what rights does "editor for hire" have?

[cinemanix]

I just found out that an editor I hired and paid last year, has posted my four documentaries on his website to show his editing ability. His passes were terrible...and the four short docs became acceptable only under my direction.

I was the writer and director. This editor was not involved in production until the edit. He did not ask my permission or tell me that he was posting my documentaries onto his website. After another project gone very bad with him, I had to part ways. I do not want my documentaries on his website. He is so poor at what he does...he does not have anything but my work on his website. Yet he owes me footage and cuts from work we "partnered" and he has not provided me with any of our "partnered" footage or edits for my website.

What are his rights? What are my rights?

I definitely want to force my work off his website. I considered him an editor for hire...although there is no written contract. I do have receipts showing I paid him in full....he insisted I pay cash.

 

[that1guyy]

Hmm interesting, I'd also like to know the answer to this.

But, I'm guessing here, as long as they are showing edits, transitions, etc, instead of long dialogue pieces I think the editor can do it...let's wait for the experts.

 

[directorik]

This is why one always needs very clear, written contracts.

What are his rights? What are my rights?

You have none.

That doesn't mean you can't hire a lawyer and send a "cease
and desist" order. That doesn't mean you can't hire a lawyer
and sue him. But what will you sue him for? You never put
in writing that he cannot use the entire documentary on a
website.

The situation sucks and I am not unsympathetic to it. But you
are asking about your legal rights. So the only thing you can do
at this point is hire a lawyer to send him a strongly worded letter
telling him to remove your work from his website. And do it
immediately. Every day it's on his website makes it more difficult
to get it removed.

 

[spinner]

Is it safe to say that since you didn't like his editing, that you had to re-edit his work?

If so, couldn't that make him "second editor" thereby freeing you up to claim editor's credits?


-- spinner

 

[PaulGriffith]

As an "editor for hire" (are there any other kinds?) it's pretty standard to put links to work or put clips in a reel. An entire documentary hosted on his website is rare, but if it's something you're that concerned about the only way I can see him violating anything (since no contract is involved) is if you have distribution rights and proof of that somewhere.

There's been very, very few clients I've had that wouldn't let anything posted in a reel or online. The rule I follow is to wait until project has already aired or released publicly so I'm not giving anything away. That's a personal rule though, not the law unless you put it in writing.

 

[PaulGriffith]

Also, even if you did direct each edit, if he did the work he's still the editor. It's the same for any job on set, some are just a smaller piece of the picture but you have to show it all just to show the one bit in a reel.

Sorry you had a bad experience!

 

[Blade_Jones]

I considered him an editor for hire...although there is no written contract.

So you have just a verbal contract. Always have EVERYONE including crew sign releases that definitively transfer copyrights to you. Because you don't have a written contract doesn't mean it's the end of the world though. I've been down this road with an actor who once was talking out of his ass about how he was going to block the sale of my movie if I didn't pay him "points" after he was already paid, but the director failed to get him to sign a release.

A movie is a compilation of creative works put forth by a lot of people including editors unless agreed to otherwise in a written contract. (Google copyrights + compilation) Everyone always says that if you don't have a contract you're 100% screwed however the exception to this is that sometimes certain facts exist that demonstrate to a court that a verbal "work for hire" contract exists. The library of congress doesn't talk about this but I've spoken to attorneys about this. Google "work for hire" + "independent contractor" + copyright.

If you paid this editor, provided him with editing equipment, the footage, had a required time frame for completion, and supervised his work then you could successfully argue in court that a "work for hire" situation was in place and therefore you OWN all rights to the movie. But often times directors, actors, editors, and others post clips of their work on their web sites to promote themselves (not exploit the movie). Is this editor posting the entire movie or just a clip or two? I definitely don't think he has any right to exploit and sell the movie but can he use clips to promote himself in advance of the release or after the release? That's in interesting question for a lawyer. It all comes down to copyrights.

 

[Jamster]

Ok, why not email and inform him that although you don't have a problem with him showing a few clips of your copyrighted material in order for him to obtain work via a showreel.

You do not authorise the showing of your entire work, and you are actively seeking distribution agreements with said work and do not want to jepadise any potential revenue as a result of said unathorised use of your copyrighted material.

Wish him all the best with his career.

Jim