I'm in pre-production to make my first children's video; you know, singing adults, giggling kids, simple puppets, etc. It will be a commercial project, which we hope to sell as a DVD.
My question is, what sort of liability might we be looking at, if we show recognizable objects and props? That is, I can't imagine some chair manufacturer spotting that we used their chair in the show and feeling we "cast their chair in a less than flattering light" and sending an atty after us. Although if the prop carried more "status" and "history", such as a hoola-hoop or something...? Pushing further, what if a performer holds an generic stuffed animal and "makes" it talk and thereby "injects" it with expanded character, and the manufacturer sees this and feels their "IP" was altered or "used" without permission? They did "create" the "character" of the animal, after all, especially if it was fantastical (say, a unique cutesy monster, but not one having manifestation outside of just being a stuffed animal; not a licensed monster), so doesn't this imply we need to ask permission before we "expand" (i.e., alter) it's "IP"? And then there is the extreme; which I'm imagining would be most likely to temp a corporate lawyer the most: what if the video showed a, say (for the sake of discussion only), Elmo puppet, bought from some store, which was made to say things out of character for Elmo, with a different voice from Elmo, and then was, say, "injured" or something, in the performance? Surely this is just asking for trouble, yes?
I hope I'm making my concern clear: how do low-budget commercial productions protect against unnecessary infringement risk in the area of objects and props? Any and all thoughts, facts, insights, opinions welcome! Thank you!
My question is, what sort of liability might we be looking at, if we show recognizable objects and props? That is, I can't imagine some chair manufacturer spotting that we used their chair in the show and feeling we "cast their chair in a less than flattering light" and sending an atty after us. Although if the prop carried more "status" and "history", such as a hoola-hoop or something...? Pushing further, what if a performer holds an generic stuffed animal and "makes" it talk and thereby "injects" it with expanded character, and the manufacturer sees this and feels their "IP" was altered or "used" without permission? They did "create" the "character" of the animal, after all, especially if it was fantastical (say, a unique cutesy monster, but not one having manifestation outside of just being a stuffed animal; not a licensed monster), so doesn't this imply we need to ask permission before we "expand" (i.e., alter) it's "IP"? And then there is the extreme; which I'm imagining would be most likely to temp a corporate lawyer the most: what if the video showed a, say (for the sake of discussion only), Elmo puppet, bought from some store, which was made to say things out of character for Elmo, with a different voice from Elmo, and then was, say, "injured" or something, in the performance? Surely this is just asking for trouble, yes?
I hope I'm making my concern clear: how do low-budget commercial productions protect against unnecessary infringement risk in the area of objects and props? Any and all thoughts, facts, insights, opinions welcome! Thank you!
