The Bad Guy
I’m a union guy. I was raised in a union household (my parents were public school teachers), I’m currently a dues-paying member of three unions (WGAw, DGA, IATSE), and if I do one more featured voice-over role, I’ll join SAG as well.
I believe in unions.
And I love my unions.
But my first love, my greatest love, will always be the WGAw. I’d like to think that I’ll keep directing films, but they have to be written first. I’ll always write first, and I’ll always be a writer first.
I want to be clear that when I criticize the leadership of my union, it’s because I love my union. I want our union to succeed. And there’s only one thing that makes me angrier than bad union tactics or poor union strategy or union corruption or union stupidity.
And that’s greedy management.
Thus, I thought I’d take a little time today to swivel the barrel of my gun toward the AMPTP. Say what you will about Verrone and David Young (and I do), but the bottom line is that I share their goals.
The AMPTP, however, has been acting atrociously. For those of you who don’t know, the proposal they currently have on the table isn’t just bad.
It’s immoral.
The first offense is their suggestion that residuals be tied to profit. I’ve already eviscerated that nonsense in another article, so I’ll simply refer you to that. If you want the executive summary, it goes like this: residuals are for the reuse of the fruits of our authorship. They must forever be tied to authorship. They are not a reward for the proper or improper work of the cast, the director, the producer, the editor or the marketing department. Period, the end, strike to the death over this if we must.
The second offense is the notion that residuals could be applied against up front money. In other words, if you’re paid more than scale, the company could attempt to “recoup” residuals out of your fee for writing.
Hell no.
Once again, residuals are not labor fees, they are reuse fees. It doesn’t matter how much you earn. That’s why we all get the same residual rate, regardless of how much we make up front. If the companies are serious about this redefinition, then they will need to stop using the word “residual” and start using the word “bullshit.”
Because that’s what this proposal is. And again…strike to the death.
Third offense—the elimination of separated rights. Our separated rights are already an impoverished version of the rights all American non-work-for-hire authors retain. They were fought for and won in the past, and they are absolutely worth fighting for today. Even if Hollywood weren’t currently attempting to turn every feature film release into a musical (thus triggering separated rights for screenwriters of original works), this would be a non-starter.
If they’re serious about this…then I’m gonna have to go with…
…strike to the death.
Fourth offense—a proposal that would eliminate the requirement to include the writers’ names in advertising, even in situations where the director or producer is included.
Strike.
To.
The.
Death.
But here’s the thing. All of that stuff is prologue to the big one. Internet.
Forget jurisdiction over animation, DVD residuals, creative rights (sadly), and everything else that the WGA wants to argue about. The only one that matters right now is finding good reuse formulae for the internet.
Naturally, the AMPTP proposal for the internet stinks. It’s horrid.
So…strike to the death?
No.
Here’s my basic principle.
I’m a moderate kind of guy. So if I think a proposal is worth the Strike Of Death™, then I’m going to presume that the AMPTP surely isn’t serious about it.
And yeah, I called them Shirley.
I think all of the above is hateful, unnecessary, intentionally provocative crap…except the internet proposal, which I hope is just a crappy starting point toward a good, fair-minded, let’s-end-this-25-year-war deal.
Now, I’ve tried to get my union to concentrate on The One Issue That Binds Us, because I think the other issues are distractions.
So now here’s my special little note to the AMPTP (and Ms. Brogliatti, hey…I hope you still love me, cuz I believe in you too…gotta be some more level heads like ours on each side of that table, right?)
AMPTP…drop your proposals. Get serious. Bargain in good faith. Silence the fringe voices on your side, and maybe you’ll find that the fringe voices on our side start to recede.
If not, you’re going to lose the moderates. There’s a lot of us. We’re active, and we vote. Right now, we’re watching and hoping.
But don’t mistake our even tempers for acceptance or an inclination to appease.
If you’re not serious about your proposals, then please get serious in a useful way.
If you are serious…
…then I’ll see you on the picket line.
Hey Craig, Just wanted to be first! But bravo on your post.
Now to finish that post. I may disagree with you on a few issues, like directing during the strike should there be one (regardless of contractual obligations, like how NBC still owes me money contractually but I haven’t been able to get it!) but your post summed up the sentiment that we all feel. We (WGAw writers) may disagree about many things and we may battle it out among ourselves, but when it comes to negotiating with the AMPTP we are standing together and, at least, for myself, trying to convince others to stand with us. I think anyone who may have doubted where you stand can no longer question that’s it firmly behind this strike should it happen.
Umm…
…no.
I’m not firmly behind “this strike” should it happen.
I’m firmly behind a strike against these proposals.
If the AMPTP gets off this mark and starts bargaining on internet, then I might be against a strike.
And again, seriously, I don’t think any director walked off a set mid-production in 1988. So stop saying that stuff like it has any relation to reality.
Very, very well-said.
Great Essay!
I’m another moderate and I’d love not to strike. But if they keep their BS on the table and won’t negotiate reasonably then I’ll walk right beside you, picket sign held high.
Excellent article. Cuts right through all of the prattling nonsense and puts the focus where it needs to be: Bargain in good faith. Bravo!
Craig,
I assume you believe, as I do, that the doubling of DVD resids is a lost cause or, more rightly, a cause already dealt with. Based on that assumption, is it weakness on the WGA’s part to pull it from the table first?
I agree that the AMPTP’s points are insulting and I’m all for STRIKING TO THE DEATH!!!!, but shouldn’t we, in the least, show that we can be reasonable before the death chants start?
I’m a baby to this world, and especially to the logic of Hollywood negotiation, so it’s possible the WGA is being more than reasonable, but I don’t see it.
Of course AMPTP are bullies and there is a certain pleasure in just saying, “Fuck you.” We should show that we’re bigger than that first. Put away the blanks (DVD resides) and then, when AMPTP are still being dicks, pull out the real guns and start shooting (the strike).
Thanks,
Seth M. Lochhead
I think I finally got the residual are not a reward premise. A
ctually, I’m sure I don’t but here’s me giving it a shot: the two words you and Ted use a lot are “business agreement.” For whatever reason, reading your post may have cleared the clouds. So here it goes…
The guilds are these places that have specialized parts that can be used to make movies. If the studios wanna use them, the deal is we get a %.
Because they’re reusable. They can keep making new money over and over again. Basically they’re cash machines. Some are trickier and more expensive to make, some just don’t print fast enough to make back the money they cost to build (although over time, even the slowest cash machine might be able to print 100mill), so the studios get to keep a bigger percent cuz they’re taking the financial risk.
So we’ve all agreed that win or lose, they get bigger %. We just want our small % and we’re cool.
I bet I’m kinda off, but it’s making more sense to me.
SML:
Yes, we should be reasonable as well.
I think the two sides are “wedge issue”-ing themselves to death. They’re so petrified of giving up any ground on the playing field that matters, they won’t even come out of the locker rooms.
Craig (8),
Thanks.
I beg to differ (a little) with SML and Craig. A bit of patience might be in order here.
First, the vote does still need to come back to make this whole thing really, truly, point-of-no-return official. I think the vote’s going to be overwhelmingly in favor, myself, and I believe we have the AMPTP and the unbridled prickery of their proposals to thank for that; they finally found that magic combination of “unreasonable” and “offensive” that would make even fairly moderate sorts exclaim “Over my dead body, motherfucker!” (So thanks, fellas.) But there may be a few folks out there on both sides still holding out hope that we’ll blink.
Second, I think the deadline needs to draw a bit nearer. Management, I suspect, is still desperate to believe that they’ll be able to stockpile enough hastily-commissioned stuff in the next couple weeks to keep this from hurting them as much as it’s going to. Ever watched a bunch of people try to get way too much work done in way too little time? They tend to stay optimistic a bit longer than they really should; only when the deadline begins to loom immediately ahead (or overhead) do they finally accept that not everything’s going to get finished the way they’d hoped. And that’s when the smarter ones among them start looking for a different way out.
We writers, I think, are already resigned to this, by and large. We’ve made what preparations we can make. There’s very little else most of can do from this point forward but ride it out.
Management still thinks they can beat it. But as we come up on the wire at the end of the month, I think we’ll see that view shift, quite hard. Maybe even hard enough to start them negotiating for real.
I have no idea whether the decision to call the strike-authorization right when we did was a long-planned piece of strategy, or a last-minute desperation move once it became clear that the DGA intended to negotiate this round out from under us, but it looks (at least to me) like a masterstroke of timing. It gave all concerned just enough time to crap their pants as they realized we were serious, but not enough time to really change anything (since everyone else’s master plans had us waiting till sometime next year before we even thought about doing this). I continue to hope that the former explanation is the correct one, just because it bodes better for the next phase, but I’m in no position to make the call.
Counterintuitive as it may seem, though, I think time is on our side over the next couple weeks. We’ve got nothing left to lose at this point. Management still does. And the closer the day comes, the more they’ll realize it.
In my humble opinion.
Craig, remember what you wrote about “investing faith in the hitherto unreliable”? Now’s the time, man.
Patience.
We’ll all know soon enough whether it was justified.
Forgive my board-speak… it’s a bit casual, anyway: I’m a writer, not in the union, but have been trying to get in and am really close to acceptance. And so, I’ve been out here for a while hustling my ass off trying to make things happen and believe it or not things have finally come together. I have a script setup at a studio plus a lot of buzz and meetings with the big dogs round town. So, when this strike talk got for real-real, I was damn bummed. Here I am, about to actually bust some shit loose and blam a freeze is about to happen. So I mired in that caca until I met up with a student of mine down at a mission on skid row, where I volunteer. During class this student, who is getting his BA from a great school in LA just found out that he needs a liver transplant. He’s got no money. Barely shelter and he needs a miracle to save his life. And yet he was more positive about his future than most bloggers are here… that includes myself. Then I kinda felt like a selfish douche. So, I think putting some perspective on this really helps and gives strength to know what to fight for and what to let go… because it’s a short time to be here and a long time to be gone… smoke that jerry.
Anon P (11).,
That’s logical. If it succeeds we’re peachy. But what if it’s less than stellar? Then where do we sit?
The unknown outcome of the vote is a negotiating advantage and our committee is sitting on it waiting for it to succeed… or fail. If it fails we’ll have to give up more than DVD resids.
Anom Boom,
I have no legs. Please go to your mission and feed that boy some soup.
SML,
I agree. I just trust that the vast majority of us, regardless of whether they like this strategy, regardless of whose fault they think it is that we’ve come to this point, are smart enough to see that, too, now that we’re here. I could be wrong. But when the choice is between “risk losing everything” and “just lose everything,” I think people will tend to see the benefit in taking the risk.
And votes made while holding noses count the same, in the end, as votes cast with an enthusiastic flourish. At least where the view from the other side of the table is concerned.
For me, the thing that really requires a leap of blind faith (with nothing other than hope to support it, quite honestly) is believing that the people on our side of the table, deep down, get it. That despite the things they profess publicly as part of their bargaining posture, they secretly agree with me (and Craig, and lots of others) that internet is the only show that really matters this time around.
I hope the DVD residuals issue is just a bargaining chip, to be traded for a few of theirs in due course. As Dennis Miller (or somebody) once said, “Two of shit is still shit.” Even if we did manage to double that rate, it wouldn’t exactly change a lot of lives. Righting a historic wrong is nice in principle, but we’ve all survived this long without doing so.
The thought that truly makes me sit up and worry is the possibility that some people at the bargaining table might feel that their names have become so synonymous with—oh, let’s say, hypothetically—organizing reality TV, or some such issue, that they just won’t be able to bring themselves to let it die when the proper time comes. (Which it should, this time around.) If our leadership’s incentives and goals are truly out of step with those of the membership at large, then yeah, it’s gonna be a long winter and a dismal spring, with no great reward at the far end.
So I just try to take heart in the fact that there are other voices at the table, too, and hope that they’re sufficiently persuasive when the time comes.
(But in any case, as you say, the long-term consequences of voting “no” would still be worse.)
Anon p. (15),
The realist and, to be honest, the scared-y cat in me agrees with you.
But the idealist in me says we shouldn’t be forced and we shouldn’t be bullied into a vote by our own guild. I think it’s wrong for anybody, including the Guild and AMPTP, to use emotion as a tactic.
Logic and reason should come first… and then, when that doesn’t work, fear and anger. Thoughts?
Anon p (16).,
It’s a huge leap of faith. HUGE. Because, to my mind, they’ve been as stubborn as the AMPTP. And, in the long run, that stubborness could hurt us just as much as a low vote.
The idea that Craig should not direct his film in case the writers’ strike happens is ludicrous.
It has no legal, contractual or otherwise ex officio basis.
Fuckit, it doesn’t even have a moral basis!
It’s just batshit crazy.
Of course he’s not allowed to change any of the dialogue though…
i’ve got a dead horse behind the barn, anybody want a shot at it?
i’m not downplaying the importance here, but another 500mil plus lost by the studios? it will be plus, that was from 1988. Vote to strike. make a stand. deal gets done. win win sometimes it really is that simple
i have to say this though we will get screwed, like always takin that .3% to the bank everyday
hell i change my mind… strike to the Death
Writers shouting ‘Strike!’ at times like this, dicks wagging in the wind, reminds me of the drunk loudmouth at the bar who wants to take on half the bar. You know what you get when there’s a fight between Conglomerates and a bunch of whiny writers? You get a new recipe for writer squash.
As in
a Phyrric victory
for any
potential
gains.
Am I saying we shouldn’t put up a fight? No. But speaking as someone who has sacrificed as much as a human being can to try and break into this business, I want everyone to avoid giving undue attention to the shouts from the leaders on both sides at times like this and listen instead to the murmurs — the voices of reason and the gurgling sound of hunger in the stomachs of some of the writers (currently in the guild and those soon to be).
Writers have to protect their rights and fight if necessary but let us fight to build new bridges instead of the useless saber rattling and death cries.
Well said, Craig.
Craig, SML, Anonymous P., etc. —
You know, just becuase the Negotiating Committee is talking about the VHS/DVD rate, it doesn’t mean they’re actually talking about the VHS/DVD rate. At one time, the AMPTP’s position on internet downloads/sales was that the residual rate should be the same as the VHS/DVD rate. That’s clearly unacceptble … and what better way to make that point then by making it clear that, as far as we’re concerned, the VHS/DVD rate is unacceptable for VHS/DVD? Let alone for a technology that incurs no additional manufacturing costs for the distributor — the primary reason the AMPTP used (and continues to use) to justify the arbitrary 80% take-away in the VHS/DVD formula?
If the WGA had a theme song for negotiations on internet/new media, it should be The Who’s Won’t Get Fooled Again.
Kudos, Craig and Ted.
I have a question:
Let’s say the WGA strikes -
And during the strike, an unknown writer
(a lowly wage slave who writes specs when he can)
gets his best script sharp, gets an agent, and gets a sweet offer for his script.
What would you like to see that writer do?
<< And again, seriously, I don’t think any director walked off a set mid-production in 1988. So stop saying that stuff like it has any relation to reality.>>
I don’t get you. Do you always respond with inflammatory language because this is a blog? Anyway, the reality of the situation is that some directors and actors may honor the strike regardless of contracts, etc. I’m not saying it’s going to happen. I’m saying it might. There is certainly an effort being made in that direction (excuse the bad pun.)
And as you said yourself, it also depends on where we are and what the strike is eventually about.
Anyway, I’ll read your posts more carefully so I don’t misinterpret what you support and what you don’t.
“Of course he’s not allowed to change any of the dialogue though…”
Come on. We all know that actors make up all their dialogue on the spot.
Wow, Craig, you’re starting to sound like me.
Ted, I noticed that also. Internet is nearly free distribution. I guess they could say that the overhead for the server is extreme - in a creative accounting sort of way. Even marketing is down with the Internet as just MySpace has millions of unique visitors every month though you only need one ad - and it’s just a file.
As a writer working on that elusive 24 points, I have to say, I’m behind you if you go out and if you don’t. But as I said, I don’t see this coming together by the 31st. Fortunately, the projects I’m currently working on are for non-signatories so I can keep writing and polishing.
And quoth the Mazin;
Strike. To. The. Death.
The Internet is like two gold mines. The studios know it.
Craig and Ted,
It’s good to know that we have guys like you that understand what’s at stake and can articulate it so clearly.
To anyone here who is not convinced about the internet download issue, you have to stop thinking about the immediate term. Everyone agrees that internet downloads are not there now. That is guaranteed to change. It is indisputable. Internet speed will get to the point where you’ll be able to download full-length, HD-quality movies or TV shows near instantaneously. This, along with lower cost of business created by competition, will surely eliminate the barriers people have to making the switch.
When? Much sooner than you think. Technology companies are investing hundreds of billions to make this happen. There is a war out there over this. Stock prices for the companies that stand to profit have been soaring. Read the WSJ, Business Week, or Fortune, et al. Now, as others have already pointed out, the way people watch their content will be seamless. We’re talking about the transmission method for content. What will be the fastest, cheapest, and most convenient method for consumers to access their content in the future? When you watch cable right now, are you “downloading” your shows? Most people would not think of it that way. The word “download” used today usually implies using a PC or Mac, selecting some file, and waiting, waiting, waiting to finally get what you want. In the future, we’ll turn on our flat panels, select our shows from a library with every conceivable show or film. There will be no detectable delays and the interface will conceal the fact that the internet is used to transmit all of this. Or we’ll go to the theater, and they will digitally project a movie that’s streamed from the internet with clarity of picture and sound that no one has ever yet seen.
The fact that the AMPTP is also holding ground on this issue should tell us something. If it wasn’t so important, then why would they go through this as well?
Travis —
What I’d like to see, is for aspiring writers to stop thinking of a WGA strike as a possible career opportunity, and start thinking of it as what it is:
A boycott of studios and prodcos by writers collectively in order to advance the rights of writers collectively.
Aspiring or not, Guild member or not, if you’re a writer, then you should participate in that boycott.
Some other points:
If you’ve written a screenplay a studio wants to buy during a strike, then a studio will want to buy it after a strike. However, if you’ve written a screenplay a studio wants to buy only because there’s a strike, then it means zero for your chances of sustaining a professional career when there isn’t a strike.
Studios won’t be looking to buy anything during a writer’s strike, because they will not have access to the WGA membership. Like it or not, the fact that studios can contract multiple writers to contribute literary material to the same motion picture is one the primary reasons why the AMPTP values the WGA membership enough to endure a strike as part of the negotiating process. Or, to put in more bluntly, the AMPTP pays writers collectively for writing, and writing is rewriting.
if any studios are looking to buy screenplay during a strike, then it means they’ve decided to break the union. If they’ve decided to break the union, they wouldn’t waste money by giving it to non-union writers, because that won’t break the union. Offering to give money to union members is how you break a union.
So, summing up: if you’re writer, regardless of anything else, you should participate in the WGA’s boycott of the AMPTP Companies becuase its about your future rights, and the rights of all future WGA members.
But even if you don’t give a crap about anything except what you can get for yourself right now, what you can get for youself right now during a strike is no different from what you could get for youself right now before a strike, and has no bearing on what you’ll be able to get for youself right now after a strike.
Maybe that comes across in print a bit harsher then I intend, but, you know … the truth is not always soft billowy clouds and fluffy bunnies.
The internet almost feels like the industry’s dirty little secret. There’s so much money being poured into certain websites by advertisers it’s incredible.
What makes the most sense is that writers get a piece of the advertising revenue when it comes to streaming television shows and a percentage of each pay-per-download for movies.
“What makes the most sense is that writers get a piece of the advertising revenue when it comes to streaming television shows and a percentage of each pay-per-download for movies.”
And that’s exactly what the Guild DID propose.
Ted:
You’re right on all counts, but you are ignoring the fact that the spec market is dead right now because the strike is about to happen, and after the strike a large chunk of WGA writers are going to appear out of nowhere with specs to sell or set up. It’s not going to be the best time to put your stuff out there. I’m not in the position of the writer that asked you the original question, as I’m already working and doing my thing, but I think it’s worth mentioning. It doesn’t mean he should attempt to do anything like he implied, but the more interesting question is whether or not non-WGA writers should be discouraged from selling to non signatories during the strike.
Kevin (32),
There’s a new article in Variety that supports the AMPTP position that internet is not as profitable as everyone thinks… it makes an interesting argument, but concludes that the AMPTP is reasonable in requesting time (3 yrs) to “analyze” the financial viability of internet.
It’s a mistake on our part to say and prove that internet is profitable at this point in time. It shouldn’t matter. We’re not asking for a dollar sum. Or back pay. We’re asking for a percent. And 2.5% of 0 is 0, right?
If the market is flooded with specs post-strike, then only the best ones will survive. That is a good thing. As Ted pointed out, if you want to be a successful career writer then keep the long-term picture in mind. If a strike happens, why not spend more time mastering the craft? Polishing your specs, writing something new? Why not try writing a novel or comic book? Why not write and shoot some short films for experience? Hey, you could even spend more time with friends and family. Read good books, watch great films. Meet with other writers and learn from them, or just take a break. Relax your mind and get reacquainted with the important things in life. This may give you new insight for your writing.
If you need some money, then learn javascript, HTML, FLASH, and AJAX and do some freelance programming. Works for me.
I think most voting members of the Guild are well aware of the importance of getting a good residual rate on Internet stuff. Everybody thinks the Home Video rate is crappy, and I think everybody knows that once a rate is agreed to, that rate is very difficult to change.
Ted or Craig,
Are we asking for a percent on profit when it comes to internet or a percent on reuse or both?
If I buy a machine, I can use that machine as often as I want during its lifetime without paying anything additional to the manufacturer beyond what I forked out when I bought it. When I plunked down my 49 cents in 1967 to buy Incense and Peppermints, that was all I had to pay. I didn’t have to cough up more pennies each time I played the record or lent it to friends for dance parties.
Why should writers be compensated every time the movie or TV show plays again? Didn’t the studios BUY the screenplay/teleplay?
The MBA half of my brain is battling the story-teller side and I need a referee here.
Thanks.
Thanks for your detailed answer, Ted.
I’m not offended by your reply, and I hope you’re not offended by my question - I just thought I’d put it to you, since surely some other wanna-bes are wondering the same thing.
I hope it’s obvious that if my motives were malicious and duplicitious, I’d be hiding behind anonymity and pretending I was purer than the driven snow. I’m not. I’m idealistic and willing to make sacrifices (and have) for what I believe in, but at a certain point you begin to ask yourself when idealism becomes masochism.
So f course, I asked because I have considered whether or not I’d be stupid to try not to sell at long last.
I do have an interesting spec I’d like to try to sell after 1-3 more drafts - but have never yet made a serious effort to do so. It’s just never been tight enough, and it’s taken me longer for my writing to mature than I anticipated.
But I’d like to try selling soon - and with my laptops stolen last month, and a car just purchased, it might be til next month before I can rewrite it. At which point the strike may well be going on.
Of course, there’s no law that says I can’t rewrite it on paper and try to pitch it right before the deadline.
I’ll be volunteering at the Expo for fun, so maybe I’ll learn something by watching other people pitch.
My brief experiences with unions are these:
I honored a picket line when I wrote that spec’s first draft - that Grocery Store strike in 2003 - I lived next door to a Ralphs in NoHo and nearly starved to death coz I was writing so obsessively I couldn’t ‘normalize’ enough to regularly
shop further afield. (Nuts, I know.)
Once upon a time in San Francisco, I raised funds for charities for a spin-off of the United Way - and helped negotiate a union contract from the side of the employees: I had a salary, but was just an AVP, not a VP or above.
And I joined SAG whilst in LA.
You probably don’t remember, but I’m the guy who got his SAG card working on the 1st POTC - you and Terry signed it for me recently at the screening Creative Screenwriting did.
It’s sort of a good luck charm for me :-)
Thanks again for your reply.
“If you need some money, then learn javascript, HTML, FLASH, and AJAX and do some freelance programming.”
And then you could come hang out with all the out-of-work programmers who live around me in the “Telecommunications Corridor” :-)
Pat,
I think a painting would be a more reasonable comparison. A painter paints and sells his painting.
I don’t think, and I could be wrong, that the patron has to pay the painter every time he shows it to his friends. But I wonder if that patron might have to pay for its reuse in a potentially profitable situation.
I don’t know the answer. Maybe someone can enlighten us.
Travis:
One might think it is easy for an established writer with a comfortable savings to say to someone trying to break into the business - “support the strike, don’t be a scab” - so take it from me, instead. I’m not an established writer with a comfortable savings. I’m an aspiring scriptwriter just like you, an aspiring scriptwriter with a spec script I would just LOVE for someone to pick up — but if there’s a strike on, this baby isn’t for sale. (Lord, that hurts to type, but it is true.)
As I see it, without the WGAw, history has shown that the industry won’t deal fairly with writers as individuals. The games that are being played now are just indicative of how much worse it could be if there were no union at all.
Support your future allies now. You’ve made it this far, don’t sell out for a short term gain.
my opinion, fwiw.
Pat,
“Why should writers be compensated every time the movie or TV show plays again?”
Only in the case where money changes hands, directly or indirectly.
If I buy a machine, I can use that machine as often as I want during its lifetime without paying anything additional to the manufacturer beyond what I forked out when I bought it. When I plunked down my 49 cents in 1967 to buy Incense and Peppermints, that was all I had to pay. I didn’t have to cough up more pennies each time I played the record or lent it to friends for dance parties.
I’ll be just a bit snarky here. (Don’t say I didn’t warn you.)
When you were getting your MBA, were you sick the day they covered market research?
You use the example of a musical recording, a pop single. The relevant comparision is NOT listening to the record at home, or playing it at parties. The relevant comparison is commercial radio stations who play the recording in question. They use the music to make money, so they have to pay the rights holders a fee.
You can play “Incense and Peppermint,” as often as you like at home. Use it to make money and you owe the rights holders some money in return.
Karen,
I’m in the same boat and I’m with you.
Just make sure you agree with your allies before you step into the fray. The a-list writers we look up to and admire are our generals and, in all great wars, generals tend to sit in their tents drinking tea while the foot soldier gets shot. Sometimes they get shot because they are freeing the world from tyranny, but, mostly, they get shot because their generals have an interest in financial gain or ratifying their own egos.
I’m all about dying for a noble cause. But I’m not totally convinced this cause is noble.
Al,
Do the same rules apply to paintings? Someone should unionize painters :)
From Joe Carnahan on the strike:
“I think the WGA is going to go out in another two weeks and it’s gonna be so ugly and potentially protracted that it’s gong to scare off SAG and the DGA and they’re going to come to an agreement before the June 30th drop dead date. I really think this is where it’s headed.
I’ve talked to friends of mine, writers and directors and agents and everybody has this bunker mentality…this strike is happening and people are going to be destroyed overnight. Careers are going to be crushed and an industry torpedoed. The respective parties as so far apart right now, the notion that in two weeks, there will be this miraculous stick save and all will be resolved, is insane…”
I feel queasy…
To Snarky Smitty (#45) -
Let’s go back to the machine analogy for a moment. I buy the machine (the studio buys the script) and make a product (the studio makes a movie). I decide that I can make the same product many times over and sell every damned one of them (the studio sells repeated viewings of said movie/TV show).
Why should the writer be paid every time the movie/TV show is viewed when the manufacturer of the machine doesn’t have to be paid every time I sell a product made with his machine?
I’m trying to understand the reasoning behind the argument without any snarkiness intended.
I’m finishing up my spec now, that another professional writer helped me develop. With the strike coming next summer it seemed safe to finish a first-draft in November and have a couple of months to fine-tune and then get it out. Now with the November strike, it looks like I might have to sit on it for a while.
It’s not looking at the strike as an opportunity, it’s the inevitable fact that aspiring writers break in constantly, and sometimes the timing of events in life can suck.
I support a fair deal for writers(one that I will hopefully work under fairly soon). I hate the concept of a strike, but I understand that they are sometimes a necessary evil to achieve a fair deal. And like all other aspiring writers, I appreciate the sacrifice that Guild-members are prepared to make to ensure that the future of writers is better.
Thanks Craig for this site and thanks Ted for Wordplayer. I’ve learned a tremendous amount from both. I hope the cool heads in this prevail and that an equitable agreement can be reached before too long.
This reminds me of the discussion about the guy that created Chicken McNuggets on the first season of The Wire. If you’re a fan, I’m only on season two now so don’t spoil the show in your replies.
A script is a creative work, not a machine. A better analogy would be to compare the script to the blueprint for the products you’re making, not to the tool you use to build them.
Your analogy is more like suggesting that the manufacturer of the cameras or editing machines used on a film, or the pencil used to write a script, should get residuals.
Pat -
Buying a script doesn’t mean what you think it means. Technically studios buy THE RIGHT to use the script for the production of a motion picture. Residuals are payments for the re-use of that copyright.
To all -
who compare scripts to music, blueprints and bubble gum machines…
Why do you need to make these analogies? It’s like saying a dinosaur is like a dog. Only much bigger. And without fur. And… you get the point. I hope.
Craig or Ted (or anyone else in the know):
As a WGA member, the way I’m planning to bridge the strike, for both artistic and financial reasons, is to direct one of my specs.
Am I correct in saying that to do so would be in full compliance with my union so long as i do not make any transactions with guild-signatory studios during the strike? i.e. As long as the film is made independently, i’m honoring the WGA?
What would I NOT be allowed to do?
I appreciate the feedback.
All media, including print and television, will be digital within 10 years, says Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer, in his opening keynote at the Association of National Advertisers’ conference. “Everything will be delivered digitally. All media and all advertising will have to take that into account.”
http://adverteasement.blogspot.com/
Or how about noting this. When a producer buys a script, he pays upfront for the right to use that script to make a movie and exhibit it in domestic theaters. In addition, the purchase contract requires the producer to pay additional amounts for other things, including putting the movie on home video and whatnot.
In a way, residuals keep costs down for producers. In theory, it lowers their upfront payments and allows them to not have to pay upfront for use in other, “ancillary” markets.
SML(#35):
I’m not sure where Variety got its information but they’re dead wrong. For the most of my career I’ve been operating on a very low rung of the industry scale and not until I made the silly Obama Girl internet video was I signed by UTA, got a network deal, and had the website bought out (article in THR on Wed).
For a major trade magazine to say that the internet isn’t really profitable is really disingenious. Or they’re just flat out misinformed.
Pat(#49),
What you’re suggesting is to rewrite the laws on copyright, which the AMPTP isn’t even proposing. I’m not even sure this is a real question…
Ryan(#56),
Purchasing an option and residuals have nothing to do with one another. A producer could purchase an option or script for 30 million dollars but it still has nothing to do with the residuals the writer will receive. Nor should it.
What KA said.
I didn’t start w/ the pop song analogy, Pat did.
I pointed out that royalties per use on pop songs have been an established part of intellectual property law for a long, long time.
Anyone who has any familiarity with the entertainment industry knows this. Hence the crack about market research.
This isn’t the time or place to get into a philosophical debate about the necessity for copyright, royalties, etc. It’s an established principle in Western law and has been for decades.
The trades (and other studio supported entities) have been quite biased in their reporting of negotiation talks. They know where their bread is buttered. However, I don’t think any reasonably minded person is swallowing what they’re dishing out.
Folks, I promise I’m not a AMPTP shill, and I support the WGA negotiating position on online residuals, but it’s important to be aware that the transition to digital distribution, while inevitable and certainly profitable, really isn’t particularly smooth. First of all, there are costs, and online marketing is far from free, as someone suggested above, when you’re talking about marketing a movie or TV show. Fifteen (or whatever) years from now, when nobody is buying DVDs, movie downloads will be marketed the same way movies are now— that means billboards, print ads, etc. And even internet advertising, when you want to reach millions of people, is not free. Even with the Fox/MySpace, MySpace doesn’t give its incredibly valuable ad space over to the movie division for free.
Meanwhile, as reported in THR the other day, right now total industry-wide receipts for paid movie downloads is $20 million. Plus, nobody’s figured out what do do about piracy, which is a huge problem now, and which will become huger than huge once online distribution is the norm. Meanwhile there really is a near-crisis in the TV advertising business which makes scripted programming hard to support, and it’s going to be a long time before revenue from online TV shows (be it via downloading or in-show advertising or whatnot) makes up for that.
I’m not really making a particular argument here, and I’m not trying to justify some kind of amorphous AMPTP ‘study.’ I’m just saying the large-scale economics of the digital entertainment future— viral successes like Obama Girl notwithstanding— are challenging and not-yet determined, and we need to be aware of that. It’s not as simple as the signatories just hiding money and preparing for a ridiculously profitable future.
From #53 -
“Buying a script doesn’t mean what you think it means. Technically studios buy THE RIGHT to use the script for the production of a motion picture. Residuals are payments for the re-use of that copyright.”
Licensing is something I understand (which is what you’ve described above). I’ve functioned under the impression (apparently incorrectly) that screenwriters sold their works. Thanks for the clarification.
**Al,
Do the same rules apply to paintings? Someone should unionize painters :)**
Use a copy of a Wyeth painting in an advertisement, or on the cover of your book, and you’ll be sued for copyright violation. Unless you negotiated prior approval and payment to the satisfaction of the rights holders.
As someone above pointed out, this is only very loosely related to the issue of residuals.
To #61 — So we should study it? All the while our cable box becomes an internet box because it will be easier to negotiate a deal in the future? No, no, no…we get jurisdiction of our net content and then we can all happily study it together. Make no mistake, the internet is an endless well of money. And the AMPTP knows it.
Kev, no, as I said in the post, we shouldn’t ‘study’ it, and I support the WGA negotiating position. Re-read my post if you missed that. I’m just pointing out that some of the discussion I’ve seen here and elsewhere about how the studios will be minting money from the internet could use a little more nuance.
Mike S(#61),
I don’t think anyone has ever argued that marketing on the internet is free, I think the argument is that, what does the cost of doing business have to do with writers?
If a studio wants to pay 120 million of P&A and the movie flops, writers should still be getting their fair share of residuals. What bothers me the most is the mystification of a fair economic breakdown for downloads. It’s simple. If a company charges $2 per download, the writer should a percentage of that (what like 3% or something?)
Kevin A (57),
There’s money there. I believe it. And I believe what we are fighting for will pay off hugely. There’s potential for this to be the main/only entertainment stream and people will always pay to be entertained.
My point is that it’s a non-starter. It shouldn’t matter if there’s money there or that money will be there, it should only matter that we see a cut when our product is reused. I’m stating the obvious, but it seems we’re getting caught up in the now, which I would argue the AMPTP wants. It’s an argument they can win. But it’s not an argument for us to even acknowledge.
P.S. That variety article was highly biased in favor of AMPTP. The only number we should be worried about is 2.5%.
And I agree with your position about the download residuals, except that if (and I’m thinking mostly about episodic TV here) ad-supported downloads are offered for free, which they are right now at nbc.com, that formula will come back to haunt/screw us. And I think that ad-supported downloads for TV could end up being the norm.
Good post, Craig.
So of course I want to amend some of it: “…residuals are deferred compensation tied to deferred income for the reuse of the fruits of our authorship….”
The base of our individual residuals was negotiated by our union, based on minimums for labor costs and events in the income producing life of projects. They come in as W-2 income, rather than as a form of royalty on form 1099. That’s minor. Where you got it most right is that residuals exist because of authorship and our ineluctable relationship to authorship.
Having been around for a few, I’ve come to believe that management wants a strike. It has avoided the waiver process in the MBA to sort out emerging business models in new media. It has come at us in separated rights. It hasn’t gotten around to asking us to do valet parking for development execs, but stick around. The most important matter to me is the attack on the rights of authorship. We’re fighting one battle o one front for all creators of intellectual property. The media congloms want everything from novels to haiku to be work for hire. So we’re speeking for more writers than those who hold Guild cards in this negotiation
I think for a lot of us who’ve been around a while, until the AMPTP proposals came in, we figured to not get involved in the debates, not be the old war horses at Guild meetings, and sort of look at it as not really having a dog in this fight.
AMPTP managed to piss everyone off, and if that’s because of arrogance breeding stupidity while they’re drunk on cupidity, maybe. Or maybe it was done by sober decision.
So for those of you thinking about striking to the death, here are a couple of parameters.
First, heroes are created by bad generals. Listen to the people propounding strategies, and get rid of the ones who want to look moral by martyring their own.
Second, when it comes to “Strike to the Death,” you want the other side to die, not your own.
Third, look ahead to the kind of peace you want, and articulate that to as many people who will here you.
Fourth, a crisis will be an opportunity for a lot of people who want not just cash but power. That could be agencies trying to broker a deal to other labor formations looking to fold us in.
Keep your eyes and minds open. There will be some strange times coming.
“Purchasing an option and residuals have nothing to do with one another. A producer could purchase an option or script for 30 million dollars but it still has nothing to do with the residuals the writer will receive. Nor should it.”
I meant “upfront payment” in terms of the sale or employment. I didn’t say word one about options, which don’t even grant producers the initial things I mentioned.
The sale gives the producers certain rights. There’s nothing other than the MBA that says producers couldn’t also buy the the rest of the rights and never pay residuals. But to do so would require, in theory, making a larger upfront payment than would otherwise be required to buy up all those rights.
It is a payment for re-use, but it’s a payment that could legally, if not for the agreement between the WGA and the studios, be made upfront. Therefore, by not having to pay those monies upfront, it makes the overall upfront payments for the producer smaller.
And your response to Post #49 is wrong, as well. It would not take a rewriting of the copyright laws to eliminate residuals. The only reason we get them at all is because it’s in our collective bargaining agreement. And there are non-signatory companies that do purchase scripts outright and pay no residuals.
“Where you got it most right is that residuals exist because of authorship and our ineluctable relationship to authorship.”
And those bastard DGA and SAG people just hitched a ride on our coattails.
Karen: thanks.
My support means little since I’m not WGA and can thus only offer written and verbal support.
(And ask questions designed to provoke responses.)
Ted’s response was so good that this analogy may seem moot, but pros, imagine this:
The DGA goes on strike -
And at that time, you, a Pro writer who felt he could have been so much more than just a Writer, finally get offered the chance to Direct - and not just Direct - Co-Produce a film.
You’re guaranteed more than TEN TIMES what you’ve ever made before this, and let’s not forget, you’ll have far more prestige than before.
STARS will looking to you for guidance on this.
In Hollywood, at least, you’re going to be famous.
And all you have to do is not give a crap about a union that doesn’t officially give a crap about you anyway, because you’re not yet a member.
Will that offer still be there when the DGA returns from their strike? Maybe…maybe not.
That’s what it’s going to feel like to some wanna-be Pro writer out there, when he/she gets offered a chance to write during a strike.
It’s going to sound like an offer only an insane person would turn down.
And in an ideal world, we’d have Ted there to explain to the writer why, in fact, they should.
Mike S(#68),
Yeah, I just hope they come to a realistic formula.
That’s why I think that writers & directors should get a percentage of that ad revenue on these sites like NBC.com. Obviously Chrysler doesn’t spend anywhere near the same rates for broadcast television but the percentage should still be the same. They could even keep the same formula of 2.5% of the gross ad revenue.
Mike S. Yep, yep, yep. Big apology. Missed it! Not feeling too nuanced today, truly sorry…
Kevin: I agree in principle, but honestly, I don’t know how that would actually get implemented, since online ad revenue comes in so many different forms with different payment schedules, some of which are determined by click-throughs, etc. Not to mention that, say there’s a banner ad at nbc.com, which is shown over whichever of a hundred episodes a used happens to be watching— how do you divvy that up? I’m sure the Negotiating Committee is thinking about this stuff, but really, it’s going to be complicated to implement. Probably will entiail a whole new online residuals department at the Guild to keep up with it, for starters…
“Fourth offense—a proposal that would eliminate the requirement to include the writers’ names in advertising, even in situations where the director or producer is included.”
Okay, sure, it’s a lesser issue, but I just…I gotta know what the hell this is doing in there. How does this benefit them? What does their putting this forth accomplish beyond alienating us? Is it just a bargaining chip, something they hope we’ll go, “Okay, we’ll settle for only FIVE cents per DVD, but we keep our names in the advertising?” Is there some hidden profit to eliminating our names from the ads that I’m just not seeing? Or do they just really hate us that much?
What’s it all about, Alfie?
Mike S(#75),
Hmm, good point. I didn’t think about it in terms of the entire network site. However, on Fox’s website they have advertisements during the specific television show’s stream, i.e. Prison Break.
Ryan (#70)
When you mentioned Producer, it made me think of an individual person and not a studio so that’s why I spoke of the “option”.
And regarding Residuals, I just did some slight, lazy research and it would seem that you’re right. Which means I was wrong.
Which isn’t fair. Not fair at all.
Forget the potential strike… I wasn’t aware that “our” Kevin Arbouet is responsible for the Obama Girl. Veddy nice.
Ronson!
I have news for you, dudarino - email me if you want it.
Ronson (#78),
Thanks!
If only every gig could involve super hot chicks.
Travis —
Do you honestly believe that you aren’t good enough to make it as a real writer? That you can’t make it on the same terms as the rest of us? That you can only win the race when all the other competitors are on the sidelines?
I can’t imagine what that must feel like.
SML:
In regards to your comment that 2.5% of nothing is nothing. True, but if nothing is all that is expected, why is AMPTP fighting to keep it?
George Lucas is hiring writers to go to Skywalker Ranch and writer the first 13 episodes of his Star Wars live action show this winter. Those guys may have an awkward time dealing with other writers after that.
Every fellow writer I’ve talked to truly believes THE ISSUE is new media (though many feel a lot for the Reality writers, etc).
The guild POV seems so simple - we dont make money if the studios dont make money on new media, right? So, where’s the risk on their part - other than just greed?
I dont want to strike (and believe there wont be one, or it will be short b/c network TV has too much to lose), but I am grateful for the WGA for what it provides me… I owe it to future writers to do what those in the past did to me.
Although the sudden pressure to get all my studio assigns turned in by Oct 31 is INSANE - anyone else feeling sat on?
And a littl advice to new writers, working away on that spec: forget the strike. When it’s good it will sell, and it ALMOST NEVER times out the way you planned and everything takes much longer. This bis isn’t a sprint; it’s a war of attrition.
Fuck the strike, just write something good. That’s ALL you should focus on. Cheers.
Brian (82),
You’re right. There’s money to be made, but trying to prove it exists now is a non-issue. Whether there’s money there or not, we want 2.5% of future reuse on our product (which could be nothing or a whole lot of something). And once that is dealt with, then, and only then, should we be debating profits and losses.
I think we’re on the same side, I’m just confusing/simplifying the issue with a faulty understanding/interpretation of our demands and their ramifications. My apologies.
P.S. One more thought. You say, “True, but if nothing is all that is expected, why is AMPTP fighting to keep it?” Not only is the AMPTP fighting to keep it, they’re claiming there’s nothing to be made. They want it both ways. Insane. This Q should be directed towards our committee and it’s an important issue that will not be dealt with for what seems like a long time.
WGA WRITER,
Well put. I’m with you.
David (#81)… where does Travis indicate that he can’t compete with union writers?
And was that “real writers” bit intentional? Do you believe that union screenwriters are the only “real” screenwriters?
Just curious… I’m not saying this applies to you, but that would be kind of humorous, if the same WGA members who want non-union writers to support the WGA were to think of those writers as not being “real” writers.
Dang it… that was me, above on #87.
SML:
Couldn’t disagree more. Fight for the future now. Last time the guilds waited on home video. You see the result of that today. If it was fought for on the last contract, we wouldn’t be where we are today. AMPTP would have conceded because they didn’t think there was a future in the new media. Go back and read some of the studio exec’s interviews if you don’t believe me.
WGA Writer,
That’s fantastic advice. And I agree in theory, except I can’t help but pay attention because I’m a masochist. You sound so much like my mentor I almost feel compelled to make a phone call and question if that wasn’t directed at me. :) But, yeah, to sort of steal an analogy from When Harry Met Sally:
You decide what you want to do with the rest of your life. So, you rush to the Christmas party. And then you get there and you realize that Meg Ryan hopped on a plane to Paris and she’ll be back in three months.
So, yeah, I got some time to write and improve my spec, work on others. But, I really wanted to start now. And that’s life and I get it. But sometimes it sucks. That’s all I’m saying.
Also, as far as non-WGA writers not being real writers I think Ted said it better, but every working, famous, Oscar-winning, or seven-figure writer was, at one point, unsold. So, you know, everybody starts somewhere.
Enough chit chat. Back to writing.
Brian,
You misunderstand. We should fight. But I think fighting to prove new media is profitable is ridiculous. We should be fighting for our 2.5%…
I suppose there is an argument that to get our 2.5 we have to prove there’s money in new media first, but I don’t believe this to be the case. I believe it’s a way for the AMPTP to pull us into an argument they can control and win.
The specter of a strike is not the reason the spec market is dead; it’s been dead for quite some time. Over the last decade in particular, studios have worked at minimizing the amount of development money they spend on scripts that never get used in a movie. Movies generate revenue; unproduced literary material doesn’t — the money spent is just more overhead. And corporations hate overhead (which is why corporations tend to cut research & development to the bone). This “decrease development costs/overhead” is responsible for other things — a lot more one-step deals than two-step deals, “free rewrites,” etc.
I don’t expect that to change after a strike. There might be a mini-spec sale boom, but nothing like the one that happened in the wake of the ‘88 strike. I could be wrong, but the way its been working for the awhile now, unless a studio is sure they can get a director and actors attached to a spec after, at most, one or two revisions, they pass.
But, you know … at any given time (except during a strike, of course), any spec screenplay is competing for the same development money as a, say, Steve Zallian script, whether written on assignment or on spec. It really comes down to this: the corporate ideal for development is identical to the writer’s idea: one writer, one draft, its a movie. Zallian has consistently proved himself closer to that ideal then just about any other writer in the industry; for writers not yet in the industry, that’s the ideal they have to aim for, too. Strike or not.
Ted,
“The specter of a strike is not the reason the spec market is dead; it’s been dead for quite some time.”
Actually, the specter of a strike is EXACTLY the reason the market is dead. Three weeks ago, buyers were looking and buying. No, not the way they did back in the heyday, or even when I broke in, but agents were still going out with specs, and people were still buying them. Within an hour of the strike authorization e mail we all got two weeks ago, that stopped cold. Nobody’s buying nothing now.
And then there’s this, which I haven’t seen discussed here (although I admit, I’ve skimmed a LOT of this stuff):
Under the newly issued strike rules, it’s virtually impossible for a writer/director to direct a film. Has nothing to do with crossing picket lines, everything to do with the WGA restricting what’s allowable for hyphenates. If you’re not wrapped post by the time the strike hits, you are well and truly screwed.
Josh:
That’s exactly what I’m talking about. I’m not talking about the spec market in general. I’m talking about the last few weeks and where we’re heading in the next two weeks. I understand Ted’s whole arugment here, but I am saying that the desire for specs and the willingness to fork up a significent amount of cash is contingent upon the buying atmosphere at that exact moment in time. The same goes for pitches.
When we get back in the swing of things, it’s going to be an awkward time for specs in general.
I agree with Brian. The things that the studios have put on the table - the rollbacks on residuals and separate rights, etc. - are transparent attempts to create a lowball negotiating position. It’s a distraction, red herring, whatever you want to call it — from the real issue of the internet. The studios knew they couldn’t just come out and refuse to give anything on the internet so they created all of these other bs positions. Their arrogance is astounding, though I guess, not surprising.
Arthur (#76),
The business rationale for eliminating the name of the writer(s) from advertising, I would guess, is that writing credits are subject to arbitration fairly late in the process, and therefore the names in those credits may change after the studio has printed up one-sheets, billboards, etc. (In a few cases, I believe, even after prints of the film have been made, but maybe someone who knows the history of this better could confirm or correct that….) Makes life easier for the marketing people if they can just ignore the fact that the film had any writers, and stick with the credits they’re certain about.
But yes, realistically, knowing how warmly we were likely to greet that proposal, I can’t imagine they intend it as anything but a bargaining chip. (With a little ritual dick-waving thrown in for good measure.)
Josh,
Agreed. Studios aren’t buying specs right now. Nor are they taking pitches. My spec is on hold and that’s fine because if we strike, I’m behind it, even it will hurt financially. But the reality is no financier is buying until this all shakes out.
Ted’s argument goes to the general trend over the last fifteen years of less spec purchases. But what’s happening right now is different.
Also, I agree that Writer/Directors in the WGAw can’t really direct because they’re not allowed to change a line of the script, according to the strike rules. And a lot more than a line changes in production.
Experimental Scenario: We tell management that we will drop the DVD increase demand plus drop for the time being, animation and reality writers entry into the WGA, if…they drop the residual rollback b.s., drop the removal of writer’s credit from ads b.s., and guarantee us a % on present and future technology.
Show of hands on what youse guys think their response will be.
My guess is that they’d continue to show their true colors and still be intractable.
Travis seems to be indicating that he feels like he’s not a real writer. He seems to think that he can’t compete as a writer unless all the WGA writers are taken out of the game.
I’ve heard a number of people voice the fantasy that a strike will cause studios to “lower the bar” to the point where they might be able to sell scripts on a scab basis. The fantasy is an empty one. Here’s why:
The studios don’t need shitty scripts. They own warehouses full of shitty scripts, and mediocre scripts, and even good-but-flawed scripts, many of them written by million-dollar writers. If, after a yearlong strike, they became so desperate for material that they suddenly lowered their standards, they still wouldn’t buy your inferior scripts. They’d go back and dust off one of their own.
The answer, my friends, is not to hope that the studios lower the bar. The answer is to aim higher. It’s a sign of desperately low self-esteem as a writer to think that anyone would need to lower the bar to buy your stuff. I doubt that anyone with such an attitude would have much of a future as a writer.
There are plenty of shitty writers in the WGA. And presumably there are some truly great ones out there, still waiting to be discovered, who are not yet in the WGA. But those great ones won’t want or need the bar to be lowered for them. They will raise the bar for the rest of us.
As for the rest of you would-be scabs — scab away, if that’s the best you can ever hope for. You might be humiliated to find that you can’t even make it as a scab.
You should name yourself. Be proud of what you said or nobody will swallow it. But I agree with you.
Craig -
Great post, well said. I just wanted to add my non-anonymous name in support. I hope people read and pay attention because it reflects rationality from the middle, the place where we get together and try to make the business work, not merely posture from ego, ignorance, greed or love of power.
Latest Variety article mentions that the AMPTP has thoughtfully posted a FAQ with regards to the potential WGA strike:
http://www.amptp.org/wgastrikefaq.html
The last FAQ on the page begins
If I am not a WGA member and write during a strike, am I banned from working in the WGA jurisdiction forever? WGA may deny, in the future, full membership to non-members who work during a strike. However, they may not deny financial core membership.
Am I reading that right?
Because the AMPTP is making it sound as if someone who scabs during a WGA strike could still join afterward as a fi-core non-member.
Are they intentionally misleading or they are revealing a previously hidden loophole of sorts for potential scabs?
Pretty devious, either way.
Anonymous,
“Also, I agree that Writer/Directors in the WGAw can’t really direct because they’re not allowed to change a line of the script, according to the strike rules. And a lot more than a line changes in production.”
Indeed. Much of what falls under “a through h services” is essential to not just the writer, but the director. When I spoke to a Guild rep about this, pointing out that this would actually push studios to fire writer/directors and replace them with writers, she said - with a straight face - “No director who ever wants to be in the WGA would do that.”
So I’d be really interested - and not just for academic purposes - to hear how Craig (or anyone else, for that matter) intends to write and direct a feature without violating the strike.
SML:
The way the MBA works, it defines “primary markets” —
(the market for which the motion picture is produced; a motion picture produced for theatrical exhibition, the primary market is theatrical exhibition (including in-flight movies); a motion picture produced for television exhibition — like an episode of Heroes — the primary market is network broadcast; etc)
— and “supplementary markets”
(all other markets in which the motion picture is used other than the primary market).
Residuals are calculated as a percentage of revenue generated by the licensing of the work for use in supplementary markets (with one exception).
So, in regards to internet exhibition, we’re asking for a percentage of the revenue for the (re-)use of the work in that supplementary market.
(The exception is network broadcast re-runs, where residuals are calculated as a decreasing percentage of the applicable minimum (which is itself covered either by the licensing fee paid by the network to the production company, or the production company’s financing for the production of the episode/MOW/etc))
Ted,
Thanks. That helps.
to #98 - no way jose - we should not give up $ we have earned or people who are deserving of better benefits in return for producers agreeing not to renege on paying us money and credits they owe, as well as ceding a share of revenue we’re entitled to anyways. please…
and to be clear chardkerm - I know I’m not actually answering the question you asked. Because you posit those tradeoffs as if they would be fair, when imho, you’ve made terrible concessions and sold yourself and your fellow writers way short.
No, they acquired the copyright in the screenplay/teleplay for use in the production of motion picture under a work-made-for-hire agreement with the author (writer) of the screenplay/teleplay. It’s intellectual property, not real property, as in the case of the machine you used in your example.
Initial compensation covers only the acquisition of the copyright and the exploitation of the copyright in the market for which the motion picture was produced. Exploitation of the copyright in additional markets requires additional compensation be paid to the author.
The MBA studiously avoids using the word “author,” at the AMPTP’s demand, save in one place: on-screen credit recognizes the true authorship of the literary material used in the motion picture. Which is why residuals are tied to screen credit.
shepherd1234
If you’re boycotting the AMPTP Companies as a writer, then you’re honoring the strike. If you’re working as a director for a production company that’s independent of any AMPTP Companies, then its not even an issue.
However, if you’re planning to do any revisions of your spec in the course of production, you should check into the Guild’s Independent Film Contract.
Travis —
I wasn’t off