My jurisdiction is: California
Hello, this is my first post. Sorry if it's long...
I have a copyright situation and I'm reasonably certain that I know my rights in the matter, but would like to run this by someone else for an outside opinion.
My small company is involved with a another company on a joint business venture. We produced 6 web ads to promote this venture; half of them were written and directed by someone else, a former "partner" in the venture who resigned from the project. He is now claiming copyright on the ads he worked on, and has even filed a DMCA takedown notice with YouTube where the ads are running.
We had no contract with him, which is unfortunate. However, he did accept payment from us for a) writing the ads and b) directing the ads. In the absence of an official work for hire agreement, we do have a paper trail of checks written to him and an invoice from him that lists the ads as work he did to earn the money. It is my understanding of IMPLIED LICENSE that we are allowed to exhibit the work he made for us, especially in the case of advertising (i.e. the client for the ads has the right to use them).
This is all sour grapes because he believes he was fired (he quit, IN WRITING) and that we re-cut the ads after he left. My company paid for everything involved in the production (all cast and crew salaries, production costs) so we own the footage, and we are not disputing his involvement. But does he have any right to seek a copyright claim on the finished product, and block it from sites like YouTube? I'm prepared to file the counter-claim to get the ads reinstated, but I'm concerned that he'll take it to the next level -- a court order blocking them from being posted.
TIA, D
Hello, this is my first post. Sorry if it's long...
I have a copyright situation and I'm reasonably certain that I know my rights in the matter, but would like to run this by someone else for an outside opinion.
My small company is involved with a another company on a joint business venture. We produced 6 web ads to promote this venture; half of them were written and directed by someone else, a former "partner" in the venture who resigned from the project. He is now claiming copyright on the ads he worked on, and has even filed a DMCA takedown notice with YouTube where the ads are running.
We had no contract with him, which is unfortunate. However, he did accept payment from us for a) writing the ads and b) directing the ads. In the absence of an official work for hire agreement, we do have a paper trail of checks written to him and an invoice from him that lists the ads as work he did to earn the money. It is my understanding of IMPLIED LICENSE that we are allowed to exhibit the work he made for us, especially in the case of advertising (i.e. the client for the ads has the right to use them).
This is all sour grapes because he believes he was fired (he quit, IN WRITING) and that we re-cut the ads after he left. My company paid for everything involved in the production (all cast and crew salaries, production costs) so we own the footage, and we are not disputing his involvement. But does he have any right to seek a copyright claim on the finished product, and block it from sites like YouTube? I'm prepared to file the counter-claim to get the ads reinstated, but I'm concerned that he'll take it to the next level -- a court order blocking them from being posted.
TIA, D
