LOS ANGELES (CelebrityAccess) – Warner Music Group (WMG) is in the hot seat following a lawsuit from filmmaker and artist Martyn Atkins. Atkins alleges that nearly half of the footage in the 2021 documentary Somewhere You Feel Free, which chronicles the creation of Tom Petty’s iconic album Wildflowers, was used without his permission. The suit, which Atkins recently filed in a California federal court, could lead to significant repercussions for WMG.
Directed by Mary Wharton, Somewhere You Feel Free showcases behind-the-scenes moments and draws extensively from an archive of 16mm film. According to Atkins, this footage wasn’t just stumbled upon; he asserts that he informed the Petty estate of its location within Warner Records’ storage.
Atkins, who served as the art director for Wildflowers and has collaborated with music legends like Johnny Cash and Eric Clapton, claims he and Petty were “fast friends.” During the making of Wildflowers and the subsequent tour, Atkins captured a wealth of footage, all of which he owned and was not part of any work-for-hire agreement with Petty or WMG.
The filmmaker’s complaint details a 1995 arrangement where Petty offered to store Atkins’ 16mm film reels and audio elements in a secure Warner Records facility in Los Angeles. Atkins maintained access to these materials at all times, including in 2014 when he and Petty revisited the idea of making a Wildflowers documentary. Petty’s enthusiasm for the footage was evident, and they planned for Atkins to direct and produce the project using his materials.
Despite Petty’s passing in 2017, the concept for the documentary remained active. In early 2020, Atkins met Petty’s daughter, Adria, and the Petty estate manager. During this meeting, Atkins claims he disclosed the location of his archival footage, believing he would be brought on board to direct and produce the film. The discussion covered potential creative directions, financing, and scheduling. Atkins left with the impression that he would soon be working on the project.
However, as per Atkins’ lawsuit, he was excluded entirely from the process. The documentary went ahead without him, and his footage was used without his knowledge or consent. Atkins asserts that he expected to negotiate a licensing agreement or receive a fee if his materials were to be included in the documentary. Instead, he was blindsided by their use and subsequent release.
In his suit, Atkins seeks damages, restitution, and the return of his original film and audio materials. This legal battle highlights significant issues regarding intellectual property rights and using archival materials in film production. As the case unfolds, it will be crucial to see how it impacts the music and film industries, particularly concerning the handling of long-held archival footage and the rights of the original creators.
