he can spend $75,000 in legal fees if I resist resist resist. He will also have one angry shooter (me) testifying at the trial.

Jeff Donald · May 26th, 2004, 09:00 PM

Nuts.

The Battle of the Bulge

On December 21, 1944 the German forces had completely surrounded Bastogne, defended by the 101st Airborne Division. When General Anthony McAuliffe was awakened by a German invitation to surrender, he gave a one-syllable reply that has been variously reported and was probably unprintable. However, there is no disagreement as to what he wrote on the paper delivered to the Germans: "NUTS!" That reply had to be explained both to the Germans and to non-American Allies.

Dylan Couper · May 27th, 2004, 12:15 AM

I'm staying out of this one, because my advice, although morally fine, may be somewhat illegal.

It's based on: if the guy is an a-hole, then treat him like one.

Peter Jefferson · May 27th, 2004, 12:22 AM

rich u should not have contacted him AT ALL.
go see a lawyer.
if ths person wants to claim damages, you should ask for your cut in it as wel as YOUR loss of earnings from HIM .

like i said, u shouldnt have made any contact at all.
from here, i would only speak to a lawyer, and arrange ur own damages claim against him.

if u have nothign documented, it shoudl serve as a lesson in business.. especially with somethign this big

good luck but i dont like ur chances
fact remains the tapes are urs
u were there with verbal permission and no production plan was discussed between urself and the guy suing the band
no releass are signed so u cant publish this stuff, but the stuff is still urse, regardless of the footage.
if he wants the footage, he DOES NOT OWN IT
you do

Rich Rosen · May 27th, 2004, 06:07 AM

He gave me exclusive and intimate access to him during the time period I was filming which someone said might be considered "implied consent" which would give me the right to use it without a release from him.

Rob Belics · May 27th, 2004, 06:33 AM

You guys are losing your focus on the issue:

1) This guy wants to use Rich's tapes as evidence in a trial.
2) Rich wants to get paid for the work he did.

There is no direct connection between the two.

Rich does not need a lawyer for point 1. Getting his tapes subpoened will not cost him anything or involve more trouble than collecting the tapes. Even his shipping costs, if any, should be paid for.

There could be exceptions such as if turning over the tapes causes Rich harm in some way, directly or indirectly. In this case he might want to consider hiring a lawyer but this doesn't seem to be the case.

Point 2 is a totally different, unrelated, issue. Whether Rich feels he wasted his time and money on making the tapes means nothing to point 1.

I might warn Rich that if, at this point, he were to destroy the tapes he might be charged with destruction of evidence in a lawsuit.

I am not a lawyer but I do run businesses and have had some experience with these issues.

Christopher C. Murphy · May 27th, 2004, 06:37 AM

Rob is right.

Peter Moore · May 27th, 2004, 06:45 AM

Rich,

1) Stop posting about this right now.

2) Find a live in person lawyer to talk to about your potential obligations to supply the tapes, and your potential ability to recover money for your work.

May 25th, 2004, 09:48 AM	#1
Rich Rosen New Boot Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 23	70 million dollar lawsuit and my footage I shot 30 hours of footage this past summer with the spoken not written permission of a young rock and roll concert promoter about a concert he was putting on that didn't happen. All during the shooting he gave me exclusive and intimate access and kept saying "we're partners on this right" so I stupidly assumed there would be no release problem. Now he's had a change of heart which means the documentary is dead. But he does want the footage for his 70 million dollar lawsuit against the people who cancelled the concert. Question is....I put about 90 hours into the shooting. Now he wants the footage for his legal and monetary benefit and the hell with my film. What should I charge? Thanks.....

May 25th, 2004, 10:12 AM	#2
Jeff Donald Warden Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 8,287	Do yourself a favor and talk to an attorney, before you have any more conversations with your "partner." __________________ Jeff Donald Carpe Diem Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Where to Buy? From the best in the business: DVinfo.net sponsors

May 25th, 2004, 01:56 PM	#5
Keith Loh Air China Pilot Join Date: May 2002 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Posts: 2,389	In fact, it would look bad for his case if he did pay you for the footage before acquiring the 'evidence'. __________________ -- Visit http://www.KeithLoh.com \| stuff about living in Vancouver \| My Flickr photo gallery

May 25th, 2004, 02:07 PM	#6
Christopher C. Murphy Trustee Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Boston, MA Posts: 1,707	Hey Rich, Isn't that the footage you accidently erased? Or was it the footage that you captured, edited and accidently left open on your network....and now it's flying around the globe being looked at for free by everyone? I personally make it a rule to erase all clients footage when non-payment reaches 30 days (ok, not 30 days...but, eventually if i see no payment after a long while). Hey, it's my tape...and tape ain't cheap. What do all you guys do? Murph __________________ Christopher C. Murphy Director, Producer, Writer

May 26th, 2004, 09:00 PM	#9
Jeff Donald Warden Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 8,287	Nuts. The Battle of the Bulge On December 21, 1944 the German forces had completely surrounded Bastogne, defended by the 101st Airborne Division. When General Anthony McAuliffe was awakened by a German invitation to surrender, he gave a one-syllable reply that has been variously reported and was probably unprintable. However, there is no disagreement as to what he wrote on the paper delivered to the Germans: "NUTS!" That reply had to be explained both to the Germans and to non-American Allies. __________________ Jeff Donald Carpe Diem Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| Where to Buy? From the best in the business: DVinfo.net sponsors

May 25th, 2004, 01:49 PM	#3
Rob Belics Major Player Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: St. Louis, MO Posts: 581	All he needs is a subpoena and he's got your footage. Don't even think of getting paid for it. Won't happen.

May 25th, 2004, 01:51 PM	#4
Peter Moore Trustee Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Arlington VA Posts: 1,034	I agree completely. This sounds like something I wouldn't rely on an Internet message board for advice on. :)

May 26th, 2004, 11:28 AM	#7
Law Tyler Major Player Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Plano, TX Posts: 204	Oh yeah, it is just like the computer algorithm I came up with, that a large company wanted me to testify to in court against a 3rd-party who was suing them for patent infringement. Since my public communication of the algorithm occured prior to the patent date, they think I can kill the other party's case. Guess what, I did not hear the phrase "expert witness", gee, hard to remember something I came up with and tossed away more than a decade ago. Why do these people think that we will put ourselves in the hot seat, being insulted by the other party's lawyers, subjected to perjury charges, just so they can save a few million dollars and we getting nothing for our trouble?

May 26th, 2004, 08:29 PM	#8
Rich Rosen New Boot Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 23	When I sent him an email asking for what I would have gotten if I was hired to shoot the footage his one word reply was "weak" and my one word reply back was "trust". He has now threatened me with a supeona. One lawyer has told me he can spend $75,000 in legal fees if I resist resist resist. He will also have one angry shooter (me) testifying at the trial.

May 27th, 2004, 12:15 AM	#10
Dylan Couper Wrangler Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Vancouver, British Columbia Posts: 8,314	I'm staying out of this one, because my advice, although morally fine, may be somewhat illegal. It's based on: if the guy is an a-hole, then treat him like one. __________________ Need to rent camera gear in Vancouver BC? Check me out at camerarentalsvancouver.com

May 27th, 2004, 12:22 AM	#11
Peter Jefferson Inner Circle Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Aus Posts: 3,884	rich u should not have contacted him AT ALL. go see a lawyer. if ths person wants to claim damages, you should ask for your cut in it as wel as YOUR loss of earnings from HIM . like i said, u shouldnt have made any contact at all. from here, i would only speak to a lawyer, and arrange ur own damages claim against him. if u have nothign documented, it shoudl serve as a lesson in business.. especially with somethign this big good luck but i dont like ur chances fact remains the tapes are urs u were there with verbal permission and no production plan was discussed between urself and the guy suing the band no releass are signed so u cant publish this stuff, but the stuff is still urse, regardless of the footage. if he wants the footage, he DOES NOT OWN IT you do

May 27th, 2004, 06:07 AM	#12
Rich Rosen New Boot Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 23	He gave me exclusive and intimate access to him during the time period I was filming which someone said might be considered "implied consent" which would give me the right to use it without a release from him.

May 27th, 2004, 06:33 AM	#13
Rob Belics Major Player Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: St. Louis, MO Posts: 581	You guys are losing your focus on the issue: 1) This guy wants to use Rich's tapes as evidence in a trial. 2) Rich wants to get paid for the work he did. There is no direct connection between the two. Rich does not need a lawyer for point 1. Getting his tapes subpoened will not cost him anything or involve more trouble than collecting the tapes. Even his shipping costs, if any, should be paid for. There could be exceptions such as if turning over the tapes causes Rich harm in some way, directly or indirectly. In this case he might want to consider hiring a lawyer but this doesn't seem to be the case. Point 2 is a totally different, unrelated, issue. Whether Rich feels he wasted his time and money on making the tapes means nothing to point 1. I might warn Rich that if, at this point, he were to destroy the tapes he might be charged with destruction of evidence in a lawsuit. I am not a lawyer but I do run businesses and have had some experience with these issues.

May 27th, 2004, 06:37 AM	#14
Christopher C. Murphy Trustee Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Boston, MA Posts: 1,707	Rob is right. __________________ Christopher C. Murphy Director, Producer, Writer

May 27th, 2004, 06:45 AM	#15
Peter Moore Trustee Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Arlington VA Posts: 1,034	Rich, 1) Stop posting about this right now. 2) Find a live in person lawyer to talk to about your potential obligations to supply the tapes, and your potential ability to recover money for your work.