Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik
Mind you, you need to be that actual copyright holder for the material. If all you did was record the FIRST provided video stream, then it's probably FIRST that's the copyright holder, since they did all the production, etc. I think unedited, uncommented video from your own camera of an FRC event is probably shaky on whether you're the copyright holder. And something like RoboShow is very clearly original material that the RoboShow guys hold the copyright to.
|
It's actually more complex (and potentially annoying) than that.
Though FIRST is the video provider (e.g. through the AV hookups at the venue), their agreement with the film crew may not necessarily specify a transfer of copyright. In the U.S., absent a work for hire agreement, the person operating the camera is the copyright holder
of the video.
1 (The lack of such an agreement would be unlikely, but to the extent that FIRST believed the webcast was a one-time event rather than a body of content that could be preserved and used forever, it's not inconceivable that the contract could omit this.) For the same reason, the person operating their own camera at a FIRST event owns the copyright
to that video.
If there was editing and production work that was creative in nature, then there would be a copyright embodied in those elements, and separate from the camera work. Again, this could be assigned to FIRST by contract, and probably is.
The main complications arise as a result of the content of the video. FIRST has music playing in the background (which is presumably under licence); they don't own that copyright, and therefore can't transfer it.
2 To the extent that creative performances take place (perhaps in the form of a speech or the rendition of a national anthem, but almost certainly not gameplay), those are copyrighted by their performers, and FIRST can't transfer that copyright either. If you re-use that content, you have to be ready to assert that your use of the portions for which you have not secured copyright approval are fair use or
de minimis infringement (too small to cause any meaningful harm). Or you have to hope they don't find out and start checking items off the list I provided above.
Another complication arises because the video host can terminate its agreement with the uploader, likely for little or no cause. Even if you legitimately own the copyright, the video host can (legally, but perhaps unethically) kick you off and take the video down. Users who are frequently the target of DMCA takedowns may find themselves in that situation.
By the way, don't file a DMCA takedown request if you're not the copyright holder. Misrepresentation will open you to liability for damages.
1 In Canada, the law is a little more complicated, but ought to work out the same way in the case of a work for hire.
2 In theory, they actually could write such a copyright transfer into the contract, but I doubt it's there. I bet the agreement only covers FIRST, not downstream re-users.