I started watching a film a while back that turned out to be porno. I quit watching. But before I did there were some shots of the pentagon and the white house. Query: Did they go to the authorities to get permission to film these sites? Which raises a cultural question, what's wrong with our government for allowing this? The last question is for a different forum. The first question is the one I need an answer for. I'm scared to death to film on the street. There might be a nail hanging out of a telephone pole of which I might fail to get permission from the company who made the nail. thanks for any advise.
devon leesley
devon leesley
First, they most likely bought the shots as stock footage and whomever shot and sold the stock footage arranged for whatever clearances required. Second, and I could be wrong on this, but I think public government buildings are free to shoot. Its part of the first amendment and our right to criticize, mock and generally harrass our political leadership. A right I'm rather fond of myself. Third, even if there was an issue, few politicians would want to make a fuss (and first amendment Martyr) out of the porno filmmaker that used shots of famous buildings without getting permission.
Lastly, the big problem with getting shots of these buildings is a security issue these days and has little to do with the content of the film it ends up in and a lot to do with Al Queda fellows being captured with home footage of future targets.
Taking shots of private property is a different issue altogether and I'll let someone else run down the issues.
RJSchwarz
RJSchwarz
Thanks RJ. Does anyone have a clue about 'shooting' footage on pubic streets with buildings, houses, businesses?
devon leesley
devon leesley
