Hi everyone.
I'm in a rather sticky situation and I'd love to seek some help/guidance/opinion.
Snippets of a timelapse video I created was recently used and broadcasted on local television without permission. I confronted the production house and sought compensation. They were agreeable to compensate me but after a few emails exchanged, they demanded a 'scanned copy of original copyright certification by IPOS (Intellectual Property Office of Singapore) registered on or before XX 2015. This is to ensure no other party can claim ownership of this video.'
They also did mention making an appointment with Commissioners for Oaths to make a declaration.
After which, I emailed IPOS and they replied:
"There is no need to file for registration to get copyright protection. An author automatically enjoys copyright protection as soon as he creates and expresses his original work in a tangible form, such as in a recording or writing. Originality simply means that there is a degree of independent effort in the creation of the work.
A copyright work created by a Singapore citizen or resident is protected in many countries overseas by virtue of international agreements. Generally, under these international agreements, the work of a Singapore citizen or resident would be protected in countries that signed the agreements as though the work was made there."
After exchanging few emails, this is the latest reply from the production house:
"Say for example, if you were asked (commissioned) to shoot this footage by another individual or organization (commissioner), then they will own the footage you have shot for them. So, even if you compiled this video and uploaded it on YouTube under your account, you may have used footage which was commissioned by someone else, hence the commissioner will own the rights to that footage.
You have claimed ownership of this video and we repeat that we do not doubt that. All we are asking for is proof that you are the sole owner of the visual content used.
It simply means that you have to produce a copy of declaration stating the facts of ownership and the date of creation, made before a Commissioner of Oaths on or before the XX of June 2015. Or you can also provide us with documentation to prove that your original work has been deposited in a depository.
A retailer has the right to ask a manufacturer for legitimate documentation before proceeding with any business transaction. We are not delaying the agreed payment. We asked you to prove your work is original and belongs 100% to you on 19th June 2015, we are waiting for an appropriate reply.
We are a PTE LTD company which is audited for all our transactions and need proper documentation to justify any expense incurred on our projects."
Here is the question. I didn't make any declaration before the Commissioners for Oaths before, and now the production house is not releasing the compensation because I am not producing any proof that I am the sole owner of the video. Is there anything that I can do about this?
I'm in a rather sticky situation and I'd love to seek some help/guidance/opinion.
Snippets of a timelapse video I created was recently used and broadcasted on local television without permission. I confronted the production house and sought compensation. They were agreeable to compensate me but after a few emails exchanged, they demanded a 'scanned copy of original copyright certification by IPOS (Intellectual Property Office of Singapore) registered on or before XX 2015. This is to ensure no other party can claim ownership of this video.'
They also did mention making an appointment with Commissioners for Oaths to make a declaration.
After which, I emailed IPOS and they replied:
"There is no need to file for registration to get copyright protection. An author automatically enjoys copyright protection as soon as he creates and expresses his original work in a tangible form, such as in a recording or writing. Originality simply means that there is a degree of independent effort in the creation of the work.
A copyright work created by a Singapore citizen or resident is protected in many countries overseas by virtue of international agreements. Generally, under these international agreements, the work of a Singapore citizen or resident would be protected in countries that signed the agreements as though the work was made there."
After exchanging few emails, this is the latest reply from the production house:
"Say for example, if you were asked (commissioned) to shoot this footage by another individual or organization (commissioner), then they will own the footage you have shot for them. So, even if you compiled this video and uploaded it on YouTube under your account, you may have used footage which was commissioned by someone else, hence the commissioner will own the rights to that footage.
You have claimed ownership of this video and we repeat that we do not doubt that. All we are asking for is proof that you are the sole owner of the visual content used.
It simply means that you have to produce a copy of declaration stating the facts of ownership and the date of creation, made before a Commissioner of Oaths on or before the XX of June 2015. Or you can also provide us with documentation to prove that your original work has been deposited in a depository.
A retailer has the right to ask a manufacturer for legitimate documentation before proceeding with any business transaction. We are not delaying the agreed payment. We asked you to prove your work is original and belongs 100% to you on 19th June 2015, we are waiting for an appropriate reply.
We are a PTE LTD company which is audited for all our transactions and need proper documentation to justify any expense incurred on our projects."
Here is the question. I didn't make any declaration before the Commissioners for Oaths before, and now the production house is not releasing the compensation because I am not producing any proof that I am the sole owner of the video. Is there anything that I can do about this?