Subject:
|
Re: Politicians allowed to veto use of news footage?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 27 Jul 2004 16:41:18 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
982 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Ross Crawford wrote:
| |
They think “...the ABC could be exposed to the risk of claims under the Trade
Practices Act or pursuant to the tort of Passing Off.”
Anyone else know of any news/media organisations that have the same policy?
Seems a bit silly to me.
|
Not in the US. At least not any that I’ve ever heard. Once you’re deemed to be
“in the public eye”, you lose a lot of your privacy rights while in the public
view (they can’t sneak into your house, but they might be able to get away with
peeking through a fence that borders a public sidewalk, and they can cling to
you like parasites when you’re out on the streets). There are, of course,
situations where it would be illegal for other reasons, such as if those terms
were negotiated as part of an exlusive interview deal, or if the footage was
originally supplied by a 3rd party who continues to hold the copyrights.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Politicians allowed to veto use of news footage?
|
| Our largely taxpayer-funded free to air TV channel, the (URL), now (URL) says> it can't sell archival footage of politicians to 3rd party documentary makers, unless they get permission from the politician involved. They think "...the ABC could be (...) (20 years ago, 27-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
5 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
