Found an issue on this page? Let us know and we will look into it as soon as possible.
Are talented artists selling their soul by signing mandatory personal release forms for reality tv talent shows like the xfactor
Anonymous5 views4 answers
The language of the personal release form does raise many red flags; for instance this section reads: (I acknowledge that there is a possibility that after my execution of this Release, I will discover facts or incur or suffer claims which were unknown or unsuspected at the time this Release was executed and which, if known by me at that time, may have materially affected my decision to execute this Release. I acknowledge and agree that by reason of this Release, I am assuming any risk of such unknown facts and such unknown and unsuspected claims) - and of course negotiation is not an option - all insight is welcome and very much appreciated. The talented singer I am asking on behalf of can be seen performing on this youtube clip:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yo5iUJrmdO4
No one [talented or not] has any obligation to enter into the contract that you describe
If the terms of ANY contract are objectionable then a person can simply walk away from it and get on with their life -- including the "talented singer" that you're trying to protect from selling her soul. She can simply move on.
If what you're really asking is whether the term that you quote is legally enforceable then the answer is yes -- though, as my colleague notes, a person harmed by someone else can ALWAYS sue and seek a remedy for his or her damages. The question in that lawsuit is whether the harmed person contractually waived his or her right to recover those damages [because of an "assumption of the risk" or because reasonable -- or contractually required -- diligence could have exposed the risk or because of some other legal doctrine].
Big picture: The law does not demand that people or companies act fairly toward each other. If a person or company has the upper hand in a negotiation [like the TV producer does in your situation] then that person or company can, and nearly always does, act unfairly toward those who decide, nonetheless, to do business with that person or company. It's all voluntary. If the person on the short end of the stick doesn't want to play he doesn't have to.
I actually think its very nice that they (the show) spell it out for you so clearly. They could use arcane, staid centuries-old language that sounds more like a magic spell out of Harry Potter but instead spell out what is perfectly within their rights to ask of unknown participants lining up for a chance to be on the show.
This is really a business issue, not a legal one. The show could face hundreds or thousands of lawsuits by disgruntled and unhappy participants. The release that seems so one-sided is probably a key factor in their ability to offer the auditions, obtain insurance, and ultimately sell advertising to the show's sponsors.
I don't see anything in your post that suggests the participants are "selling out their souls". The auditioners have to agree to certain terms to participate include waiving certain reproduction and privacy rights. The fact that these shows also go from state to state and each time they open their doors face a different set of state laws that may impact their liability exposure or reproduction rights also bodes in favor of imposing as much contractual protection in the shows' favor as possible.
Nothing in that language, or the common law, however, bars a participant from suing a show for facts or claims that do not exist at the time the release is signed. I don't want to speculate as to what those claims or facts could be but typically, I will say at least in New York, you may not contractually waive claims based on facts not yet in existence when the release is signed notwithstanding the language in the release.
The language you cite isn't a red flad, it's extremely common in CA settlement agreements and consents, and is known as a CA Civil Code section 1542 waiver of unknown, as well as known claims. It's to create finality in a release, so the parties are fully and finally released of anything that has happened, whether the parties know about it or not. It doesn't work prospectively, only retroactively.
As for "selling their souls," that's the price many are willing to pay for TV exposure. With talentless people like Mike "The Situation" Sorrentino making $5M a year in endorsements and appearance fees, the payoff of fame and money is too tempting for many not to go for it.
Disclaimer: I'm only licensed in CA. Please note that this answer does not constitute legal advice, and should not be relied on, since each state has different laws, each situation is fact specific, and it is impossible to evaluate a legal problem without a comprehensive consultation and review of all the facts and documents at issue. This answer does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Perhaps one of the most important thing that anyone interested in participating on a reality show, even at the "tryout" stage, is that the show is attempting to simulate real people in somewhat unrealistic situations. From the company's perspective, they are trying to protect themselves from being liable for a host of potential lawsuits ranging from a right of privacy or right of publicity claim from a participant who does not enjoy the way they were portrayed on the show to a simple assault and battery stemming from a conflict on the show.
Is this language extremely vague and open-ended? Yes. Would a Court enforce it against someone who signed it? Probably.
As one of my colleagues pointed out, the bottom-line is that people are willing to do just about anything to get on television for the shot at becoming a star. They also know what they are getting into, having seen similar shows. That being said, if they aren't willing to sign it, someone else will in order for their fifteen minutes of fame. Is it a good idea? That all depends on what other opportunities the entertainer has available to them and what kind of resources they have to push those opportunities forward.
Disclaimer: I'm only licensed in MO and IL. Please note that this answer does not constitute legal advice, and should not be relied on as such. Every state has unique statutes and common law, and each situation is fact specific. It is impossible to evaluate a legal problem without a comprehensive consultation and review of all the facts and documents at issue. This answer does not create an attorney-client relationship.
