is it commercial filming?

[stevechesh]

Ok, quick couple of questions in the hope that someone might be able to help....

theoretical scenario:

Diver A (an amateur videographer) is approached by a TV company to obtain some video footage for them. Diver A isn't paid for the footage or his expenses, however, the chartered boat is paid for by the TV company and Diver A is invited to dive from it free of charge. As Diver A isn't HSE qualified (or whatever it is) can he legally do this?

If not, then is there a way for Diver A to get some footage and give it to the TV company and get a free dive without falling foul of the law or any other legal guidelines?


Can Diver B (who does no filming etc) go along for the free ride and dive as well, as long as no money changes hands?

I'd imagine that there would be something about "benefits in kind" and so forth . . .


there, that should just about cover it for the time being......

before anyone asks, i'm not Diver A, cos i'm shite at photography and videography

[divemaster-uk]

benefits in kind is only a taxable term used by the inland revenue, if your not being paid for the film, then it has nothing to do with the hse, Film companies are allowed to use amatuer footage from whatever source as long as they are not commissioned to do the filming.

EG, you could have filmed something last year and a film company can buy it of you legally, but they can not commission you to go out and do fresh work for them.

[scuba g]

Once you don't get paid for work (being allowed dive off the boat is merely a gesture not a form of payment, as no contract or invoices will be used) then not having the HSE Part 4 shouldn't be an problem. If the footage is done without any interaction of the TV company, i.e., no aid given or assistance, then Diver A's footage is being used, and not being filmed by him/her for the TV company. I would check with HSE if you are in doubt. Years ago a few of us lifted a car from a canal, it was part of a clean up (and it involved the local waterways company)but because we were not paid, no one needed any commercial qualifications or specific insurance.

[stevechesh]

Originally Posted by divemaster-uk

benefits in kind is only a taxable term used by the inland revenue, if your not being paid for the film, then it has nothing to do with the hse, Film companies are allowed to use amatuer footage from whatever source as long as they are not commissioned to do the filming.

EG, you could have filmed something last year and a film company can buy it of you legally, but they can not commission you to go out and do fresh work for them.

Hmm, sounds like this bit might be dodgy ground then, with the TV company paying for the charter and Diver A handing over the footage. . . . .

[divemaster-uk]

No, you should be ok mate, you dont have a contract, you havent been commissioned, the dive boat is incidental. I wouldnt worry about it.

[David]

would it not be more of a problem if you did this a lot....

doing once might be wrong :-) but if you then find out it is wrong what is the worst that can happen, your told not to do it again or we (HSE) will take you to court.

but if your planning to do this alot then you might need part4 !

[Letz]

You will probably find the HSE consider it work even if you are voluntarily just helping out, it isn't even pre-arranged and you receive no consideration whatsoever

Particularly if someone complains to them .......................... remember

[Gary K]

PM sent

[NeilP]

Ask Mark (OKeanos) - he did this for the BBC, or something similar, when we did the Dollar wreck.

[KevinJ]

If Diver A & B are allowed to dive from the boat as a favour, and diver A gets some video footage (for his/her own use) and then subsequently gives a copy of the footage to their hosts as a measure of his/her appreciation, then surely there isn't an issue.

If this really was an issue wouldn't this have implications for the thousands of underwater photographers who sell / trade their images.

Just my 0.02p