Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Should I watermark my stock footage

Owen Rennie

Owen Rennie

Well-known member
Joined
May 5, 2010
Messages
761
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Age
45
Location
Sydney
Website
www.driftwoodcinema.com
Hi, I've started exporting a heap of footage to start a library on my own website. I haven't used any watermarks and now I'm starting to think maybe u should have... I'm uploading to Vimeo and embedding on my site. Would you guys watermark?

Thanks
 
People worry way too much about watermarking and policing every minor misuse of their images or footage. They are making a mistake. We released my film "TimeScapes" as a Cineform 4K 4:4:4 AVI with no watermarks or protection. We ignored people making little mashup videos with their church music on youtube (who cares??... a couple hundred views, how does that damage anyone?). What we did instead is sit back and wait for major companies that should have known better who took our footage and started using it at trade shows and even in online ads, and we sued the hell out of them and made a truckload of money.

When it comes to protecting your content, use your brain, not your emotions.
 
Tom Lowe said:
People worry way too much about watermarking and policing every minor misuse of their images or footage. They are making a mistake. We released my film "TimeScapes" as a Cineform 4K 4:4:4 AVI with no watermarks or protection. We ignored people making little mashup videos with their church music on youtube (who cares??... a couple hundred views, how does that damage anyone?). What we did instead is sit back and wait for major companies that should have known better who took our footage and started using it at trade shows and even in online ads, and we sued the hell out of them and made a truckload of money.

When it comes to protecting your content, use your brain, not your emotions.
Click to expand...

Dear Tom

This was such a smart and refreshingly honest response to the original post.

Thankyou
 
Tom Lowe said:
People worry way too much about watermarking and policing every minor misuse of their images or footage. They are making a mistake. We released my film "TimeScapes" as a Cineform 4K 4:4:4 AVI with no watermarks or protection. We ignored people making little mashup videos with their church music on youtube (who cares??... a couple hundred views, how does that damage anyone?). What we did instead is sit back and wait for major companies that should have known better who took our footage and started using it at trade shows and even in online ads, and we sued the hell out of them and made a truckload of money.

When it comes to protecting your content, use your brain, not your emotions.
Click to expand...


So you spent your time scouring the internet looking for people who used your footage?
How are you supposed to tell if someone steals your footage ..
 
Personally I would . There is case here in Oz where a commercial network downloaded some footage of a cloud bank in Northern Q from a photographers website used it & paid nothing for it, citing public rights & interest .
 
Tom Lowe said:
People worry way too much about watermarking and policing every minor misuse of their images or footage. They are making a mistake. We released my film "TimeScapes" as a Cineform 4K 4:4:4 AVI with no watermarks or protection. We ignored people making little mashup videos with their church music on youtube (who cares??... a couple hundred views, how does that damage anyone?). What we did instead is sit back and wait for major companies that should have known better who took our footage and started using it at trade shows and even in online ads, and we sued the hell out of them and made a truckload of money.

When it comes to protecting your content, use your brain, not your emotions.
Click to expand...


Tom, I've read this before from you and it's the reason I stopped using watermarks on all my work.. I've even talked others out of using it..Makes so much sense. Unfortunately my work isn't as tempting to steal as yours and I'm yet to make a truckload of cash.

I was only thinking Stock footage may be different as I'm "flashing footage in people's faces to use" and I'm hoping to eventually build my site into a huge library also including 3rd party content from other Filmmakers. It seems all stock sites use watermarks

But anyway, most of my film making gear and techniques have been influenced from reading your Timescapes and Reduser posts (except for buying PC) GO MAC.. So if you say no watermark than ok no watermarks :)

Anyway here is my recent work (unwatermarked) would be awesome to hear your feedback.. https://vimeo.com/162615871

 
Mike Garrick said:
Personally I would . There is case here in Oz where a commercial network downloaded some footage of a cloud bank in Northern Q from a photographers website used it & paid nothing for it, citing public rights & interest .
Click to expand...

Cant believe they'd get away with that..
 
If your footage is likely to be interesting to news type organisations I'd watermark it. The appeal to 'public interest' is something that makes it easier for them to take and try and rail road you then ever before, especially if others repost it amd those news organisations take it from them.

Also, I'd be wary of Tom's advice re stock.

In the case of Timescapes I would imagine the work is registered for copyright. As such he can sue in US jurisdiction, and also force settlement in US jurisdiction -in both cases the resulting damages for commercial usage are likely much higher than other areas and also you will be much more likely to find an entertainment lawyer who will pursue your case.

However, if your work is just stock, you likely aren't registering it for copyright, because you will be posting it speculatively. If it's not registered, you can still claim copyright but you can't sue for damages in the US.

As usual disclaimer - I am not a lawyer but there is also probably a big difference between damages for using part of a whole work (like Timescapes) and damages for using a single piece of stock posted on a website as stock.

Certainly, if you were to take Tom's advice, you'd want to have the non watermarked stock compiled as a single video and registered for copyright. (Rather than paying to register each piece separately).

There may be a more efficient way to protect stock footage in terms of copyright registration - but for that you would need to talk to a lawyer.
 
Owen Rennie said:
Tom, I've read this before from you and it's the reason I stopped using watermarks on all my work.. I've even talked others out of using it..Makes so much sense. Unfortunately my work isn't as tempting to steal as yours and I'm yet to make a truckload of cash.

I was only thinking Stock footage may be different as I'm "flashing footage in people's faces to use" and I'm hoping to eventually build my site into a huge library also including 3rd party content from other Filmmakers. It seems all stock sites use watermarks

But anyway, most of my film making gear and techniques have been influenced from reading your Timescapes and Reduser posts (except for buying PC) GO MAC.. So if you say no watermark than ok no watermarks :)

Anyway here is my recent work (unwatermarked) would be awesome to hear your feedback.. https://vimeo.com/162615871
Click to expand...

Nice footage. Also nice music. Did you pay for that? ;)
 
Yep, those commercial networks etc over here grab YouTube etc video left right and center, and I wonder if they license it. All they have to do is if somebody Ballenger them say well give you so much or nothing, because it costs too much legally. But the answer is to challenge them all and in class action, and for predatory practice, it then costs them not to do the right thing. It's not like patenting it's a lot cheaper. However there is fair use a different educational use (and believe me companies chop up those laws when they want to charge universities exorbitant fees to use little peices) which means that little pieces of video might be fine, but the whole work, including the whole photographic work, should not be. I see them trying the really low resolution trick on these news peices even.
 
Absolutely.

I know 4K is all the rage, but I don't upload any 4K that I don't expect to see downloaded and used in an unahtorized way. Watermarking is a good idea.

David
 
jake southard said:
So you spent your time scouring the internet looking for people who used your footage?
How are you supposed to tell if someone steals your footage ..
Click to expand...

Hi Jake - using a google reverse image search can work, but not always. Take a full screen screenshot from a video and upload it to google. That can *sometimes* show you where the image appears online, even within another video, even if it's been graded for a very different look. I suspected one of our media company's content suppliers of stacking his "reel" with other people's work and used google's reverse image search tool to prove it. Then again, we've tried this with other material we knew was online and nothing came up. Worth a try anyway if you're worried about unauthorized usage.
 
And thanks guys, I'm thinking I'm better off hosting my footage with a third party library now instead.. So they take care of all the waternarking and legals I guess.. It's a shame we live in a world full of scum bags
 
Owen Rennie said:
And thanks guys, I'm thinking I'm better off hosting my footage with a third party library now instead.. So they take care of all the waternarking and legals I guess.. It's a shame we live in a world full of scum bags
Click to expand...

There was a thread here a while back where a guy had posted images of horses, slow motion, really nice stuff, dusty backlit stuff.

Then a while later these shots show up in a thread with a Music video by another user.

Turns out the user had purchased the shots legitimately from pond five.

Someone had downloaded his video, chopped it up and posted it for sale on pond five and Just by chance another user bought those shots for his video, like 8 months later. I don't even want to post to vimeo anymore for this reason.

David
 
I don't know how the jurisdiction is in the states but here in europe you should "ALWAYS" watermark your footage. Im making a living from stock footage and if you don't watermark your footage you won't see a penny. I know news broadcasters here that just copy the content from youtube and use it without paying anything. In case you try to sue them - they even have a budget for such cases because its cheaper to pay a small penalty fee than to buy it legally. They have a meaning for it "better sorry than safe". I know firsthand because I worked at a huge broadcast company couple of years back.
 
If a company is large enough to cause material damage and loss to you, they are also big enough to sue the hell out of.
 
David Battistella said:
Absolutely.

I know 4K is all the rage, but I don't upload any 4K that I don't expect to see downloaded and used in an unahtorized way. Watermarking is a good idea.

David
Click to expand...

Yes. Theft prevention is always way better than trying to prove up damages in our jacked-up legal system. Suing is a very last resort since it can take years to resolve and carries risk since you have to pay legal fees to prosecute the case. Once you "win" . . . then you have to collect. Tom's case is unique and it seems he had the resources and time to pursue that course against legit companies who could pay once losing in court. I also don't post reel's etc since there is no way prevent illegal downloads and theft. Then again, Getty's T&C / payouts are a different form of artistic theft ;-)

Think of it like unwanted pregnancy: a whole lot easier to prevent than to remedy
 
Hi Owen,

I'm also busy cutting a showreel for my stock. I think it's worth watermarking your work, but in an unobtrusive manner. See attached. It's still a hassle for people to crop/blur/composite it out, but it doesn't detract too much from the footage.

Cheers,
Rob
 

Attachments

  • Vulture small.jpg
    Vulture small.jpg
    85.6 KB · Views: 0
David Battistella said:
There was a thread here a while back where a guy had posted images of horses, slow motion, really nice stuff, dusty backlit stuff.

Then a while later these shots show up in a thread with a Music video by another user.

Turns out the user had purchased the shots legitimately from pond five.

Someone had downloaded his video, chopped it up and posted it for sale on pond five and Just by chance another user bought those shots for his video, like 8 months later. I don't even want to post to vimeo anymore for this reason.

David
Click to expand...


Wow haha what a weird cluster fuk. I hope the creator got his justice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top