|
Question: A friend and I were working on a script. Together we came
up with the initial idea and the major plot points as well as some details
along the way. My partner wrote most of the dialogue and the physical screenplay
on his computer, fleshing the story out on paper. My question is ...would
my contributions warrant a writing credit? Or a story credit? My "partner" doesn't
seem to think so since he spent "hours" behind his computer typing
it all out....... It's a shame that we are bickering like this and
is probably a sign of the debacle to come....do you have any thoughts on
this?
Answer: This question raises a variety of issues concerning copyright ownership,
writing credit, the nature of authorship, and the importance of parties
clearly agreeing on the nature of their collaboration at the outset of their
working relationship.
The two friends could be joint authors of the work, if that was their intent,
and share copyright ownership. Or the parties could have agreed that
one party was employing the other, and that the employer is the sole copyright
owner of the work. Alternatively, one person could be contributing all
the creative work that is copyrightable, while the other is merely providing
clerical services, such as typing. In this case, the typist
would not be considered a copyright owner regardless of how many hours were
spent typing. Since it is unclear to me exactly what each party has contributed,
and what agreement the parties made, if any, I cannot predict how a court
would determine who is the owner of this work. The copyright owner(s) of
the work would determine how it is exploited. In the absence of an agreement,
certain legal presumptions might apply. If both parties made creative contributions
to the work so that it is deemed the expression of both authors, then they
might be presumed to be joint copyright owners in the absence of an agreement
that provides otherwise.
Credit is entirely another matter. It is allocated according to the
parties agreement. If the writer is a member of the Writer's Guild,
and the employer a signatory to the guild, then the credit allocation rules
of the Guild would apply. If a party is not given credit they are due,
it might be considered an instance of unfair competition if it mislead the
public about the origin of the work. In some countries the denial of credit
might be considered a violation of the author's moral rights. The United
States recognizes moral rights in regard to fine art, but not in the realm
of movies.
The bottom line is that it is very important for the parties to have a clear
agreement as to the nature of their collaboration before they begin work.
This agreement should be in writing to avoid any future misunderstanding.
The Writer's Guild has a model collaboration agreement that is available
to Writers. There is also one in my book "Contracts for the Film
and Television Industry, 2nd Edition (Silman James Press). Otherwise you
can end up in a messy situation where it is unclear what the respective rights
of the parties are.
—Mark Litwak (www.marklitwak.com)
Mark Litwak is a veteran entertainment attorney and Producer’s Rep
based in Beverly Hills, California. He is the author of six books including:
Reel Power: The Struggle for Influence and Success in the New Hollywood,
Dealmaking in the Film and Television Industry, Contracts for the Film and
Television Industry, and the recently published Risky Business: Financing
and Distributing Independent Film. He is the author of the CD-ROM program
Movie Magic Contracts, and the creator of the Entertainment Law Resources
website at www.marklitwak.com. He can be reached at law@marklitwak.com.
Disclaimer-Any
material sent to or provided by Mark Litwak is for illustrative and educational
purposes only and should not be relied upon as legal advice, or be considered
confidential or the basis of an attorney client relationship. This
material may not be suitable for your particular situation and different
legal advice may be appropriate depending on your jurisdiction or circumstances.
Therefore, you should not rely on this material, or any part of it, without
the advice of competent legal counsel.
|
