I Shot "Guerilla style" could the city sue me

Funkyfilms · Jan 29, 2014

Last year I shot a feature length film a guerilla style in Washington DC. I had very low budget for the film so I couldn’t afford the insurance or location permit fee. I went head and shot all my exterior locations with out any city permit including one a park. We were shooting very low key and we didn’t have any problem while filming no Police stopped us or asked for any permit at all.

My question is after the film is finished & released can the city come after me for not acquiring proper permits for the exterior locations. I might add some of the locations are very recognizable.

Any tips or past experience would help. Thank you.

Lucky Hardwood · Feb 14, 2014

For the most part, permit requirements are to minimize disruptions to the general public in public places. They also generate revenue for those times when the public must be inconvenienced. If there were no regulations, it could become impossible to get anywhere because any and every would be filmmaker could clog every street in the area with gear and sets.

Skyeward · Feb 14, 2014

For big production things with closing off whole streets and cameras on cranes and everything, I get the permit thing. That's an inconvenience and the city might not want you filming there. For just a lower-budget independent filmmaker, I don't really think they would 'clog' up the streets because they're only an inconvenience when they do ask to close off a street. If the permit thing was lifted, I don't think lots of filmmakers who have been waiting for this day to come would suddenly flock to the streets to film, so I don't think it would be an issue.

As for revenue, I agree it does bring in a little. For an independent filmmaker though, especially one with little budget, that permit could break the bank, straight up. I think I saw the figure $835? (That could be a complete lie, correct me if I'm wrong

) If you had only $2000 to begin with, that's a pretty big spend.

baoliun · Feb 14, 2014

Skyeward said:
For big production things with closing off whole streets and cameras on cranes and everything, I get the permit thing. That's an inconvenience and the city might not want you filming there. For just a lower-budget independent filmmaker, I don't really think they would 'clog' up the streets because they're only an inconvenience when they do ask to close off a street. If the permit thing was lifted, I don't think lots of filmmakers who have been waiting for this day to come would suddenly flock to the streets to film, so I don't think it would be an issue.

As for revenue, I agree it does bring in a little. For an independent filmmaker though, especially one with little budget, that permit could break the bank, straight up. I think I saw the figure $835? (That could be a complete lie, correct me if I'm wrong ) If you had only $2000 to begin with, that's a pretty big spend.

I am not saying that I agree with permits,but usual indie production doesn't have insurance,lack professionalism and actually is a major safety disruption imho. Fake gun fights are quite stressful for city/police/people and that is shit loads of tax money going to waste.

Metrostar · Feb 14, 2014

In Wyoming, you can film just about anywhere and the authorities just look the other way. It's so windy here, they are just glad you are making the effort. :lol:

Lucky Hardwood · Feb 15, 2014

Skyeward said:
For big production things with closing off whole streets and cameras on cranes and everything, I get the permit thing. That's an inconvenience and the city might not want you filming there. For just a lower-budget independent filmmaker, I don't really think they would 'clog' up the streets because they're only an inconvenience when they do ask to close off a street. If the permit thing was lifted, I don't think lots of filmmakers who have been waiting for this day to come would suddenly flock to the streets to film, so I don't think it would be an issue.

As for revenue, I agree it does bring in a little. For an independent filmmaker though, especially one with little budget, that permit could break the bank, straight up. I think I saw the figure $835? (That could be a complete lie, correct me if I'm wrong ) If you had only $2000 to begin with, that's a pretty big spend.

I'm not saying that there would be a mass film riot in the streets of every city and town in America. What I am saying is that, without the permit requirement, zero budget filmmakers would have no reason to keep their productions small and covert when filming on/near public thoroughfares and public property that others should also be free to enjoy. The problem, as I see it, is respect or a lack thereof for the needs/desires/rights of others. I am not accusing anyone on this board of being inconsiderate with their filming process, but I will say that there are those out there who would take advantage of the lack of regulation with a total disregard for others.

Regulation and enforcement are very different things. As long as you aren't creating a disturbance or causing citizens to call 911 because of your filming, it is highly unlikely that any cop will hassle you about shooting some footage in public.

Aspiring Mogul · Feb 22, 2014

I'm not up on this, but film permits are issued to allow you to occupy public places - IOW, to cordon off certain sections and start filming. AFAIK, they can't require you to get a permit just to get your camera rolling, because that may violate your First Amendment rights.

David.rhsc · Feb 22, 2014

If you get a distribution deal you are very likely going to have to get Errors and Omissions insurance, which will protect you and the distributor from civil and (most) criminal litigation.

Don't sweat it. If you are concerned about screening it before someone wants to distribute it, get the E&O for yourself and add a future distributor as additional insured when you get one.

@Aspiring, that is not true at all I'm afraid. Use of public space for commercial activity is not a first amendment right. Stopping a narrative/fictional production that doesn't have permits doesn't hinder speech in the first amendment sense, you just have to film it elsewhere. You're thinking of the right to document things like public protests, police brutality, etc. Very different.

If it were possible to bypass the permitting process via the 1st, the big players would have figured that out years ago.

A person just "pulling their camera out" usually flies under the radar, but if you start setting sticks and 6x6 frames you should really have a permit in hand. A couple people and a handheld camera probably won't draw any attention, but if you are on a public sidewalk (for example) and someone complains you can still be shut down without one.

Having said all that, permit enforcement varies from place to place. It's a lot harder to shoot without one in downtown Los Angeles during rush hour than it is in Oakland, for example. We can't spare the cops for anything short of gunfire these days.