[wadiz] Transparency Report Vol. 14

CASE 01: Unauthorized Use of Broadcast Footage

Copyright / Modificationof Broadcast Content

01 · Detection

AI Monitoring

The Story was using a screenshot of a scene from a TV program as-is. The program name and the broadcaster’s logo were clearly visible on the screen.

02 · Review

Verification of Rights Scope

Even for broadcasts featuring the performer themselves, the copyright for the footage, subtitles, and program title belongs to the broadcaster. We confirmed that the right to appear on the program and the right to use the images are separate matters.

03 · Action

Image Modification Complete

We requested that the maker either provide proof of the right to use the broadcast footage or delete the image in question, and the maker has made the necessary revisions accordingly.

CASE 01 Detailed Case

"It’s a show I was on" — Appearing on a show and the right to use it are two different things

A project was using a screenshot of a broadcast segment in its Story, and the screen clearly displayed the program name and the broadcaster’s logo. It’s easy to assume there’s no issue since the maker appeared in the broadcast, but the copyright for the broadcast footage, subtitles, and program name belongs to the broadcaster, so separate permission is required. wadiz requested documentation to verify the rights to use the broadcast content, and since providing proof was difficult, the maker edited the image to comply with the requirements.

Through post-launch monitoring, we discovered that an educational rewards project was using photos of well-known figures in its story to promote the product’s effectiveness, implying a connection between those figures and the rewards. Even for well-known figures, securing the rights to use their photos for advertising or promotion is required, but no supporting evidence was found.

Just because a person is famous or a photo is widely circulated does not mean anyone can use it freely. Portraits and photographs of individuals are subject to separate rights, and legitimate authorization is required to use them in advertising. wadiz requested documentation verifying the rights to use the image in question; since no supporting evidence was provided, we instructed the project to remove the image, and the correction has been completed.

 

These days, as ordinary people increasingly appear on various channels such as TV broadcasts and YouTube, there has been a rise in the casual use of photos or videos of individuals without much thought. However, regardless of where an image is published, using it for advertising or promotional purposes is an entirely different matter.

This is because the person in the photo has the right to decide how their likeness is used (right of publicity), and the broadcaster or videographer who produced the broadcast or video holds separate rights (copyright) to the content itself. “Being publicly available” is not the same as “being allowed to use it in an advertisement,” and using such content without proper authorization may constitute a rights infringement.