What is Digg?109 Comments
- bookishboy, on 11/10/2007, -4/+98According to the WGA, they're not only concerned about the next few years. If their promo material is to be believed, the WGA took an 80% cut back in the 1980's on residuals from home video sales. They did this at the request of the television/film organizations, in order to give the medium a chance to take hold and mature. The television/film industry responded by failing to revisit the WGA's home-video earnings for the next 20+ years. I think that home video could be described as a mature and established medium, and has been for quite some time.
Since the production companies have shown a history of unfairly taking advantage of this agreement (which was only intended to be temporary), the WGA would be well-advised to force agreements *now* that will affect them for the next 5, 10, 50 years. Rather than just the next few years.
Wasn't Michael Eisner the former Disney exec who sued a children's hospital for painting Mickey Mouse on the walls? - glitch47, on 11/10/2007, -3/+68When Eisner was ousted from Disney he received a $100 million dollar payout.
I wish I could have a job where failing = $100 million.
Sorry, I side with writers on this one. - Nowheredan, on 11/10/2007, -0/+35If they're so certain they're not going to make any money online, why are they so reluctant to give the writers a percentage?
- Frank_the_Tank, on 11/10/2007, -1/+36Yeah, this internet fad is sure to wane...
- Bukowsky, on 11/10/2007, -16/+42That's funny. I always thought that FoxNews was "misguided" & "stupid"
- Chompy, on 11/10/2007, -1/+25I see stupid ex-CEOs and I see less stupid ex-CEOs. And I see smart ex-CEOs. This is a stupid ex-CEO.
- j1a1g1, on 11/09/2007, -2/+22Give the writers what they deserve!
... an account on demoniod! - jmpeagle, on 11/10/2007, -2/+21huh? I think you commented in the wrong article. Eisner was a guest on Neil Cavuto's show on Fox News. That is what the whole aritcle is about. Way to be retarded though.
- petebot, on 11/09/2007, -2/+18Apparently, douchebags have not gone on strike.
- reeder, on 11/10/2007, -1/+16Defuser is just a dupe account so this jerk can comment like a ***** child:
http://digg.com/users/Defuser
He has no friends, only 7 diggs, and over 360 comments. He's probably just some viral marketing *****. - elbowman, on 11/09/2007, -0/+15And we should expect a management employee to take the side of union employees in relation to a strike based on a request for higher wages?! Everyone's playing their assigned role.
- vishass, on 11/10/2007, -1/+16That is great and all, but residuals are not a bonus or hand out.
I wrote a script. We have no idea how good this script is, so let's both decide it is definitely worth at least X. If the show doesn't perform, then no one gets paid any more money. Now if it goes into syndication, sells a ton of DVDs, and gets downloaded a lot and generates ad revenue, that script was worth more than X. The agreement is that I get a tiny percent of the revenue generated to pay that difference.
The producers are spending all their time trying to figure out how to milk the product for all it is worth in evolving mediums. It is only fair to continue to pay the people who created the product the fair price for their work.
I seriously doubt the number of people "living the good life for 40 years" off of residuals or royalties is a huge percentage. They're just a flashy percentage. - bookishboy, on 11/10/2007, -0/+10Would you apply the same business plan to the copyright owners? Should the production studios also stop making money on a television show after a year? Five years? Fifty?
Since the WGA members are asking for a *percentage* of proceeds that their efforts generate in the future, it seems reasonable to grant it to them. If the material is still profitable in 25 years, they still get to have money trickling in from it.
Your position seems unreasonable, because you don't want people who actually contributed to the creation of the material to benefit from it financially in the future. Yet, you don't seem to bemoan the fact that the production studio can still have exclusive rights to charge you for a holo-cube version of the show, 25 years from now. At that point, how many studio execs will even be left who worked there when the show was made? Let alone contributed to the show's creation. Yet, they'll still be able to charge money for re-prints of the show, and sue anyone who sells reprints without their permission. - theutopian, on 11/10/2007, -1/+11Yes, but none of those other people would have a job if there was no writer. The number of people able to live off royalties is less significant than you think. Only something like 5% of the Writers guild makes enough money to 'live richly'. What you fail to understand is that writing work is not like a regular job, it's an irregular job sometimes with writer's only writing a couple episodes a season or one movie every few years (movie development takes years) Sometimes they do no writing and make no money. Sometimes they rake in the dough. Royalties are supposed to soften the blows between broke ass times and good ass times. So, you're saying someone who writes a best-selling novel shouldn't be allowed to profit from it in the long term? The entire profit model of publshing is based on long-term sales. Movies and TV are no different. Everyone deserves a cut. Most of all the person wihtout whom there would be no movie or TV show in the first place.
- sittered, on 11/10/2007, -0/+10At this very moment I am copying my inbox out by hand.
- ZenMojo, on 11/09/2007, -0/+9Oh, look, I'm watching Chuck and there's five ads in a half-hour show.
PAY THE ***** WRITERS!!! - buckrogers1965, on 11/10/2007, -0/+8If it is not going to make any money, then give them half.
After all, it's not going to make much money, so half won't be anything.
(Yeah, right, I believe that, sure I do.) - pilot3033, on 11/10/2007, -0/+8If you create something, I see no reason why you shouldn't profit off of it. I especially don't see the problem if someone else is also profiting off of it. The example are the endless reruns of "I Love Lucy". The ad money brought in by syndication is in the hundreds of millions, the studio gets the money, why shouldn't the cast, crew, producers, and writers?
The Actors, Producers, and Directors contracts aren't up yet, you can bet that they will go on strike this summer if they don't get a better deal as well. - reeder, on 11/10/2007, -1/+9Maybe that's why Eisner's dumb ass got the boot. What a ***** joke! The WGA is smart enough to know they have all the real strength in the business, and deserve a much bigger cut than some jackass in a suit who think they did something because they used the term "paradigm shift" in a meeting.
- joessandwich, on 11/10/2007, -0/+7If you think writers are millionaires, you are SADLY mistaken.
- FreewareCityC0M, on 11/10/2007, -3/+10Why doesnt Eisner want to share the wealth with people that make him rich?
- joessandwich, on 11/10/2007, -0/+7The problem with your argument is that you don't understand the fundamentals of this industry and how it works. It is by nature a freelance industry, and someone is extremely lucky if they stay on the same show for more than a year. It is not uncommon to have multiple employers in a year, and unemployment is a major part of that. While the amount paid per script may seem high, keep in mind that 20% of it goes to an agent and a manager (necessary in this industry) and another chunk goes to income taxes. That drastically reduces the amount they actually see. Then, they have to stretch that money out through periods of unemployment, so what seems like a highly paid writer getting $100,000 suddenly turns into 60,000-70,000 spread over two years. Not so much anymore, huh? Marc Cherry, the creator/showrunner of Desperate Housewives, is well known for saying that before he got his hit, he was surviving on about $25,000-$35,000 a year. That's almost what a low-level PA makes! And this is one of the successful guys! Keep in mind, this is also LA where housing prices are astronomically high compared with much of the rest of the country. The other problem? Since one doesn't stay at an employer for a significant amount of time, things like health insurance and retirement plans are not as constant, unless you go through the guild. The reason writers need residuals is because that money (yes, the whopping $.6 from a $19.99 DVD) goes to help a writer through the tough times and fund their health care and pension.
Yes, there are some writers who are rich. But those are only the high-profile ones and their salaries don't even compare to those of actors, directors, and executive producers. Usually the rich ones get there because they do more than just write. A remarkably large amount of writers are middle-class. Middle-class people who work over 60 hours a week. So they are demanding a share of the work they created (because it all starts with the script) so that they can live a decent life.
So no. YOU screw off. - totorototoro, on 11/10/2007, -0/+6Steve Jobs made getting rid of Eisner a prerequisite to selling Pixar to Disney; its obvious Eisner hasn't quite gotten over that yet :p
- huskerdude, on 11/10/2007, -5/+11What a shock, a guest on a Fox show attacking unions...
- meno911, on 11/10/2007, -0/+6I completely support the writers guild. They are demanding a bigger slice of the pie. And the industry is saying "NO!". So there is no more TV shows for US viewer; no more Late Night TV scripts; ect. So let's analyze the situation shall we?: The writers guild is on strike and it's member writers are hurting financially but this is nothing compared to the loss of revenue the greedy content providers are going/are loosing. I'm just guessing but we're talking about an writer and his/her family losing $10,000-$20,000 a year as opposed to "big media" losing $1,000,000-$100,000,000 a year. Argue as you will: Big media are the writer's bitches. If only we the people could control the writers....
[EDIT] New Seasons of British TV is coming soon. Yay Dr. Who! - kageki, on 11/10/2007, -0/+5Hasn't the studios and labels been doing what you are accusing the writers for wanting all this time? Instead of the people that create the content freeloading off their own creation it was the corporations that were freeloading off of them. This still hasn't changed. While I do agree with the spirit of your message I don't believe you are quite right with your point.
To me I think the writers are asking for what they deserve. - Bukowsky, on 11/10/2007, -1/+6Well. Lets see.... It does say "Fox News" right there in the title... if you would've clicked on the story and read it, you would know that it was said on that channel.
So, Why don't you crawl back into your little hole and leave the real digging to people who actually give a *****.... *****' spammer! - amoirae, on 11/10/2007, -0/+5Huey, Dewey, and Louie tallked and pointed out on the doll where he touched them.
- Spamcan, on 11/10/2007, -0/+5What the writers are asking for is fair, and the directors and actors are going to be behind them 100% because the end result of this strike will effect their own union negotiations, both of which take place sometime next year unless I'm mistaken. Beyond simply getting residuals for online viewing which is going to continue to increase to the point where it might be the preferred format within a decade they also don't get paid for "webisode" work right now as it falls under the networks definition of "promotional" material. They're expected to pump out additional material without being compensated for it AT ALL. That ain't right.
- DCJoeDogaswell, on 11/10/2007, -0/+4thank you, I was gonna make a comment on this one issue but you beat me to it. If they stand to lose little money then there shouldn't be a problem, but they know it will eventually be a HUGE business and they want to take as much as they can when the time comes.
- reed311, on 11/09/2007, -2/+6Eisner actually did a LOT for Disney during his years. It's just the last few weren't as productive.
- chocobomog, on 11/10/2007, -0/+4Why do people still talk to Woz about Apple?
Eisner did a lot for Disney, he is primarily responsible for the animation revival in the late 80s (Beauty and the Beast, Little Mermaid, Aladdin, Lion King, etc). He just become too controlling in his last few years and needed to go. But since he was such an essential part in Disney's success of the last 2 decades his opinion is still relevant even if you disagree with it. - mrurc, on 11/10/2007, -0/+4The band that wrote the theme song from friends is getting royalties from every DVD and every official download*. Shouldn't the people who actually wrote Friends get money too?
The writers work on an incentive system. If they write a show, they get paid up front for the content; if the show is popular, meaning that they wrote good content, they make additional money in the long run. They do not get paid more at the end of the season if the season is popular. The writers are legally stakeholders of the content but they have no rights as to how the content is used. The writers are not the ones who decided to give shows away for free on the internet. Even if the shows sell on the internet, they writers get next to nothing. Despite the lessened cost of the distribution system, the writers get less per show sold on the internet through official channels than they do if the show is on TV. Even free website shows made ad money.
*Just to clarify, this is legally what is supposed to happen because it is licensed content but the companies that license the content have been refusing to pay any royalties to artists even for iTunes downloads for which the company is not licensed to sell in the first place. - theutopian, on 11/10/2007, -0/+4If the writer doesn't create, then those people have nothing to do. Just look how everyone's favorite shows are fairing without them. They are all dropping off the air and halting production.
- vade79, on 11/10/2007, -1/+5Indeed. Why is his opinion even discussed given he has no context to it, and the only reason he is known in the first place is for failing based on his opinions?
- davidrools, on 11/09/2007, -2/+6Eisner on YouTube: "How many times do we want to see a pussycat riding a skateboard, or a kid getting hit in the groin?"
many, many, MANY times! - breeeze, on 11/10/2007, -0/+3Just how bad the deal from the eighties is: the writers get 1.5% of 20% of the "producer's wholesale cost". In real words, that means about 3 cents per DVD sold. So, the producers want that same split on everything else: iTunes, ad supported streaming, etc. The writers want to finally get a new percentage split. I think what there asking would make it about 8 cents per DVD to the writer, with the same split on "new media" revenue.
- ooknabah, on 11/09/2007, -0/+3As an actor who is part of a union I do understand your feelings here but I think ultimately the unions are very important for artists. Honestly, even without the unions there would be tons of "pandering" required and no checks and balences to ensure that the large percentage of working actors out there (not stars or unemployed) are actually making a living wage in decent conditions.
- uptown, on 11/09/2007, -0/+3If it's not going to be a lot of money, then they shouldn't have a problem sharing it then.
His logic just doesn't make sense...... - Cerebral, on 11/09/2007, -0/+3This should actually be expanded to the video game market as well. Do you think that the original coders/writers of the Legend of Zelda or Mario 64 are receiving residuals from VC sales? I doubt it.
I think it's effed up but it's the same anywhere you work. Employees want to work less for more money and employers want you to work 24x7 for little to no pay. - jmpeagle, on 11/09/2007, -1/+4if they are overestimating then the studios can't/won't carve so I don't see what the problem is.
- Jade10145, on 11/09/2007, -0/+3This is slightly off topic but, the fact that "reality" tv writers are striking is telling. You mean to tell me that "reality" tv is scripted?, the hell you say!
- neopara, on 11/09/2007, -0/+3@Defuse
I can't believe you are getting dugged up for that comment. That is such a stupid argument. This is simple matter of worth. A certain product is made by various people that will generate X amount of dollars over a period of time. As a worker, I try to get as much money as I can and as a employer you try to pay as little as you can. The idea that the employer will value your worth correctly is stupid and absurd.
And with the whole free endless money comment, why is it so for the writers, but not for the producers. The writers are valuing their worth and determine they can get more, so they negotiate; that is good business sense. I never understand why people don't treat themselves as a commodity.
Who do you want the 10 cents of your "House" Episode to go, and do you really think that they will remove it from the price. Now a days the cost of goods usually don't reflect the price. The price is usually based off of how much the market can handle. You think those designer shoes cost $100 more because of higher production cost.
I say good for the writers if they can get more, and good for the producers if they don't. It has nothing to do with me, it is about other people negotiating about how to split the pie that I have no stake in. - bookishboy, on 11/10/2007, -0/+3Or "synergy"
- inactive, on 11/10/2007, -0/+3wait, he's saying that youtube has no future but baseball cards do? yeah, im going to side with the writers on this one.
- kageki, on 11/09/2007, -0/+2You really think the audience for the internet compares to the reach of network television?
- inactive, on 11/09/2007, -3/+5And just how much scratch is Mr. Eisner banking each year?
- bat-21, on 11/10/2007, -0/+2It was a buyout, not a payout. Eisner was a major stockholder at the time. Even though he's no longer employed by Disney, he had the potential to cause a lot of trouble if he kept most of his shares.
- actorboy, on 11/10/2007, -0/+2Yes, and all those people have unions with contracts the will soon be re-negotiating too. They are supporting the strike.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 108 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is