Criterion most definitely could not license most of their titles in perpetuity because I believe most of their collection is under contract from major studios who would simply never agree to it. Most studio licenses are shorter than those for foreign films, they can actually be year to year. A streaming license is very different from selling a DVD or before that a print with PPR rights. A DVD is a physical item. With streaming you are selling rights not a physical item and companies can't sell rights for a term longer than their contract. I did in fact check around with a number of companies who distribute foreign and independent films and none sells rights in perpetuity or even longer than the term of their contract except in unusual cases where they actually have rights in perpetuity. There were some odd contracts particularly with foreign films were owners either naively or because they needed money fast did sell rights forever, but it is fairly rare. I was told that most contracts are now closer to 10-15 years than the old 7, but they are still limited in time frame.
If the companies/producers from which distributors license films from found out they were licensing beyond the terms of the contract, they would be in serious trouble. There would be little point in selling a film for distribution for say 7 years if the company you sold it to then resold to customers for 20 years. Trust me distributors are as frustrated as you. We would love to buy rights forever and not have to worry about renewing them, or the next format that might come along. With the rapid technology changes the rights issues have gotten even more complicated and rights holders shall we say a bit more ornery? Jessica On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 1:49 PM, Susan Weber <swe...@langara.bc.ca> wrote: > Thank you, Elizabeth for this clarity. > I had been told the same thing from Criterion, in Canada. > > However, many of the distributors who have digital rights do not uphold > this belief. > They tell us that they cannot license beyond their agreement with the > rights' holder. > I've often brought up the DVD sold with perpetual use as the parallel with > digital or streaming rights. If they can sell the DVD for its physical > life, > they should be able to sell the streaming rights with the same condition. > Alas, they don't seem to accept it. > Or, do you think I'm being sold a bill of goods on that? > > I know Dennis has mentioned that a digital file can be converted to other > streaming > standards. to clarify, we cannot convert an MPEG 4 file to whatever the > next > standard is, can we? Would that not be a new version, and therefore require > new > permission, and perhaps a payment? > > Susan > > > > Elizabeth Sheldon 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> > <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. > > > > -- > Susan Weber, Librarian > Langara College, > 100 West 49th Avenue, Vancouver, B.C. V5Y 2Z6 > Tel. 604-323-5533 email: swe...@langara.bc.ca > > > 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.
