Who owns the footage when client doesnt pay

[Landon D. Parks]

 

Yes indeed they are, quite right.

 

R,

 

Not questioning that at all. In fact, of the few places I have sued, I've only ever managed to collect the judgement once. Most of the time, if you have to resort to suing someone or a business, they are either broke or really good at what they do. Neither one will work in your favor. My point is that it's a fairly easy to thing to do, and will not require much of your time. It might well result in you getting your money. Sometimes, you don't even need to go to court. Often times the simple act of filing the case will trigger the person to pay.

 

I'm not really saying immediately go and file a lawsuit. However, that is certainly a viable option to poster has if he wants his money. He'd need to weigh the benefits of doing so, to determine rather it's worth it to him. I guess in my case, having been trained in business - I feel like no one should get by with anything. I gave you my time and expertise, if you can't pay me for it I'll make sure you suffer until you do pay it. Call it the ruthless mentality I guess.

 

In that instance I'd probably be better of running a movie studio than actually making any movies. :rolleyes:

Edited May 2, 2016 by Landon D. Parks

[Landon D. Parks]

You do crack me up Landon, I will say that. :)

 

R,

 

It's my job, what can I say ;)

[JD Hartman]

Getting a judgement in small claims court and collecting it are two different things.

 

 

 

Yes indeed they are, quite right.

 

R,

 

 

 

Not questioning that at all. In fact, of the few places I have sued, I've only ever managed to collect the judgement once. Most of the time, if you have to resort to suing someone or a business, they are either broke or really good at what they do. Neither one will work in your favor. My point is that it's a fairly easy to thing to do, and will not require much of your time. It might well result in you getting your money. Sometimes, you don't even need to go to court. Often times the simple act of filing the case will trigger the person to pay.

 

I'm not really saying immediately go and file a lawsuit. However, that is certainly a viable option to poster has if he wants his money. He'd need to weigh the benefits of doing so, to determine rather it's worth it to him. I guess in my case, having been trained in business - I feel like no one should get by with anything. I gave you my time and expertise, if you can't pay me for it I'll make sure you suffer until you do pay it. Call it the ruthless mentality I guess.

 

In that instance I'd probably be better of running a movie studio than actually making any movies. :rolleyes:

 

If FOS Productions followed your business model, they would form an LLC for each project and dissolve it after.. They'd have minimal assets in the LLC and the first people to be paid would be the primary owners. No assets to attach to and their minimal personal assets are protected. They live in an apartment, drive a used car, what assets are you going try to have the court seize? There are none, any equipment is leased or rented. You've just spend how much time and money? You've successfully collected how much? You've made them suffer? How? They are protected, you are frustrated, tell me how you will win this?

Edited May 2, 2016 by JD Hartman

[Landon D. Parks]

If FOS Productions followed your business model, they would form an LLC for each project and dissolve it after.. They'd have minimal assets in the LLC and the first people to be paid would be the primary owners. No assets to attach to and their minimal personal assets are protected. They live in an apartment, drive a used car, what assets are you going try to have the court seize? There are none, any equipment is leased or rented. You've just spend how much time and money? You've successfully collected how much? You've made them suffer? How? They are protected, you are frustrated, tell me how you will win this?

 

Following my earlier advice and setting up a company for each production would not mean that when someone sues the LLC they can't get anything. All that allows you to do is funnel some assets into parent companies that reduce liability for the child companies. If a child company produced a film, that company would still own that film - as well as any future earnings that film makes. If Joe Cameraman is not paid, he can sue the production LLC but not the parent production company. In suing the production LLC, he would still be entitled to any income due him from that settlement that comes into the production LLC, be that through royalties or cash payments for rights to the film. The only difference is he cannot sue the producers themselves, or attach assets of the parent company - which could go much deeper than what a production LLC has.

 

A example:

 

'My Company LLC' has assets including offices, equipment, etc. My Company LLC sets up an LLC called 'Cool Movie A LLC' (This is standard practice in professional film). 'My Company LLC' then puts $1,000,000 in the bank account of 'Cool Movie A LLC'. 'Cool Movie A LLC' then spends that money to make the movie. It produces all contracts in the name of 'Cool Movie A LLC' and not the parent. Likewise, all income derived from that motion picture will flow through 'Cool Movie A LLC' first. It will then be split with the parent production company and anyone else holding an interest in 'Cool Movie A LLC', which could be other producers or actors, etc. NOW, let's throw a wrench in the mix. 'Joe Camera' is not paid his due according to his contract with 'Cool Movie A LLC'. He sues that company in court. While it's true he cannot attach the personal assets of the producers, or the assets of the parent company, that does not mean there are no assets. Remember, all income from the movie first flows through 'Cool Movie A LLC' before being deposited to the parent company. As such, all future income that flows through 'My Movie A LLC' is subject to being taken in a lawsuit. If the company has little money or cash flow, the court could order that the very rights to the film that 'My Movie A LLC' owns be transferred to the plaintiff as a lien.

 

There is also the very real probability that a good lawyer would go ahead and sue everyone anyway, and then each person - the parent, the producers, etc, would have to prove they did not pierce the corporate vale. This happens more times than one might think, even if it's not successful in the end. On the off chance that the producers and/or parent are caught off guard, or that the parent or the producers actually did pierce the corporate vale, then a whole new revenue stream just opened for the plaintiff.

 

---

 

Yeah, it's difficult to fully understand. However, in the world of business, there are ways. You may not always collect every lawsuit you file, but often times the mere threat of a suit will make a person pay up or attempt to work out a deal with you. Most cases, even big ones, never proceed to trial after being filed. They settle first.

 

The goal of having a separate LLC for each movie does not offer unlimited protection to the production company, it simply limits its liability to that one production, including and income and losses of that one production.

 

Don't underestimate the power of thought. That little $100 or less filing fee may well earn you your contracted due, even without court. Now if your damages are are only a few hundred in the first place, it might well not be worth your time sue. Depends on how much you value your time. My time is cheap.

 

PS) Some here act like the above method is something foreign. ALL professional films do this. Any entertainment attorney will tell you to do this very thing (set up another company). It even happens for real independent films. In today's sue-happy world, you need all the protection you can get.

Edited May 2, 2016 by Landon D. Parks

[Edward Lawrence Conley III]

" walked in with no contracts and really no idea how these things work."

 

what is he going to sue them for?

 

 

:ph34r:

[Landon D. Parks]

Not saying he has too, or that it's even a good idea... Though apparently he has a verbal contract for an agreed upon payment. Verbal contracts are valid, at least in the States - and I'd imagine so in Australia as well. I was just pointing out that he does, in fact, have the option to attempt to recover his due money in court should he want that option. He might not succeed if he tried, but he has the right to try if he desires. Just pointing that out to him as one option. Not even saying it would be a good idea at all.

Edited May 6, 2016 by Landon D. Parks

[Tyler Purcell]

Getting a judgement in small claims court and collecting it are two different things.

It's actually the most important comment too because generally, people don't pay because they can't pay.

 

All of those contracts, paperwork, legal documents, they're worthless/useless if the person who is suppose to pay you, doesn't have any assets. So you spend your own money to go to court, you sue the guy for the money you're owed, but getting that money from someone who doesn't have the money to pay you, is almost impossible.

 

Lets say you get a settlement out of court, back end from the sale of the product. Who says they will actually pay? Most of the time they sign legal documents and they simply change the asset in some way so when it's sold, it's not considered the same product.

[Edward Lawrence Conley III]

Although verbal contacts are technically binding, actually enforcing one is damn near impossible.

 

 

and as Tyler mentioned- 99% of the time when people don't pay- the money train has dried up- so there is NO money to go after.

 

 

You can demand COD or take the risk of 30-60 day or longer if the word "magazine" is in the company name.

 

Just had this conversation with a friend who got burned when Cimmaron went down- he still takes jobs 30-60 but has tightened up on the problem clients by being "Booked" whenever they call.

[Tyler Purcell]

HA, small world! I was at Cimarron when they went down as well. 220 employees, no pay for two weeks, and then the company goes belly up. The lawyers and banks took all the money left in the company, the employees saw nothing. I was owed around $3500 dollars when they went belly up.

 

For post production, I take half up front and half on delivery.

 

For cinematography, I take a down-payment up front (unless I know the people really well) and then take a weekly/bi-weekly payment.

 

I know a lot of people who do 30-60, but I think it's away too risky. I've been on shoots where they literally let go of the entire crew after week two, before paying. Then they changed the name of the show, moved all the assets to a new production company, started it up again, got an all new gullible crew to finish the show, changed the title again and wound up selling it to some out of country distributor which means, the money trail stops.

 

If people want to screw you, they will get away with it. Of course if you're a millionaire, you can go after them, but you will be spending all your own money because you won't get a dime from them.

[Max Field]

I've never had legal advice as far as shooting goes, but I've been told if a voice actor sends in their AUDIO recordings to a game dev/animator and there is nothing in a contract that states they are signing over the rights to their recordings to someone else, they could technically sue the video game/cartoon.for using their recordings without permission. Not sure if video is the same.

This is in America though.

[Landon D. Parks]

Unless a contract exists that the actor is creating the work for hire, then copyright ownership over that work would indeed be in question. This would likely be the same in any countries that base their law on English common law practices. It might be judged that the actor providing such services would have created a de facto contract given the nature of the transaction, but that would depend on how far each party pushed it, and also how well each party argues their point to a judge or jury.

 

There is a reason most disputes settle outside of court... No one really wants to go to court - it's brutal and it's nearly impossible to tell who might emerge victorious. I'd say a good 90% of lawsuits filed end up in pre-court settlements for that exact reason.

Edited May 7, 2016 by Landon D. Parks