Just Been on the Telly....

meanredspider

...filmed without my permission.

Last year I was filmed complaining to staff on the Kessock Bridge about the ridiculous detour they put in place whilst working on it. Afterwards the film crew approached me to sign a release. The form they had was for a different programme so I didn't sign but said contact me via email if they wanted a release. They never did. Now I'm hearing from lots of people that I'm famous!

Does anybody know the rules about them filming me without my permission then using the film without a release?

hegyestomi

SUE THEM!!!

scottishgeek

I know in the UK when it comes to photography any images taken of a person in a public place or readily viewable from a public place can be used without a release provided it does not portray the subject in a manner that is defamatory. I presume the same would be relevant when it comes to video. The issue would come about if the programme was sold for broadcast outside the UK where laws may be different.

majormantra

Yes, IANAL, but I think that's broadly correct. Obtaining a release is an extra CYA measure, but it's not essential.

meanredspider

But it's effectively listening in to a private conversation - the images are one thing but the content of the conversation is something else

asprilla

In the UK then provided you are not the main subject of the image in question (so you happen to be in a photo of something else) then a release form is not required. However, if you are the main subject then a release form is required.

However, however, no-one in the UK gives a toss about rights. I have designed rights management platforms for a living.

The rights forms are collated by the most junior member of staff on the team at the end of the shoot, along with al lthe other rights information and so consequently this doesn't happen accurately, if at all. When it's ingested into the organisation that uses it then it is the lowest priority metadata. When it's then extracted from a library the users frequently don't understand it's value and so discard it.

All BBC rights info is held on paper or is demanded from the production team when used. ITV are the same. The team are most likely all contractors and so can't be contacted, are no longer under contract or just cant be bothered. Sky can't keep track of content IDs sufficiently well enough to have a tracking system. News Corp publish content without rights and wait for the owners to demand payment.

Basically, you send them an invoice for use of your rights. If it's too much they will try it on and say 'see you in court' and then it becomes a small claims court issue.

meanredspider

Thanks - yes, I will have definitely been the main subject. And, yes, they were contractors. The release form they shoved under my nose was for DIY Rescue or something like that. I pointed out that it was the wrong form and that I wasn't sure I wanted to release anyway. I said to email me the right form. They never did. My belief, therefore, was that they wouldn't be using the footage so I'm annoyed that they have. I have filled out a complaint to the BBC

The Rookie

All those people who apply to Big Brother e.t.c. would be so envious of you right now, I mean, like, you are now a celebrity innit!

meanredspider

They're welcome to it. I've been on TV enough times not to want to be on any more

goonz

Do you really want to be famous for moaning?

thistle_

If they gave you a release form and you refused to sign it, can't that be taken as you saying you don't want the film to be used?

msmancunia

Years ago I worked down the road from Granada studios. Our office was next to an advertising agency who used to get really annoyed if we stood outside their office smoking. One morning, for a "laugh" (read:publicity) they nailed up an open coffin to the wall, with a sign that said "Smoking Cubicle" on it. Obviously we just stood next to it and smoked.

Didn't think anything of it until ooh, about half way through Granada Reports when my uncle rang to say I'd been seen smoking. He is completely anti-smoking, (even though I'm a grown up and don't do it in front of him) and never misses an opportunity to have a nag. I denied it, to be told "I've just seen you and a colleague smoking on Granada Reports". He has never let me live it down.

The Rookie

thistle (MBNW) wrote:

If they gave you a release form and you refused to sign it, can't that be taken as you saying you don't want the film to be used?

Which would be irrelevant if their were no bar to them using it in the first place, the point of this is to find out if there is or not!

meanredspider

I've just spoken to the BBC - judging by the reaction of the guy on the line, this is not something that should have happened. He was going to kick off an investigation and come back to me in 2 or 3 days.

My gut feeling is that it can't be right that essentially private conversations can be filmed and broadcast without either consent or some "public interest" angle. I'm assuming I'm also identified given that my daughter's friends (who are unlikely to recognise me - let alone dressed in my helmet and winter cycling gear) let her know I was on TV. I'm hoping I can catch it on iPlayer abroad so I can actually see it. The programme was Life and Death on the A9 and my son tells me I appear 47 mins into the programme

zx6man

If thats you, dodgy coloured neck scarf.. :-) Mines a Darth Vader one... chosen by my 3 yr old

meanredspider

zx6man wrote:

If thats you, dodgy coloured neck scarf.. :-) Mines a Darth Vader one... chosen by my 3 yr old

Dunno - it was a year ago. I have 3 different Buffs I might have been using. If it's "dodgy coloured" then it's either a green Maggie's charity one or it's the rainbow Shutt VR one.

zx6man

Deffo the rainbow one :-)

meanredspider

zx6man wrote:

Deffo the rainbow one :-)

That's a pukka cycling one (Shutt VR) rather than any other connotations that rainbow might give

Though I can use your post in my Ofcom breach of privacy case

Kieran_Burns

Just grabbing a screen shot...

Here we go:

zx6man

Even the guy in the pic can't take his eyes off your buff.

meanredspider

Too funny. Must have been very cold - that's my well-sub-zero get-up. Almost never wear a Buff or lobsters

zx6man

At least on leaving you didn't do the "Live long and prosper".

meanredspider

Intrigued to see it now. Transerv were utterly useless - they managed to get proper diversion signs up 2 weeks from completion (of a 14 week IIRC) job. They've just started the other side of the bridge

Kieran_Burns

meanredspider wrote:

Intrigued to see it now. Transerv were utterly useless - they managed to get proper diversion signs up 2 weeks from completion (of a 14 week IIRC) job. They've just started the other side of the bridge

To be fair you look a little like a Cyberman with the flashy light on yer noggin.

majormantra

Kieran_Burns wrote:

Just grabbing a screen shot...

Here we go:

Is that a Livestrong helmet OP? I can see why you're upset.

Ian.B

meanredspider wrote:

I'm hoping I can catch it on iPlayer abroad so I can actually see it. The programme was Life and Death on the A9 and my son tells me I appear 47 mins into the programme

I thought you didn't want this disseminated, now you're telling us all where to go and find it!

Interesting to know where you stand in these circumstances, and it sounds like you've got a good response from the BBC at least

aberdeen_lune

I watched the show last night and thought it might be you. I thought your argument was quite rational although the roads guy did say after you went off that cyclists were very difficult to please.

First.Aspect

I take it this is the show about the A9?

I was watching the end of the 10 part drama about the B6094 on the other side so I missed it.

meanredspider

MajorMantra wrote:

Is that a Livestrong helmet OP? I can see why you're upset.

All my dirty secrets are coming out now...! The Beeb are going to pay big time!

I have a much nicer lid these days!

meanredspider

Aberdeen_lune wrote:

I watched the show last night and thought it might be you. I thought your argument was quite rational although the roads guy did say after you went off that cyclists were very difficult to please.

Yup - adding a badly-signed 2.5-mile detour to a 1-mile crossing was guaranteed to delight us (and pedestrians btw). We're so unreasonable.

DrLex

Kieran_Burns wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

Intrigued to see it now. Transerv were utterly useless - they managed to get proper diversion signs up 2 weeks from completion (of a 14 week IIRC) job. They've just started the other side of the bridge

To be fair you look a little like a Cyberman with the flashy light on yer noggin.

I was thinking along similar lines, but more the black dalek from the Eighties, due to the orange protuberance: