Well, Mr. Undisclosed, your bent is as obvious as Trump’s combover. Roger Stone as a natural choice to narrate a kids story about HRC? Please. You want advice? Wash your hands and your phone after speaking with Stone.So, am I wrong? What would you do in my situation?
In November of 2017, I began corresponding with Roger Stone about narrating a short animated piece that covered the history of Hillary Clinton. The animation is part of a series I created called “The Sandbox Weekly”, which consists of topical headlines from the point of view of kids, and drawn with crayons. I had been avoiding anything political since there seems to be no shortage of political news, but if I wanted to be topical with my series, politics were unavoidable.
I decided to go the Clinton route and thought “Who better to narrate and be a part of this episode than Roger Stone himself?” I reached out to his people with a rough idea of the episode, not expecting a response. A week after emailing, he responded and asked to see a script. I sent him a basic script in the vein of a bedtime story, as if he were talking to children about everything Clinton.
He quickly sent two different audio versions of his take on the script. Months passed, and I continued animating and receiving more audio from Mr. Stone. I eventually found myself throwing in a few visual jabs at Trump as the tone and subject matter called for it. The idea of taking shots at Trump while listening to Roger tell his story became more intriguing. I began requesting audio that wasn’t exactly directed at Clinton, but more about how politicians are generally inclined to lies and corruption. To my excitement, and surprise, Roger continued sending me what I needed.
So, am I wrong? What would you do in my situation?
In November of 2017, I began corresponding with Roger Stone about narrating a short animated piece that covered the history of Hillary Clinton. The animation is part of a series I created called “The Sandbox Weekly”, which consists of topical headlines from the point of view of kids, and drawn with crayons. I had been avoiding anything political since there seems to be no shortage of political news, but if I wanted to be topical with my series, politics were unavoidable.
I decided to go the Clinton route and thought “Who better to narrate and be a part of this episode than Roger Stone himself?” I reached out to his people with a rough idea of the episode, not expecting a response. A week after emailing, he responded and asked to see a script. I sent him a basic script in the vein of a bedtime story, as if he were talking to children about everything Clinton.
He quickly sent two different audio versions of his take on the script. Months passed, and I continued animating and receiving more audio from Mr. Stone. I eventually found myself throwing in a few visual jabs at Trump as the tone and subject matter called for it. The idea of taking shots at Trump while listening to Roger tell his story became more intriguing. I began requesting audio that wasn’t exactly directed at Clinton, but more about how politicians are generally inclined to lies and corruption. To my excitement, and surprise, Roger continued sending me what I needed.
So, am I wrong? What would you do in my situation?
In November of 2017, I began corresponding with Roger Stone about narrating a short animated piece that covered the history of Hillary Clinton. The animation is part of a series I created called “The Sandbox Weekly”, which consists of topical headlines from the point of view of kids, and drawn with crayons. I had been avoiding anything political since there seems to be no shortage of political news, but if I wanted to be topical with my series, politics were unavoidable.
I decided to go the Clinton route and thought “Who better to narrate and be a part of this episode than Roger Stone himself?” I reached out to his people with a rough idea of the episode, not expecting a response. A week after emailing, he responded and asked to see a script. I sent him a basic script in the vein of a bedtime story, as if he were talking to children about everything Clinton.
He quickly sent two different audio versions of his take on the script. Months passed, and I continued animating and receiving more audio from Mr. Stone. I eventually found myself throwing in a few visual jabs at Trump as the tone and subject matter called for it. The idea of taking shots at Trump while listening to Roger tell his story became more intriguing. I began requesting audio that wasn’t exactly directed at Clinton, but more about how politicians are generally inclined to lies and corruption. To my excitement, and surprise, Roger continued sending me what I needed.
So, am I wrong? What would you do in my situation?
Are you getting any nibbles from "P" and "S"?
If you have been entirely honest with him about your production, then there should be no problem.
However, if you have misled Mr. Stone in any way about how your piece is being constructed then I suggest you DON'T use any of his narration. Don't assume anything.
If you are unsure of his understanding, then I suggest you contact him and explain EXACTLY what you intend to produce and ask his express permission to continue using his narrative.
Negative
That isn't how it works.
In the industry, if talent signed the contract, they signed the contract.
You can't just turn around and decide that you didn't like the checks you received, or that the agreement is null and void.
Stone is "talent", specifically VO talent. He can exercise his option to not work on any further episodes than those he contracted for, but that's it.
There's a reason Prince felt compelled to change his name to an unpronouncable symbol. He didn't like the contract he signed, but he was nevertheless still "under contract" and had to perform to meet the terms of the contract.
His name change was part of his protest. Eventually he was able to negotiate OUT of that contract but it took a fair bit of effort, and money, to do so.
Likewise, if Stone has signed a contract, he has already given his express permission.
Renegging is breach of contract.
Did you see her post anything stating she had a "contract?" Is Mr. Stone being paid for his "narrative?"
All contracts, even oral ones, require an offer and an acceptance. The terms must be clear.
This seems a simple verbal agreement based on her original outline. She admits that she has NOT told him that she is changing the agreement, just simply asking him for more general narratives.
It is a breach of contract any time EITHER party changes the terms without the agreement of the other party.
I also did not see anything he posted stating that Stone was NOT under contract.
And since neither you nor I have seen the contract, if any, we do not know how specific the terms are, or how vague.
Well, she is ASKING if it is okay to do what she plans to try to do. She also admits she has NOT told him her plans.
That indicates she knows what she is doing was NOT part of the agreement. That should be self-evident to anyone reading her OP.
It's also self evident that you're not looking very closely at this thread.
How can I tell?
You're the only one here who thinks wordclown is female.
It's also self evident that you're not looking very closely at this thread.
How can I tell?
You're the only one here who thinks wordclown is female.
This.
Deflection...noted. :roll:
I addressed the question, you respond with an appeal to authority "I know how entertainment contracts work." I respond that this does not appear to be an "entertainment contract" where there is an "actor/performer" aware that they are playing a role, but rather a political cartoon the narrator is volunteering statements for because he thinks it is targeting a political opponent.
I am giving the OP reasonable advice based on the information provided, while you are not (IMO).
If the OP does not think "HE" is doing anything wrong, then there is no point to his asking for advice in this thread.
Yes, I apologize for the mistake.
That does not mean I was not offering reasonable advice. :shrug:
So, as I suspected there is no agreement. Then without one you cannot use Mr. Stone's spoken words without his express permission in your production.
This is not the same situation as those which fall under the "fair use" doctrine which applies to copyright material.
When in doubt in this kind of situation it is better to ask permission before you do it, rather than beg forgiveness after.
Deflection...noted. :roll:
I addressed the question, you respond with an appeal to authority "I know how entertainment contracts work."
Thanks. No contract but we exchanged emails with him giving my blessing to "Cross the line if needed." I've sent him random scenes that don't include his voice. We shall see. Thanks again.
If everything looks like debate to you, then you're out to win a debate.
I am not out to win a debate.
I'm semi-retired from thirty-five years in the business, Emmy nominated, worked on several Emmy winning projects, four time Telly award winner, and I even got to shoot some fun stuff but mostly I was an editor, a film editor and occasionally a producer.
I've even sat in the director's chair a couple of times but had more fun being the TD (technical director) because then I got to be the "guitar" that a GOOD director wanted to pick up and play...
I'm not a lawyer, but I've hired some from time to time...I am simply sharing personal experience and what I've learned after putting a lot of my own hard earned money into an attorney's checking account.
If you don't believe what I am trying to tell you, it's not going to make a shred of difference to me.
Well, that's almost a contract but not quite.
You writers, hee hee...get a contract, and get a pit bull in a three piece suit.
My point was that you jumped to conclusions with no basis in fact, whereas I looked at what the OP wrote, and addressed the point that whatever it was he was talking about, it did not appear to be your suggestion of an "entertainment contract."
This you subsequently discovered for yourself and admitted with this next post:
Thus my advice was on point, based on my own education in Contract Law and my own experiences with contracts.
However, I was not giving the OP "legal advice," just offering my personal opinion as a Forum member based on his proffered fact pattern.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?