Why the writers' guild is on strike

[unixronin]

Thanks to dafydd, a very clear explanation of the problem.

Capsule summary of the video he embeds: 

Many years ago, after a long- protracted fight, Hollywood finally agreed to pay writers a "residual" fee of 2.5% when something they wrote was re-broadcast on network TV.  The agreement applied only to material written after the agreement, so Hollywood has never paid a writer a cent for reruns of, for example, I Love Lucy, which has been rebroadcast continuously for fifty years and made hundreds of millions of dollars for the studios ... of which no writer ever saw a single cent.

22 years ago, Hollywood asked writers to accept a "temporary" 80% pay cut on that 2.5% residuals fee, for programming released on VHS tape, "for promotional purposes".  Unwisely, the writers agreed.  That "temporary" cut is still in effect, and applies to DVDs as well now, despite the burgeoning market that doesn't need any further "promotion".  And if you watch something on streaming video, Hollywood doesn't pay the writer anything at all.

So when you spend $20 on a movie or TV show on DVD, the writer gets ... four cents.  Watch the same show on streaming video, with no manufacturing, shipping or warehousing cost for the studio, and the writer doesn't make a cent — just like before the broadcast residuals agreement.

So what are the writers asking for?  They're asking for another four cents per DVD — in other words, they're asking for one quarter of that "temporary" pay cut back, after more than twenty years — and they're asking to be paid for streaming video reruns at the same rate as syndicated network reruns.

Not much to ask, is it?  But you can guess what Hollywood answered.

And that's why the writers are on strike.

Comments

[ithildae.livejournal.com]

Is that much worse than what recording artists get from the RIAA companies? I seldom have a use for either medium anymore, so I don't keep track. I think it is criminal to make a fortune on creative people's work, and never pay them anything substantial. I thought that slavery was outlawed.

[unixronin.livejournal.com]

Is that much worse than what recording artists get from the RIAA companies?

I believe that's called "damning with faint praise". ;)

I think it is criminal to make a fortune on creative people's work, and never pay them anything substantial. I thought that slavery was outlawed.

I think it's a prime example of "Do as we say, not as we do".... they rip off their artists, steal their artists' copyright to their own work, then complain that anyone who makes a copy of a CD for a friend is stealing "from the artisis", and takes them to court because "we're only trying to protect the artists."

Yeah, that kind of "protection" we've heard of before ...
"Nice career you have here. Be a shame if anything were to happen to it." [crack knuckles]

[ithildae.livejournal.com]

I think you and I both know not to expect honesty from anyone that, essentially, makes their living by stealing from others.

[house-pundit.livejournal.com]

And people wonder why so much of TV sucks? These writers are better than the guys in line behind them, but there's a lot of creative talent that looks at that industry and decides to pick a different outlet for their abilities.

Books, it's not about who you know, it's about what you can do. I've heard, but don't know personally, that who you know does matter in Hollywood. Still, that just means there's a lot of talent picking other creative outlets.

Some of those outlets may not even be what people consider "creative". I was a database programmer for five years. I write SF at the book level because Baen pays me. If Baen didn't pay me, I'd still write, but I wouldn't spend as much time on it. Programming, if you're good, requires you to think out of the box. Creativity. It pays a lot better than writing.

People always underestimate the other choices these folks can do with reasonable happiness while doing it.

I do it. They buy it. You pay me.

Otherwise, we can take that ability to think outside the box any number of places other than "starving artist" jobs.

[wyrdling.livejournal.com]

i figured it had to be something important for them to get this serious about it.
actors in tv commercials get better residuals than that.

[perspicuity.livejournal.com]

there's a lot of legal snafus being worked out for "legacy apps" (media) even now. there was time when the rest of the world got OUR tv shows especially but also movies BEFORE we did, sometimes by years, due to reruns, syndication rights, and so forth.

then there are antics where future rights weren't negotiated, like the muppet show. sure, disney? now owns all that, but they do NOT own the most of the musical numbers and rights. which ARE owned by powerful/noteworthy at least musicians. to those retro box sets? not entirely complete. chances are, you'll never see those either. ever. new viewers won't notice.

same with episodes of the animated tick - 1 or 2 episodes are missing, with no commentary on why. i think i have at least one of them still on video tape. you tube might have them, but you won't see them likely. possibly not for years.

same thing with some movies, and many other shows. now, these days, they've almost got the angles figured, and "any future media" is probably a key phrase. the writers? honestly, i feel they should not only strike for more money, like say, 100% of the original deal, but *retroactive* payments, with interest, and then some.

there's a good reason i like to buy used to. i figure the whole system is so tangled and ripped off, that residuals from resales amount to nothing for the various talent and just ka-ching for the parent company.

oh, and oddly, dvds, with much more material and richer content, tend to cost less per minute of goodness, than a mere cd with 60 minutes of content. if you're lucky. we were promised when CDs came out that prices would be higher at first while catalogs where remastered, and then prices would come down. they lied. a lot. it costs what? $0.05 to master a cd now? less? $25 for briney spear's latest drivel? no thank you. pirates exist in markets where there is unfair practices. ahoy.

#

[unixronin.livejournal.com]

the writers? honestly, i feel they should not only strike for more money, like say, 100% of the original deal, but *retroactive* payments, with interest, and then some.

Can't argue with that. The Hollywood moguls are unashamedly shafting anyone they can, and have done so since the beginning. Like the way any percentage of net in a movie is worthless, because on paper, no movie ever makes a significant net profit (and most don't make any net at all) by the time they're done cooking the books.

it costs what? $0.05 to master a cd now? less? $25 for briney spear's latest drivel? no thank you. pirates exist in markets where there is unfair practices. ahoy.

Indeed. Which brings us back to that Eastern European professional media pirate in the interview about 10-15 years back: "There's only one thing the studios can do that would put me out of business — start charging a fair price for their products. But they'll never do it."