Licensing price per second for unlimited use for a project

Hello guys. I'm getting approached more and more for video footage and would love to know what you guys are charging for HD video content. In this case, the production company is asking for this:

Owner hereby grants XXX ("Producer") and XXX and their respective parents, successors, licensees and assigns, the right, but not the obligation, to incorporate the film footage, video footage, still photograph(s), audio recording(s), document(s), artwork, and/or other materials described above (the "Property") in any manner Producer and/or XXX sees fit in Producer's and/or XXX's film or video production currently entitled "XXX" (the "Production"), and to use and authorize others to use the Property as so incorporated in the Production in the distribution, sale, licensing, marketing, advertising, promotion, exhibition and other exploitation of the Production in all markets and media (whether now known or hereafter developed), throughout the universe, in perpetuity.

 

Credit will be given to "Eric Cheng" in no less manner than others receiving a similar credit.

It is a brand-name production. Thanks for any help you might be able to provide!

Those are very broad rights indeed. In effect, you are assigning copyright in all but name...

I too would be interested in what HD commands.

My understanding it that I would only be assigning rights when the footage is associated with the specific production.

My understanding it that I would only be assigning rights when the footage is associated with the specific production.

That is what it looks like from what you posted (really should be couched as a perpetual license, not an assignment), but they can use the footage for marketing, promotion etc. Example, they can lift a still from the footage and place it on posters or t-shirts, though their language is actually kind of weak if they want to do that (though I am sure they intended to try to have rights like that, which is often fairly standard.) Not sure what other language is in the document, but you can ask them to put language in that "It is understood and agreed, that notwithstanding anything else expressed or implied in this agreement, the rights licensed hereunder are non-exclusive, and Owner conveys no ownership or copyright to Producer and Owner may exploit the Property in any manner that Owner desries" or something along those lines. You get the idea.

My understanding it that I would only be assigning rights when the footage is associated with the specific production.

Having re-read the rights assigned I would agree...but this section; in all markets and media (whether now known or hereafter developed), throughout the universe, in perpetuity is quite broad indeed. Do they need these rights, or just want them? What happens when the format shifts to something new?

If it were one of my still images, I would hope their pockets were very deep indeed. Or they had some less demanding contract they could offer.

I'm assuming your clips are from the Z1 and 5D2? Technically they aren't HD resolution so it's considered SD for many broadcast companies. If it's broadcast, I usually ask for 1 minute minimum at $600-1800 for SD/pseudo HD, depending on the production size and program, for normal, not so rare clips. It goes up as the clip is more important to the story line. The Beeb/Discovery/NGC is a minimum of £1000 per minute (again depending on program), 1 minute minimum. But they usually only want the more special stuff.

Having re-read the rights assigned I would agree...but this section; in all markets and media (whether now known or hereafter developed), throughout the universe, in perpetuity is quite broad indeed. Do they need t

It is standard language and video companies would be silly to not get perpetual rights throughout the universe. There are constant lawsuits about when formats shift, blu-ray from DVD, DVD from VHS - this is why the language evolved that way. There cane be some nuances regarding flat payments vs royalties (more so when royalties are calculated on different prices and reductions for new media) and you may want to exlude some rights, but for a use of footage in a video production....

As said it all depends on the actual program where/ how long the footage is being used ... I've sold footage for £8.50 per sec to £33.30 per sec... However this is UK pricing. They seem to want it all so I agree that it should be the mother of all rates ... Or maybe you should take charge and suggest something that suits you in rates and rights... I don't care what anyone says there is no standard rate although there really should be. If your footage is 'amazing' or 'new behaviour' then the worlds your oyster in most cases ...

Dive safe

DeanB

It is standard language and video companies would be silly to not get perpetual rights throughout the universe......

Standard language? Just like there is no set fee, its all down to negotiation. In the publishing world I have been sent a contract; one that grabs "all rights" for a single use fee. This has been politely declined, at which point a single use rights contract miraculously appears with a "sorry, sent you the wrong one..." type explanation. Not all deals end like this, but in my experience the fee and the rights are jointly negotiable. Sometimes its just a question of asking/negotiating.

All rights assigned for a single use fee are great for their business, but not mine. All rights are for sale and I have sold images with those terms, but the fee was in the "brand new Subal with GS viewfinder and a dome port" range. Having said that, I still regret it. And like Dean says, it depends what the footage is revealing helps drive the fee. But does everyone realise the true value of their image/footage? I suspect not.

And thanks for the numbers Dean - was that for all rights? Something similar to the contract that Eric has been offered?

Anecdotally, I have heard numbers up to £100 per second, minimum 60 seconds - but this was for an event quite unique and I didn't see the terms of the deal.

OK, so I was offered $0, and then $20/second. The production company has no budget, so I declined. This was for a show on NatGeo. I wonder what kind of shark footage they will end up with for $20/sec...

Eric,

I have a couple of Nat.Geo productions under my belt so this is from experience. A lot of the time, while it may be for Nat. Geo, the production company is really a separate entity working as an independent contractor. Thus, you are selling footage to IndoME Productions who then use it for their show broadcast on Nat Geo. This was the situation I experienced after having shot A roll stuff and then being called back to shoot b roll by another company for a production on Marlin. It was actually the independent prod company who put the film together and then sold it to Nat. Geo. It aired last Oct if I remember correctly.

However, for selling of stock footage, I usually charge $45 per second with a 15 second minimum. I always, always keep the rights to my own footage for future use or sale by me. I am selling them the footage for specific productions so that they can't use it for a million other productions where I would not get paid.

Steve

Yes, this was a contract with an independent production company.

Standard language? Just like there is no set fee, its all down to negotiation. In the publishing world I have been sent a contract; one that grabs "all rights" for a single use fee. This has been politely declined, at which point a single use rights contract miraculously appears with a "sorry, sent you the wrong one..." type explanation. Not all deals end like this, but in my experience the fee and the rights are jointly negotiable. Sometimes its just a question of asking/negotiating.

Yes, when someone produces video on a flat buy out language for use in a production they need to bundle all the rights together to be able to produce the video and otherwise market it etc. There is a difference when you are speaking about publishing an image where it is appearing in a magazine. You can make some analogies about advertising and the rest in the context of publishing where the language could be perceived as broader, but let's say it is a cover shot you land and the magazine puts out an advertisement that a new issue is available or they make PDFs etc.

Not saying things are not open to negotiation, but this case is one of those where the contract expressed really what is needed to produce a video and they limited the rights to the production. Of course we can do angels on the head of the pin things (and trust me I have negotiated tons of those), such as if the still winds up on a promotional condom and it offends the artists sensibilities, but more often than not alot of those are really exercises in mental masturbation, but it happens.

Every Producer/ production company has 'No' or 'Little' budget ... Stick to your guns, if they really want it they will pay ... Everybody else who is working on the programme/series will be getting paid and 99.9% will be on their usual rate ... Although if you just want your name in the credits !!!

Dive safe

DeanB

OK, so I was offered $0, and then $20/second. The production company has no budget, so I declined. This was for a show on NatGeo. I wonder what kind of shark footage they will end up with for $20/sec...

Quite a lot actually. Seeing how many people are doing the shark dives and using "HD" cameras, unless your stuff is that much better in terms of quality (or rarity) you'll always be going again the dime store stock libraries.

Just don't make the stupid mistake I made by selling first use rights (I still can't use the clip I sold til next year!)

This is bull shark footage, so less common that Tiger Beach shots. It is stable footage, and the sharks are close. I know HDV sucks, but it's all I had at the time.

I've been getting some good footage with the 5D2 lately, but a lot of it is shaky because SLR housings are so hard to hold steady.

Eric, I was recently invited to attend an important convention of professionals at the Art Institute of Ca. in San Diego. One of the break out group topics was entitled

'The Canon 5D, Savior or Satan'. Had to laugh at that. While I haven't used it or the 7D, it seems that without a tripod you are just out of luck in terms of the video and I recall you saying that you were less than estatic with the photos. I don't see one anytime soon in my future though if I were doing tons of topside work, it would be a great way to go.

Steve

I would say ya have to weigh the housing down to get smoother shots.

Yes they all have no money but can spend thousands getting to a location, food and accommodation no problems......

Negotiate and only sell as Non Exclusive use, ie only use the material for that one only program.

O and how can you say HDV sucks? Its not that bad.

Eric, I was recently invited to attend an important convention of professionals at the Art Institute of Ca. in San Diego. One of the break out group topics was entitled

'The Canon 5D, Savior or Satan'. Had to laugh at that. While I haven't used it or the 7D, it seems that without a tripod you are just out of luck in terms of the video and I recall you saying that you were less than estatic with the photos. I don't see one anytime soon in my future though if I were doing tons of topside work, it would be a great way to go.

Steve

I think you have your information wrong, though. I am totally ecstatic with the photos from the 5D2. I am not fond of the autofocus or body handling, however, and for video, holding it steady underwater is impossible if you're moving at all in the water.

But on a tripod, the footage is ridiculously good for a small, (relatively) expensive camera.

O and how can you say HDV sucks? Its not that bad.

All you have to do is see it next to proper HD footage.

Interesting Eric - Is it the trip I was on with you a few years back or a different one?

Cheers

James