I am not sure if we are talking about the same kind of film, but fiction feature films are nearly always licensed from large companies or sales agents that represent them and you definitely may not license them to anyone beyond the term of your contract without their agreement. I imagine if you work directly with a filmmaker things are different, but contracts for standard feature films limit the distributor's rights to the term of the contract. In general rights not explicitly granted in a contract belong to owner. There was a lot of nasty arguments when DVD came in and companies realized that most old contracts did not cover the format. It would hardly make sense for a company to license a film to distributor for say 7 years and yet allow the distributor to license it in perpetuity. What for instance would prevent a distributor from making all TV sales and Netflix deals in perpetuity? They would also have "fire sales" when rights were expiring and just start selling rights to anyone they could get any money from . The reason rights are so damn complicated with foreign and independent films is that they change and expire so often. Streaming rights are a contract, not a physical item like a print or DVD which can be sold for life of format and a company whose rights are limited to a certain period can't sell them to someone else for a longer period.
I am currently involved in sales & marketing for a number of films. With one group I work with the director so these films can be licensed for a month or in perpetuity as she owns all the rights. The others I work with are under contract with several very large European companies and under no circumstances could I legally license them in perpetuity. If the issue came up, I could ask them if they would agree, but unless a LOT of money is involved I would not hold my breath. They would certainly take legal action if they found out I was claiming rights to license their films beyond the terms in the contract. Again films where are working directly with a filmmaker may have more flexibility because of the relationship, but I am referring to fiction feature films many of which are under contract from large and often litigious rights holders. Every contract I have ever seen or been involved with on those would not allow a distributor to sell any rights extending beyond their own contract. If anyone else who deals with fiction feature titles want to comment I would be most interested. On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 5:38 PM, Elizabeth Sheldon <elizab...@kinolorber.com > wrote: > For clarity, unless a contract between a filmmaker and a distributor > specifies that the distributor may not grant licenses that extend > beyond the original Term of the contract, a distributor may license a > film for any given period of time during the original license period. > For example, if a contract was signed in 2005 for a seven year term, a > distributor could grant licenses that extend ten years beyond, or > even, in perpetuity. The right to grant licenses expires in 2012, not > the licenses granted to the end user. > > For example, a PPR license is for the life of the DVD. Even if the > distributor only has seven years to grant PPR licenses to customers, > the customer's license does not end when the distributor's contract > ends. Likewise with digital site licenses, it is for the term of the > digital site license agreed to between the institution and the > distributor. Unless there are underlying rights issues and/or a clause > that limits the term of a license to a certain period beyond the end > of the original contract, there is no reason for a distributor not to > offer a digital site license in perpetuity. > > From a legal point of view. > > Best, > > Elizabeth > > Elizabeth Sheldon > Vice President > Kino Lorber, Inc. > 333 W. 39th St., Suite 503 > New York, NY 10018 > (212) 629-6880 > > www.kinolorberedu.com > On Sep 30, 2010, at 5:08 PM, Jessica Rosner wrote: > > > As a practical matter Swank really can't license for more than one > > academic year. This is what I have been trying to explain re studio > > product. I think is is very unlikely they will ever allow Swank, > > Criterion Pictures ( Fox films) or even themselves to license for > > more than a year. Anything is possible but I would not hold my > > breath. Similarly most independent and foreign films are likely to > > be able to license for say 1-7 years because 7 years is the standard > > contract term though some go up to 10 or more, however the clock > > starts ticking when the contract is signed so a film released in > > 2005 is likely only to have 2 years of licensing life left. In many > > cases these films are renewed, but in many cases they are not and a > > whole lot of companies go out of business these days leaving a lot > > of films in limbo. > > > > The Swank scenario may be more restrictive in terms of use than > > some, but for fiction feature films, most are going to be time > > limited and few available in perpetuity unless it is put into new > > contracts from now on and again I would not hold my breath for that. > > > > Jessica > > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 3:40 PM, Stanton, Kim <kim.stan...@unt.edu> > > wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > > > I think we’re about to license our first streaming film through > > Swank Digital Campus. The usage scenario is so different from what > > I normally deal with. Typically, my library licenses individual > > films from distributers for use by all current student & faculty, > > for a term ranging from 3 years to perpetuity and we stream the > > content from a library-run server and management system. The Swank > > content would be license for 1 semester, would only be accessible > > to a specific class and would be hosted off-site. > > > > > > I’m trying to figure out what my library’s role should be in the > > Swank scenario. If you’ve used Swank Digital Campus at your > > institution (or deal with other short term/ course specific digital > > rights), could you tell me how this was handled. > > > > > > · Who is responsible for the transaction – i.e whose name > > is on the contract/ invoice? The Library, the academic department, > > the faculty member, another campus group? > > > > > > · Who directly pays for the content? > > > > > > · If both of the above were handled by the library, was > > there any resistance to this sort of short term, limited access > > being the library’s responsibility? > > > > > > · Is there another department on your campus that more > > directly supports development and resources for online courses? > > What was their involvement? > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > Kim Stanton > > > > Head, Media Library > > > > University of North Texas > > > > kim.stan...@unt.edu > > > > P: (940) 565-4832 > > > > F: (940) 369-7396 > > > > > > > > VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of > > issues relating to the selection, evaluation, > > acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current > > and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It > > is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for > > video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between > > libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and > > distributors. > > > > > > VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of > > issues relating to the selection, evaluation, > > acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current > > and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It > > is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for > > video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between > > libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and > > distributors. > > > > Best, > > Elizabeth > > Elizabeth Sheldon > Vice President > Kino Lorber, Inc. > 333 W. 39th St., Suite 503 > New York, NY 10018 > (212) 629-6880 > > > VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues > relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, > preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and > related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective > working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication > between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and > distributors. >
VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors.
