STATE of CALIFORNIA
I am looking for second opinions on a matter.
I want to commercially release a reenactment of "prank phone call". I would also of coursetake out identifies such as names. I would also be using an actor to replace the call subject's dialog. I would also make changes to their actual dialog to one degree or another.
I was told by a lawyer that a prank call conversation is a joint work and that either contributor has the right to exploit the work, therefore I have a right to do this (as long as I don't use their voice -- invasion of privacy).
This is where it gets a little sketchy. I was told by one lawyer that if I came up with new dialog BASED ON the call subject's dialog then I would owe no royalties. He never elaborated what "based on" means. A second entertainment lawyer told me that I only have to make SLIGHT changes to the dialog. When asked HOW slight of changes I would need to make he said that it's not black and white. Still I'm wondering if anyone in this forum has some examples of what might be sufficient. I'm not really sure how far I should go. I would prefer to make less changes so as to keep the original character.
BTW this call is well over 10 years old.
And is there anything that I may have overlooked? Anything that might make it copyright infringement?
I am looking for second opinions on a matter.
I want to commercially release a reenactment of "prank phone call". I would also of coursetake out identifies such as names. I would also be using an actor to replace the call subject's dialog. I would also make changes to their actual dialog to one degree or another.
I was told by a lawyer that a prank call conversation is a joint work and that either contributor has the right to exploit the work, therefore I have a right to do this (as long as I don't use their voice -- invasion of privacy).
This is where it gets a little sketchy. I was told by one lawyer that if I came up with new dialog BASED ON the call subject's dialog then I would owe no royalties. He never elaborated what "based on" means. A second entertainment lawyer told me that I only have to make SLIGHT changes to the dialog. When asked HOW slight of changes I would need to make he said that it's not black and white. Still I'm wondering if anyone in this forum has some examples of what might be sufficient. I'm not really sure how far I should go. I would prefer to make less changes so as to keep the original character.
BTW this call is well over 10 years old.
And is there anything that I may have overlooked? Anything that might make it copyright infringement?
Copyright Law: Second Opinions About Reenacting Dialog to Avoid Owing Royalties
0 commentaires:
Enregistrer un commentaire