This post has been de-listed
It is no longer included in search results and normal feeds (front page, hot posts, subreddit posts, etc). It remains visible only via the author's post history.
Hi everyone,
If I were to film say a review of a restraunt/my experience there, would I need a location release?
What about a government owned park? Or say an airport?
As I understand from film making back ground, I basically need a release to film anywhere for commercial uses? Surely this applies to Youtube as well but I doubt most creators are doing so?
What's your understanding of this?
I just wonder if I do end up reviewing a hotel or whatever and it’s not favourable they might try and strike it down but that’s probably really jumping the gun.
Yeah that’s why I’m being concerned because of experience in the film/ad industry but I think you are right.
I guess what I’m trying to figure out is where you’d draw the line. What counts as like ‘it happened to be in the shot’ vs ‘this videos needs a release’. Say for example, a video on a local historical site, it’s owned by the local historical society but has public access vs I’d like to review my experiences at the hotel and use b-rolls that show amenities vs showing off some foods at a restraunt?
Subreddit
Post Details
- Posted
- 8 months ago
- Reddit URL
- View post on reddit.com
- External URL
- reddit.com/r/PartneredYo...
Couldn’t they sue me for revenue for using their premises without a release?