Junior Member
1,661 POSTS & 885 LIKES
|
Post by theend on Jan 18, 2024 20:27:38 GMT
Should the subject of a documentary ever be entitled to the money made off of the documentary about them? In recent years there have some documentaries, usually on true crime. Cyntoia Brown on Netflix. Made without her involvement. Madeline McCain on Netflix. Made without the family's involvement. Making a Murderer, my local true crime Netflix story. And most recently, Gypsy Rose on Hulu.
It amazes me how well you can make a documentary about a current figure with the compilation of the coverage already made about them. I understand that legally they may have no current rights. But, in your court of opinion, should they?
It is also interesting to think of how much and how often in modern times people who never asked to become celebrities or icons have become that. George Floyd being the biggest current example. He didn't aim to have murals all over with his face on it. If they made a documentary focused on his name, likeness etc it would all be profit for the film maker and the subject would get nothing.
Yet, generational family members get to sue for their ancestors music rights. It's just bizarre what is owned and can be profited from and who can do it.
Mini random thought bubble.
|
|