Legal Constraints

It is of great importance that producers understand the legal constraints associated with media. Consequences can range from mild to career ruining and even prison time. It is likely offenders will incur a fine at the very least, as rules are there to ensure the protection and safety of the public as well as those involved in the media industry. There are many legal considerations producers must be aware of, such as:

Copyright and Intellectual Property Law:


It is inevitable, even when creating a work based entirely from brand new ideas, that a production company is going to run into a copyrighted work at some point. This may be music, when it comes to producing a soundtrack for the film, or even small, seemingly insignificant things like artwork that may be in shot when filming. When an artist copyrights their work (music, cinema, novels, games, characters etc.), it means that by law, that creator then exclusively owns the rights to that work and may choose do distribute (or not, as the case may be) how and to whom they see fit. It is essential that full authorisation and permission is gained from the copyright owner by the production company whenever a copyrighted work is to be used. This usually involves money changing hands, as a product is essentially being purchased here, in so far as the production company is purchasing the rights to use the artists work. An example of when this law was broken occurred in 2014, when pop star Shakira was sued for allegedly copying a song by artist Ramon Arias Vazquez.


Libel Law:

Libel law is primarily there to protect an individuals reputation and how they are perceived by the public. With those in the public eye it is extremely important that they maintain a good reputation. Harm can be done to this reputation when a statement is made or published which is untrue and harmful. This cold be an untrue statement which states that a family man is having an affair, for example. With the ever growing popularity of social media and internet culture, it is now easier than ever for false statements to be made which harm the reputation of an individual. Millions of people use sites like twitter and Facebook as a platform for expression and with this great outlet for free speech comes the inevitable risk that someone is going to make a slanderous comment about someone else: be they in the public eye or not. Libel law is legally defined as being "to publish in print (including pictures), writing or broadcast through radio, television or film, an untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others". An example of when libel law was broken happened when Lord McAlpine, conservative peer was falsely linked to child sex abuse on twitter.

Privacy Law:

Privacy law is largely self explanatory in so far as the purpose of the law is to protect the privacy of the public. Everyone has the right to be left alone, and it is this rule which constitutes the basis for privacy law. Privacy law includes everything from paparazzi photographing celebrities while on holiday, to data protection of the general public. Defined as "a legal right to informational privacy - the protection of personal or private information from misuse or unauthorised disclosure". A huge example of this law being broken which is still in the news today is the phone hacking scandal committed by News of the World, when newspaper journalists hacked into the voicemails of murdered schoolgirl Millie Dowler. 

Obscene Publications Act:

The obscene publications act (1959) is, like all other acts and laws which need to be taken into account by producers, there for the protection of the general population. The aim of this act is to stop offensive or harmful publications (be they written, in image form, or film) from being seen by those who may be offended or disturbed by them, so they do not "deprave" or "corrupt" any consumers. This act also helps to strengthen laws concerning pornography and publication for gain of obscene matter. What exactly classes as "obscene" is clarified by a "test of obscenity". This test is outlined on legislation.gov: "For the purposes of this Act an article shall be deemed to be obscene if its effect or (where the article comprises two or more distinct items) the effect of any one of its items is, if taken as a whole, such as to tend to deprave and corrupt persons who are likely, having regard to all relevant circumstances, to read, see or hear the matter contained or embodied in it.". The act was updated in 1964, mainly to strengthen laws regarding production of obscene articles. A good example of this act is BFI banning many films on the grounds of the obscene publications act. One such film was "Human Centipede 2" which was deemed too obscene for release. 

Official Secrets Act:

The official secrets act of 1989, unlike most other acts, applies specifically to those who are government employees, including armed forces and civil services. This act covers the disclosure of information and is legally binding, meaning that those who falls into this category are, by law, required to maintain secrecy. With this act being legally binding, consequences face those who fail to comply, although the punishment obviously varies depending on the nature of the individual situation. This act came into effect on March 1st 1990, replacing the outdated 1911 version. The law is broken if information is divulged from any of the following categories:

• security and intelligence
• defence
• international relations
• foreign confidences
• information which might lead to the commission of crime
• the special investigation powers under the Interception of Communication Act 1985 and the Security Service Act 1989.

An example of this act being broken was when former MI6 employee Richard Tomlinson was imprisoned for six months under the official secrets act for attempting to publish a book outlining his time at MI6. He believed he was dismissed unfairly which prompted him to write the book, and because of this, MI6 now allow employee tribunals. 


  Health and Safety Act:


The health and safety act of 1974 is the main umbrella act which ensures the protection of the public, both in and out of the workplace. —This act includes providing and maintaining safety equipment and safe systems of work as well as ensuring materials used are properly stored, handled, used and transported. This rule allows for a safer work environment and minimises risk, which is what the health and safety act is all about. Alongside this it is necessary for employers to provide information, training, instruction, supervision and provide a safe place of employment/safe working environment. This is important for production companies to remember as they will be liable for any injury or harm caused due to any of these rules not being followed. Employers can also assist in the safety of their employees by providing a written safety policy/risk assessment, liaising regularly with health and safety operatives. This act could be seen as the most important for a production company to take into account as it offers a blanket check list as to what is necessary in the protection of employees. Anthea Turner was injured on set during a TV shoot after a motorcycle stunt went wrong and left her burnt. Although the incident could have been a lot worse, it would not have happened at all if the correct health and safety guidelines had been in place. 


Ethical Constraints:

Ethical constraints can certainly put pressure on and restrict any production. Although they are not laws or acts, and therefore not legally binding, it is important for a production company to take into account ethics as there are certain regulatory bodies which govern productions and have certain rules which dictate what is okay and what isn't. It is less likely for legal action to be taken if an ethical guideline is broken, but the reputation of a production company/person is still highly at steak, meaning that future work may prove difficult if ethical constraints are not taken seriously.

Ethical guidelines and constraints are mainly there to so as not to cause anyone harm or offence and to ensure that people's sensitivities are being respected. Representations of people or groups of people, stereotyping, product placement and sex/language/violence on screen all need to be considered carefully by any production company. It is vital that any company ensures they are working within the accepted "social norms".

Social sensitivities are a big issue where ethics are concerned. This means that a production company must treat issues which many people in today's society may find a little close to home. An example of this in soap operas, which aim to deal with real life situations such as teenage pregnancy, must treat the subject with respect, which is why many productions which deal with such issues offer a support hotline at the end of the television show for anyone who has been affected.

It is essential that no harm or offence is caused by a production or company. This could be anything from not condoning certain types of behaviour to featuring racial stereotypes. The release of the film "This is England" in 2006 was controversial because it featured many racist characters as well as violent abuse against an ethnic minority character. The film, however, dealt with the topic from a non biased angle and was depicting events that occurred regularly in the 1980s in England with the rise of "skinhead" culture, without glorifying the lifestyle or events.

There are many regulatory bodies which dictate what goes when it comes to ethics, the biggest and most famous of which is Ofcom (the Office of Communications). It is a government approved authority which ensures the protection and safety of those involved in broadcasting. The Ofcom code, which all production companies must adhere to if they are to maintain a good reputation, has nine key sections containing principles and rules:

- Protecting the under-eighteen's

- Harm and offence

- Crime

- Religion

- Due impartiality

- Elections and referendums

- Fairness

- Privacy

- Commercial references in TV programming

A major example of when Ofcom's code was breached was the "Sachsgate" incident of 2008.

Comedian Russell Brand and talk show host Jonathan Ross left actor and national treasure Andrew

Sachs offensive voicemail messages which eventually led to 37,500 complaints which forced

Ofcom to look into the matter. The BBC, who were responsible for allowing the pre-recorded

show to be aired, were found guilty of breaching rule 2.1 (generally accepted standards must be applied to programmes), rule 2.3 (offensive material must be justified by the context) and rule 8.1  (the ‘standard’ requiring adequate protection for members of the public from unwarranted infringements of privacy). As a result the BBC was fined £150,00 for breaching these guidelines and Ross was suspended for 12 weeks without pay. This is a perfect example of why it is essential for a production company to follow ethical guidelines.