Maybe Panasonic and LivinginHD should read their own rules
A few weeks ago I submitted a video for Living in HD – a contest presented by Panasonic. It’s the chance to get some free gear and also get some insider info from Panasonic. The submitters were suppose to upload a 2 minute video on what they would do with the products and why they should be picked.
I did enter and I didn’t get picked. No big deal – that’s happened before – I’m not bent out of shape for that. However, I checked out the 10 entrants involved and I have to ask myself – Why didn’t half of these get disqualified?
Let’s look at the rules.
4. ENTRY REQUIREMENTS/CLEARANCES:
(a) Commercial Must Meet LivinginHd Technical Requirements For Uploading. It must be color. Recommended formats include WMV, AVI, MOV, and MPG. The Video should not exceed two minutes. All Videos must be tagged with #LiHDInsider.
That means shows longer than 2 minutes should be disqualified, right? How is it that 8 of the videos EXCEED 2 minutes?
(b) Content and Originality. Each Video must be the original work of the Entrant, may not have been previously published and may not have won previous awards. Videos must be in English. The Entrant must appear in the Video; if other people are in the Video, there must be no-one under the age of 18.
I am curious on the “Previously published” part. I see a couple that have clips from “Previously published” videos. If they allow those snippets, it should have been stated as just.
(c) Secure Authorizations from Others in the Video. Before entering this Contest, Entrant must receive prior written permission from other person(s) in the Video (or from their respective parent/legal guardian if person(s) featured are considered minors in their state/territory of residence) for Sponsor to use their likenesses for publicity including posting on Website; and make written copies of such permissions available to the Sponsor upon request.
Once again, there are a couple videos that are showing pictures or even interviews with celebrities. While they might have received permission to get those, did they get permission to put it in the contest?
(d) No Infringement. The content of the Video must not infringe third party rights by including, for example, the copyrights, trademarks or logos (such as other company names, labels, symbols, store or building facades) music , photographs, works of art, or images that have been created, distributed, aired or published by others, such as those on or in websites, television, movies, or other media). The content of the Video must not violate rights of privacy, publicity rights or other intellectual property or other rights of any person or entity.
Are you serious? One person blatantly mentions a national Pizza chain. Another shows a Big Ten video. How is this not Infringement?
(e) No Names and Likeness Without Permission: The Video must not use individuals’ names, in whole or in part (except for the Entrant’s first name); refer to public figures; contain materials embodying the names, likenesses, photographs, or other identifying elements of any person, living, or dead without permission.
We have gone way beyond this point, but once again, there were a lot of references that I highly doubt permission was given to.
(f) No Illegal, Offensive or Inappropriate Content. The Video must not, in the sole and unfettered judgment of the Sponsor, contain words, images or statements considered offensive to individuals of any race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, or socioeconomic group nor any threats to any person, place, business or group, contain material that is unlawful, nor materials that promote bigotry, racisms, hatred or harm against any group or individual or promotes discrimination based on race, sex, religion, nationality, disability, sexual orientation or age. The Video must not, in the sole and unfettered judgment of the Sponsor, contain any materials that depict illegal acts, are sexually explicit, disparaging,
libelous, obscene, violent, hateful, slanderous or other inappropriate content (such as but not limited to smoking, alcohol, fire arms, harming of animals, provocative/suggestive outfits or poses) or nudity. Content must be in keeping with Sponsor’s reputation and image, at Sponsor’s sole discretion.
Let’s quote one line from a video – “This is sticky” – “That’s what she said”… Is that NOT offensive?
(g) Obtain Third Party Releases: If the Video contains any material or elements that are not owned by the Entrant and/or are subject to the rights of third parties, the Entrant are responsible for obtaining, prior to submission of the Video, and in writing any and all releases and consents necessary to permit the use and exhibition of the Video by Sponsor in the manner set forth in these Official Rules, including, without limitation, name and likeness releases for any person who appears in or is identifiable in the Video.
That will be a task for some of those videos….
(h) Retain for your records: Retain a copy of the Video in the original format after uploading it to the Website. (All of the above requirements and criteria, collectively named the “Requirements &
Automatic Disqualification: In the event any submission contains any material or suggests any material that, in the sole and unfettered judgment of the Sponsor, depicts illegal acts, is sexually explicit, disparaging, libelous, abusive language or other inappropriate content or nudity, is potentially infringing on third party rights, or otherwise, does not effectively pass the Requirements & Clearances, the Sponsor will immediately disqualify the Entrant.
Like I said – this is not about my video getting picked. It’s more about the videos that did get picked. It’s about rules that didn’t get followed. If I didn’t follow a rule, I can understand why I would get disqualified.
There is only 1 video on the list that I would chose because it met all the requirements. If any others get picked, well – we’ll leave it at that.