Home > All Posts > Individual Post
Post #1328

Re: [videoblogging] INdTV

By Christopher Weagel | Christopher Weagel <humandog@...> | ronnalddd
September 30, 2004 | Post #1328 | Topic #1299

Yeah I'm aware of work for hire. Again, it's the "Independent" TV emphasis. But I suppose it's no different than any other marketing use of the word independent. Chris On Sep 30, 2004, at 4:50 AM, Andreas Haugstrup wrote: > On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 02:56:40 -0400, Christopher Weagel > <humandog@...> wrote: > >> The thing that bugged me was that it comes off as INDtv wanting its >> applicants to do all the work for them, then they own all the material >> produced. > > This is standard for all the publishing companies I've heard of > (excluding > still photographers who have a good union here). It's an easy way for a > media company to secure exclusive rights - they are paying you to do > the > work after all. > A comparison is a computer programmer: He doesn't own any of the code > he > writes for a company either. > > Of course it leaves a bad taste in my mouth when they call it > idenpendent > tv or whatever. But as a business they need exclusive rights for the > content produced by their employees. Otherwise they're just throwing > money > out the window. > > -- > Personal: <http://www.solitude.dk&gt; > File Thingie - PHP File Manager <http://www.solitude.dk/filethingie/&gt; > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > >