Archive Houses Have 'Eyes On The Prize'

I remember reading an article last fall on the classic Blackside, Inc. masterpiece EYES ON THE PRIZE. The sad fact of the matter was that the vaunted PBS mini-series on civil rights was being held hostage by copyright law. It was actually illegal to re-broadcast the series anywhere or release it on DVD because many of the original rights clearances had expired. I couldn't help but think what a crime this was against American history and culture.

If corporate archivists hold the rights to key componenets to films that explain who we are, where we come from, and where we are headed, how are we docmakers supposed to keep history alive and well on the airwaves? Recreations? For events that were never captured on film or tape, recreations are not bad for giving the illusion of 'being there', but I don't think we need to recreate history that already exists on film or video. I want to see these events for REAL, not some low rent actors making it look good.

I got my first real taste of the arhive footage nightmare while working on Discovery Health's BEATING THE ODDS. This mini-series looked at people from all walks of life who overcame enormous obstacles and got on with their lives. The non-celeb types were no problem to work with and we actually had some fun doing a few small recreations to put viewers at the 'scene' of the incident. But then came the celebrities. On a personal level, they were all a pleasure to work with. But when it came time to show clips of their works from an earlier point in their careers, the numbers were unreal. $5 - $10K per minute of usage EXCLUDING any royalties due the actors, directors, writers, musicians, personal trainers, yada, yada, yada. Well, that just wasn't going to fit into our miniscule stock footage budget line. In the end, we panned across some publicity photos and called it a day. What a way to cheapen a good film.

Nowadays I'm working on my indie doc WINGS ACROSS THE SAHARA. The project has gotten lots of good revues on the treatment and trailer, but funding is slow to come aboard. In the meantime, I'm researching footage the film absolutely needs to show what actually happened 65 years ago. I came across some vintage footage only to find that the stock house is representing a private owner and wants to charge $25,000 or more for about 5-8 minutes of usage. We're talking standard cable rights, int'l release and home video. And the private owner is not even the filmmaker!

This is where things have gotten out of hand. I can understand filmmakers wanting to charge a nominal fee for using something they acquired in the field with their own sweat and tears. Heck, we don't make money on these films to begin with (see July 3 post). But a private 'collector'? That's just plain wrong. Here is some historuc film of American history that is rarely, if ever, seen and some individual gets to hold it as an investment? This stuff should be in the National Archives. But it's not, so my film gets to be held hostage like so many others unable to pay the ever increasing corporate ransom. It should be public domain footage - at least it would have been under the old copyright rules. But it's not, so this huge canyon of unraised cash is staring up at me just waiting to be filled in by as much cash as it can eat.

There appears to be hope on the horizon. A recently published statement on Fair Use from American University's Center for Social Media (www.centerforsocialmedia.org) is an attempt to bring some sanity back into filmmaking. Hopefully, the statement will catch on in the legal system since it is currently a guideline only and has no legal standing whatsoever. Until that day arrives, it looks like the hottest commodity market won't be on Wall Street...it's on Sixth Avenue.