Distributors and Clearance

B

Blade_Jones

Has anyone out there actually inked a distribution deal? What is the clearance process? Do distributors want to see copies of every actor release, painting and sculpture release, animator's work for hire agreement, editor's work for hire agreement, trademark and copyright agreement, etc? Or does their errors and omissions insurance company want to see the legal papers? If you DON'T have a release will a distributor handle a DVD if YOU assume liability or if you assume liability based on a valid verbal contract (instead of a missing actor's release)??

Do distributors always license rights to do their OWN manufacturing of DVD's OR do they sometimes order DVD product that YOU manufacture?
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
Blade_Jones said:
Has anyone out there actually inked a distribution deal? What is the clearance process? Do distributors want to see copies of every actor release, painting and sculpture release, animator's work for hire agreement, editor's work for hire agreement, trademark and copyright agreement, etc? Or does their errors and omissions insurance company want to see the legal papers? If you DON'T have a release will a distributor handle a DVD if YOU assume liability or if you assume liability based on a valid verbal contract (instead of a missing actor's release)??

Do distributors always license rights to do their OWN manufacturing of DVD's OR do they sometimes order DVD product that YOU manufacture?
Click to expand...


Blade:

For the releases most do not. HOWEVER this isn't a reason for not having them done. Our US guys wanted to see the music release forms to go with the cue sheet. But neither they or the sales agent wanted copies of the actors releases. So mostly they will want YOU to have them but not to see them.

If you do not have releases and get teh film sold you could be in for a whole heap of shite. A friend of mine didnt get the actors release for the lead, went to him after the film was picked up and he refused to sign (thus making the film unreleasebale) until he got a better deal. In short he screwed them and they had no choice.

Proper distributors will license their own DVD's. If they dont I'd stear WELL CLEAR!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
If you lose releases you still have a verbal contract. It just becomes more difficult to prove that there was an agreement and what the terms were. Parites to a lawsuit will at some point have to swear under penalty of perjury as to the facts. If an actor says "No. I never signed a release to work for $125 a day" but the casting agent has proof of the breakdown, the line producer testifies that they signed the release for $125 a day then that puts the dishonest actor in trouble if they choose to lie at all.

Proper distributors will license their own DVD's. If they dont I'd stear WELL CLEAR!
Click to expand...
Why would you steer clear of distro's that won't take finished product? It is advantageous to supply THEM with the product because you will get PAID! Otherwise they just keep dipping into their inventory. There's no incentive to be honest and pay you. THAT is a major issue in doing business. You need to have the upper hand.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Blade_Jones said:
If you lose releases you still have a verbal contract. It just becomes more difficult to prove that there was an agreement and what the terms were. Parites to a lawsuit will at some point have to swear under penalty of perjury as to the facts. If an actor says "No. I never signed a release to work for $125 a day" but the casting agent has proof of the breakdown, the line producer testifies that they signed the release for $125 a day then that puts the dishonest actor in trouble if they choose to lie at all.


Why would you steer clear of distro's that won't take finished product? It is advantageous to supply THEM with the product because you will get PAID! Otherwise they just keep dipping into their inventory. There's no incentive to be honest and pay you. THAT is a major issue in doing business. You need to have the upper hand.
Click to expand...

As the old saying goes a verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's printed on. You MUST have signed documents and releases. But not just for the actor's time but for rights to use his or her image without restraints and without limitations. Thta is one of the key things you need and that's where the problems can arise.

As for the upper hand, for my money you are looking this at the wrong way. You will never have the upper hand with these people unless you have a potential mega hit, a Clerks or a El Mariachi.

Far to often indie film makers have (and Blade this is no reflection to you but a general comment fromwhat I have noticed over teh past few years) this arogance that they can do what they do better than others and there film is better and worth more. To be honest most of us, myself included and I have been through all of this, have a product which will sell a few thousand units and maybe, just maybe make a small profit. But we have very limited power.

The companies can easily just turn around and say fuck you and then go to Cannes or AFM and pick up another 4 or 5 films that will do similar.

That's the problem now, as more product comes on the market, the lesser bargening power you/we have.

And this isn't just my POV, this is from some of the leading Indie sales agents in the world.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
mr-modern-life said:
Far to often indie film makers have (and Blade this is no reflection to you but a general comment fromwhat I have noticed over teh past few years) this arogance that they can do what they do better than others and there film is better and worth more.
Click to expand...
It's called confidence in yourself. If you don't think you're putting out the best product, and you think it's half-assed, then why do it?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Confidence is fine. I have confidenace in the level of my product. BUT too many indie film makers have over confidance and place their product higher than it is. This is coming from several major sales agents that I know or work with.

The problem is every indie film maker thinks that their film is the best indie film ever, that is deserves awards and massive sales deals. The problem is not only do these deals no exisit, the fact is most films will struggle to get any deal no matter how good they are.

I have seen films at Cannes that have bought the house down, highly regarded and well budgeted that as yet have only been released in one or two countries.

The market is pretty dire at the moment, with many companies having to take small deals to get the film out there.

The problem is no one is telling this to people and we, as indie film makers, still believe that the pot of giold is still there. It's not. Not at the moment.

What I'm trying to do, whether you guys like it or not (and judging by the normal reaction to my posts it's a not) is give people honest, unbiased facts based on the information I have from some of the leading players out there. I'm not putting people down, just advising people to look at what they have and be realistic with it.

Does it make easy reading? No. Is it what people want to hear? Well probably not. It is the truth? What what I have been lead to believe yes, yes it is.

Is it important that people know the truth yes, because that knowledge will help people get the best deal possible.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I think Phil has a fair point here -- it's not about confidence or quality -- it's about having a realistic understanding of the market value of No Name, Low Format films.

There is so much more to this business than making a good film -- the other part is about understanding your film's place in the market.

If you're making a feature and shooting it digitally, with an unknown cast, then even if you've made a half decent genre film, you're still competing with thousands of other film makers.

The distributors always have the upper hand -- except in the very rare occasion that your concept is extremely hot and you're able to create a huge audience for the film despite its no name status.

For the indie film maker whose intention is to make sales the first question you should ask yourself is "How am I going to get an audience for this concept?" That should pre-figure even writing the script.

That's one of the reasons I've spent the last year studying virals -- an indie film has to have viral qualities, if you want to negotiate a decent distribution deal -- you can't rely on the distributor to sell the film for you.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Exactly. I dont say these things to piss people off or be controversail (whatever comman opinions are of what i do) but i have a large contact list with companies that do sell films and have helped me shape the kinda films i make to ensure they get the best money and best place in the market.

And as Clive says making the film is only a small part of it. The real hardwork is selling the film and getting the best for what you have. And you will NEVER do that unless you approach it in a level, realistic and often brutally honest way.

Is my film flawed, technicaly is up up to scratch, where are the selling points, what are the weak points, where does this film fit (is it a Pulp Fiction kinda film or a Clerks). Then making sure you target the right company that covers what you do, that they have simlar product.

Trust me when I say there are some great films out there that have been unreleased and if your film isn;t sold right (and bringing it back to Blades original question) and has all the i's crossed and t's dotted, no matter how good it is it will not sell.

And Blade thats why the paper work needs to be right and done. If it isn't then there will be someone behind you with everything correct and by the book that they will take instead. Distributors and sales people dont want the risk of indie films at the best of times and if they think that your film will bitethem on the arse latter down the line they will avoid you like a Hooker with the plague.

So to speak...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
...the thing is: we all think we will be the next Kevin Smith or Robert Rodriguez. :yes:

We don't want to be told, I know I don't, that my idea isn't the next big thing. But I personally know that the odds could be against me even finishing the film let alone becoming the next filmmaking darling. That doesn't mean my idea isn't killer, its just that there are many killer ideas out there and I think I need to be able to package it in the best way possible to give it the best fighting chance....

But I am willing, and you have to be willing, to hear all the bad news and all the horror stories and all the "negativity" in order to figure out how to counter all the bad news. It may not be encouraging, but I expect that it is the truth and if you aren't realistic about what you are doing and what you have, I think you may be in for huge disappointments. I hope I am being realistic. :blush:

One more thing: Clive, define virals. I understand the "YouTube" thing, but I guess I don't understand what the potential is for this outside getting your high school pals together, doing something dumb and putting it online. What are you finding is important about "virals"? What is it?

-- spinner :cool:
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
spinner said:
Clive, define virals. I understand the "YouTube" thing, but I guess I don't understand what the potential is for this outside getting your high school pals together, doing something dumb and putting it online. What are you finding is important about "virals"? What is it?
Click to expand...
Creating something short and memorable that will be passed from friend to friend on the Internet. The trick is getting someone to notice you as a filmmaker, and not the guy who tripped on a ham sandwich and landed in a pile of hot coals.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
clive said:
I think Phil has a fair point here -- it's not about confidence or quality -- it's about having a realistic understanding of the market value of No Name, Low Format films.
Click to expand...
I understand that point. The type of confidence I was talking about was believing in your product. If you walk into the room with a distributor, financer, or anyone else, they can tell if you are not behind your own product. If you come across with excuses about why it's not as good as other films out there, but they should get onboard anyway, that's not a good pitch. You've got to pitch the hell out of it. I believe Phil is saying that is arrogance. I am saying there are ways to be confident, and not arrogant. When it's pitch time, you don't hold back. It's your job to tell them why they should get behind your product instead of the other projects on their desk. Don't say "Well, I don't know, I haven't seen those other proposals, maybe you should check them out and compare."
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
if they think that your film will bitethem on the arse latter down the line they will avoid you like a Hooker with the plague.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. They could do a contract whereby YOU assume the liabilty.

I have been in a CD distribution contract whereby I had to assume liability. I have always done my own manufacturing too. DVD distribution is new to me. Not sure how many commonalities there are.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
Blade - that doesnt happen. And the difference between DVD and CD contract is like comparing F1 car with a ford escort.

They expect you to be correct in everything, that is how the industry works. The E&O does cover certain bits but you have to get the releases for your sake as well as the contract. Again remember if you cant do it, some one else can.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
indietalk said:
The trick is getting someone to notice you as a filmmaker, and not the guy who tripped on a ham sandwich and landed in a pile of hot coals.
Click to expand...


You think!

This is why I don't understand why some people actually believe that they can master viral campains.

Not everything can be viral, because that is an innate quality.

There cannot be companies that can promisie viral campains for their clients, because if the movie sucks, no matter what kind of trailer they are going to cut for it, it will still suck. And nobody will ever send that to their friends. Period.

Only things that are very good will propagate.

But this was true even before somebody mede up the word "viral".
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
As the old saying goes a verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's printed on. You MUST have signed documents and releases. But not just for the actor's time but for rights to use his or her image without restraints and without limitations. Thta is one of the key things you need and that's where the problems can arise.
Click to expand...
Not always true. I recently spoke to an attorney and he said that actors consent to being in a movie by merely being on set. If they audition for a part, have 8 X 10's, learn their lines, show up on a set where there are cameras and full crew, act in front of the camera, and are PAID, then they have legally consented. A release form is really a second line of defence that helps, but it isn't the end of the world if you don't have one or lost it. The more lines of defence the better but not the end of the world.
All of those people sueing over the Borat movie have a different situation. They weren't on a "movie set" and they aren't "actors".
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
All of those people sueing over the Borat movie have a different situation. They weren't on a "movie set" and they aren't "actors".
Click to expand...
... but it was my understanding that they did sign a release. They are saying they were duped into signing.

I don't see why you're arguing whether or not you can win in a court of law without a written release. I think most of us would argue that we'd like to avoid the court case altogether, and a clear, written understanding with each actor is the best way to avoid an expensive legal confrontation. Not many people will drag you into court if they have little or no chance of winning.

Even if you may survive a legal battle, in my opinion, it is bad advice to tell someone to go forward without documentation. You can survive driving the wrong way down the interstate, but I don't recommend it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
For Horrors of War, we had to provide to Maverick Entertainment (and subsequently the Errors and Omissions Insurance) Every single contract for ecvery single person mentioned in the opening credits, plus we had to have new contracts drafted just to allow the use of their names IN the opening title sequence.

Your attorney might be able to argue that the actor being on set & paid is sufficient, but NO DISTRIBUTOR ON THE PLANET will accept that. The reason is that the terms and details therein are NOT specified, so there is still civil liabilities that are NOT given just by their "consent of being on set".
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
... but it was my understanding that they did sign a release. They are saying they were duped into signing.
Click to expand...
And they seems to have a valid argument. Actors on sets do not. So if you lose release forms, someone slips through the cracks and you don't have a release / can't find them / they won't sign or resign, it is not the end of the world. There is implied consent with actors on movie sets. A release form is just a second line of defense. And if they refuse to sign, but accept payment for their work it is an assumed work for hire contract. It is also assumed that producers want to "sell" thier movie to the fullest extent that they can. So an actor isn't gonna get far in court saying "I didn't know".
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top