Today in Legal Snafus: Babies Targeted, Crude Subpoenaed

It's not necessarily the publicity you want the day before you open your international baby movie opposite Iron Man 2. But really, I respect the director of Babies all that much more for raising a midde finger to the established order of California child-labor law and making a movie with a newborn infant despite everything. He's in good company today, too, fighting against The Man with a documentarian peer who may wind up at the U.S. Supreme Court before his case is resolved.

A judge in Manhattan today granted Chevron's request to issue a subpoena for raw footage from Crude, director Joe Berlinger's documentary about Amazonian farmers who have sued the oil company for allegedly polluting their water. Chevron claims that a scene in the movie depicts improper dealing by the plaintiffs, further arguing that additional evidence might surface among the 600 hours of footage Berlinger shot. Obviously this is a gigantic First Amendment issue; according to the NYT, Berlinger and his lawyers will ask the judge to stay the subpoena order while they appeal the decision to a U.S. Court of Appeals Second Circuit.

Things probably won't escalate to that level for Thomas Balmès, the Babies director who today is defending himself against claims that young Hattie -- the San Francisco-based quarter of his crying, pooping, four-headed baby hydra -- was filmed illegally. According to California state law (as reported by the AP):

Infants need a doctor's note and legal permits before they can be stars. They're only allowed on camera for 20 minutes a day. They must be accompanied by both a nurse and studio teacher -- both paid for by the producers. The babies also need to be at least 15 days old. [...]

Violators could be subject to fines ranging from $50 to $5,000 per violation [... The] labor commissioner's office could also "preclude a filmmaker from getting a permit to film in California in the future."

[Producer Amandine] Billot and Balmès maintain they did nothing illegal because the babies in their film weren't actually working.

"California's child labor laws only apply to employees, and Hattie was never our employee in that way," Billot says. "Just as filmmakers who produce nature films seek to blend in with their environment, we set out to create a wildlife film of human babies by being as unobtrusive as possible. In short, we quietly observed and recorded the babies' activities."

And OMGZ _their widdow faces wuh... suh... cuuuuuuuute!!!!_ Sorry, folks -- you've got to pick one or the other. You just don't get that footage when they're 10, you know.

· 'Babies' may have violated child labor laws [AP]

· Judge Rules That Filmmaker Must Give Footage to Chevron [NYT]