Legal Question in Intellectual Property in California

Re: Ownership rights

If she paid for your services, she has the rights unless there is a contract stating otherwise.

Re: Ownership rights

If she paid for your services, she has the rights unless there is a contract stating otherwise.

Re: Ownership rights

I'm going to start out by saying that I can discuss some of the issues here, but don't know enough to give you the answer.

First, in your photographer/subject question, there are two kinds of rights possibly at stake; copyright and privacy. The photographer holds the copyright, unless otherwise agreed; but the person portrayed has a privacy right to object to commercialization of his or her image without an agreement.

In the dance studio situation, things are a little less clear. Copyright to creative works arises when the works are first set down in some tangible form with a degree of permanence; having the words to a poem in your head or even reciting them to an audience does not give rise to a copyright, even a common-law copyright. So, the choreographer's rights are probably to whatever notation she has set down. Rights to the film would be held by the videographer - BUT in a sense the videotape would be a derivative work. Sooooo..... my answer is that I don't know who would win in court. Maybe the two would have to share royalties.

Perhaps another LawGuru attorney will provide a further response and have some actual experience with the issue of derivative works in this particular context.

One thing of which I'm reasonably certain is that there would not be enough royalty income to warrant filing and prosecuting a lawsuit.

Re: Ownership rights

First let me warn that Mr. Mahurin's analysis, though logical, is incorrect. In the absence of a written agreement expressly stating that the video belongs to the choreographer, (or dance studio), the video copyright belongs to the Videographer... he's an independent contractor, so the results and proceeds of his work belong to him.

BUT (and it's a big one).... the Choreographer MAY own a copyright in her choreographer (if she's NOT an employee of the studio, but an independent contractor too).... So, the Videographer has created a DERIVATIVE WORK, and may not exploit the video in any way, without her express permission....

Same analysis applies to the photographer who's hired to take the portrait... photographer owns the copyright unless there's a contract specifying that the photos are work-made-for-hire.

Best advice is for the choreographer and videographer to work out some kind of a deal. Videographer sells the DVDs, and pays Choreographer a royalty ( a percentage of gross)... or vice-versa if Choreographer sells the DVDs.

You probably need a lawyer to write up a contract.