TWC release form..

[r0adb10ck]

Hello All,

I got a comment on one of my YouTube videos (linked below) from someone from The Weather Channel. They wanted to use my video one their website, social media apps, etc. I emailed the guy, said no problem and then I got the release form with the wording below.

I was fine with it until the second paragraph which says they can give permission to authorize others to use..

What would you do? I'm just a hobbyist doing this for fun, not part of my job.

"In consideration of my desire to participate in the Content (as defined below), I,_________, hereby grant to TWC Product and Technology, LLC and its affiliated companies (collectively “TWC”) the right to reproduce my photographs, documents, footage or other materials that I provide to TWC (collectively, the “Materials”) and to use the Materials in connection with its websites, mobile apps, social properties, television programming and content packages distributed to partners (the “Content”) for perpetuity.

I agree that TWC shall have the rights to use, and to authorize others to use, the Materials in connection with advertising, publicizing, and promoting the Content and/or TWC.

TWC agrees to display the creator’s credit when the material is shown in the content."

Tim

 

[drm]

I think that's pretty standard in the media business. Some years ago I signed a similar release for a different type of content with a BBC affiliate.

 

[ob1415]

You've got some good footage of some nice subject matter there. No wonder they want to use it. I don't like that they want you to give them permission to authorize others to use your footage "in connection with advertising, publicizing, and promoting the Content and/or TWC" though. Makes if sound like they want you to give it to them for free so they can make money off of it.

 

[GMack]

So are they paying you for the rights to your material?

If not, then seems they can and will profit off it. When others see it, they will claim the material as theirs so you will be a distant memory if they even mention you as a credit. I don't see any benefit unless they are paying you - and well. Also, I hope you have a 107 too.

I've gotten paid well for material in the past. When it went to the web, they came back saying "Since we already paid you once, we'd like to re-publish it for free on the new web-based magazine." I said, "Sorry, but as the original copyright holder, I expect to be paid for any re-release." I still get request from them, but unless they pay me, it's no dice.

It's your decision though, but I'm tired of working for free.

 

[Richard R]

They make it sound like you were the one that wanted to have them use it. I only authorize 'first generation use' of anything that I release. And I would never give them unlimited time rights. Tell them that they can use it one time and any future use would have to be negotiated and suitable compensation agreed to.

 

[r0adb10ck]

They are not paying me.. Just an amateur hobbyist and posting to YouTube.. no 107 either..

 

[r0adb10ck]

They make it sound like you were the one that wanted to have them use it. I only authorize 'first generation use' of anything that I release. And I would never give them unlimited time rights. Tell them that they can use it one time and any future use would have to be negotiated and suitable compensation agreed to.

Good advice.. Thanks all.. I'm going to take a pass.

Tim

 

[Richard R]

So are they paying you for the rights to your material?

If not, then seems they can and will profit off it. When others see it, they will claim the material as theirs so you will be a distant memory if they even mention you as a credit. I don't see any benefit unless they are paying you - and well. Also, I hope you have a 107 too.

I've gotten paid well for material in the past. When it went to the web, they came back saying "Since we already paid you once, we'd like to re-publish it for free on the new web-based magazine." I said, "Sorry, but as the original copyright holder, I expect to be paid for any re-release." I still get request from them, but unless they pay me, it's no dice.

It's your decision though, but I'm tired of working for free.

The OP doesn't need a 107 in this instance. The FAA has been very clear that when imagery taken under obviously hobby conditions and posted to social media like Youtube with no intention of selling the media, it is okay to sell the media if someone approaches you after the fact with a request to purchase. Obviously, one can't use that loophole to continuously get around the 107 requirement, but the OP would, IMO, be in the clear in this instance.

 

[GMack]

The OP doesn't need a 107 in this instance. The FAA has been very clear that when imagery taken under obviously hobby conditions and posted to social media like Youtube with no intention of selling the media, it is okay to sell the media if someone approaches you after the fact with a request to purchase. Obviously, one can't use that loophole to continuously get around the 107 requirement, but the OP would, IMO, be in the clear in this instance.

Disagree. If he is being paid for it, which he should be as the copyright holder, then it is indeed commercial so he'd need a 107. A sale puts him into the realm, and bartering is also payment in the eyes of the IRS too.

 

[BigAl07]

Disagree. If he is being paid for it, which he should be as the copyright holder, then it is indeed commercial so he'd need a 107. A sale puts him into the realm, and bartering is also payment in the eyes of the IRS too.

Intent of the flight is what matters to the FAA. If a hobbyist captures footage that later is sold "incidentally" no hard done. So long as they were operating completely within Part 101 and not intending to do anything commercial with the footage it's good to go.

But... going forward you'd have a hard time claiming this for future flights that you sell the footage for.

 

[GMack]

Good to know. I think I'll just sell anything under 101 and not bother with the FAA and 107 then. Just claim it all as incidental and therefore none if it is or was commercial, just hobbyist type stuff.

 

[ianwood]

Ask for payment. $500 per clip is reasonable. I charge nearly triple that for TV and film. A clip is an individual segment of your video and not the whole video.

And you don't need a 107 or any other commercial setup. If your intention at the time of flying was amateur, that's all the FAA cares about. If someone wants to buy it after the fact, that doesn't impact the nature of the flight you did.

 

[Richard R]

Ask for payment. $500 per clip is reasonable. I charge nearly triple that for TV and film. A clip is an individual segment of your video and not the whole video.

And you don't need a 107 or any other commercial setup. If your intention at the time of flying was amateur, that's all the FAA cares about. If someone wants to buy it after the fact, that doesn't impact the nature of the flight you did.

Do it more than once or twice and the FAA may take exception with you. Especially since you have publicly stated your intend to sell future images!!

 

[ianwood]

Do it more than once or twice and the FAA may take exception with you. Especially since you have publicly stated your intend to sell future images!!

I conduct amateur flights all the time. I also conduct many professional flights. They are not mutually exclusive.