RE VIDEO-BLOGGING & FILMING "LOCAL COLOR"
I noticed something Crowell posted online at
http://www.school-video-news.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=285:when-is-it-legal-to-film-people-without-their-permission&catid=36:legal&Itemid=53
I was wondering if you could comment on the following: I "video-blog" every day of my life, from very casual things such as "at the post office" to worshipping at church to filming celebs arriving at the Oscars (or Peoples Choice, Grammys, etc) (I live in southern Cal, so I am around these award ceremonies all the time; most recently I captured Lady Gaga arriving at NBC, the day after the Grammys; she was nice enough to come & sign & say hello).
Anyways, you get the picture (no pun intended). I take videos & pics & post them online (YouTube, Posterous, Blip.Tv, etc). I very RARELY get any objections, because I don't embarrass people, don't say bad things about them, etc. I just record what one of my English professors calls "local color". And I have people who find my video-blog interesting. They "follow" me online.
Recently, 2/24/11 I was at a FCU (cred union) & taped a 10 second segment of me "depositing a $2500 check" (with the teller, a young lady, included). I posted it to YouTube & didn't think much more about it. However, because I wanted the check cleared sooner, I called the FCU main office & the next day (2/25/11) called again (b/c the gal who promised to call me back w/ an answer didn't call back). After we conversed, she said, "Would you be willing to talk to ....[indiscernible] about your customer experience..?" I thought she meant a feedback survey, & I agreed.
However, the guy who came on the line identified himself as "security" for the FCU & said "We have a system that alerts us whenever a video is posted about the credit union. Why did you post a video ?" I was taken by surprise, & happened to be in a public library at the moment & couldn't speak very loudly & said I would call him back, but before I did he started saying it was "illegal" to post videos of people online without their permission. I asked if he was an attorney & he said no, but didn't need to be to know the law...
Anyways, I talked to him later & agreed to remove the video NOT because I thought it was "illegal' but simply to avoid a dispute. But I was wondering what you think about this? I wasn't casting anybody in a false light. I was simply "blogging" (for my followers sake as well as a "journal" of sorts, since I cover a lot of territory every day & this helps me to remember what I did). What category, if any, would this daily video-blog fall under?
Vander
http://www.thomascrowell.com/sub/components/contactEmail.do
---------------------------------
WHEN IS IT LEGAL TO FILM PEOPLE ?
" Defamation and libel suits arise when a person who is distinguishable on camera claims that he or she was portrayed in a false manner that is harmful to his or her reputation. Usually, statements that are "merely unflattering, annoying, irksome, or embarrassing, or that hurt only the plaintiff's feelings" do not support a defamation claim. Nor will humor or parody. Furthermore, public figures such as celebrities and politicians have a much harder time winning defamation cases: they have to prove that the filmmakers knew that their portrayal of the subject was false or was made with a reckless disregard for its truth (a standard called actual malice). Filmmakers tend to get into hot water when they portray nonpublic figures in contexts that are both scandalous and false."
Thomas A. Crowell concentrates his law practice in the areas of entertainment and inte aw. Portions of this article were taken from his new book, The Pocket Lawyer scheduled to be published by Elsevier in February 2007. Crowell can be reached at
www.thomascrowell.com
