Originally Posted By BlueOhanaTerror >>>William: go read the beginning of the thread. Because I had a difference of opinion, I was berated and trashed by the few that think they own the rights to the opinion on this subject.<<< No, you were berated because your comments were both insulting and reflected a complete ignorance of issues and reality. That and your overall comments betray a lack of interest in facts or even general cordial, neighborly behavior. This is right in keeping with your other trolling posts, on other subjects. You enter a room, annoy people with ignorant and caustic statements, try to find a few allies, and when you finally embarrass yourself beyond measure, you disappear for a while, waiting for a new opportunity to get attention. There's a word used to describe that insatiable appetite for attention. Sadly, there's no paparazzi for you, Peeannutt. You'll have to head to rehab with nobody watching.
Originally Posted By peeaanuut BOT: You seriously have me confused with someone else on these boards. You really need to read other threads instead of just this one. I am looking for no other allies here. I could really care less if anyone else agrees with me. I never have. But going back in this thread, I was never admin'd while you and your side were admin'd quite a few times. That would show that you broke the rules while I did not. I could care less if you and I do not agree but when you simple spread lies about me that is simply rude and make you look quite the fool.
Originally Posted By BlueOhanaTerror >>>I could really care less if anyone else agrees with me. I never have. But going back in this thread, I was never admin'd while you and your side were admin'd quite a few times. That would show that you broke the rules while I did not. I could care less if you and I do not agree but when you simple spread lies about me that is simply rude and make you look quite the fool.<<< Mmhmm. I see. Just FYI, it's "Could NOT care less." That's the benefit of an education. It tends to keeps you accurate.
Originally Posted By peeaanuut So you really have no valuable information to add to this discussion? You only purpose for being here is to throw insults at me? In yet another violation of the community standards. I may not be as educated as you, but at least I learned manners and how to express my opinion as opposed to filling an argument with emotion only and no substance. I swear you attack me like I ate your young. You might want to consider therapy.
Originally Posted By BlueOhanaTerror Hyperbole doesn't make a case for you. I've added plenty of FACTS to the discussion that you've only battled with opinion and more hyperbolic insult toward writers and their case for a tiny percentage of overall studio revenues in the future. If you see nothing but insult, you've definitely not read very much of this thread. There's plenty to LEARN about, if one is willing to read, not merely what I've posted, but of what others have posted on the issue (like Ron). If one is willing to learn, if one is willing no longer to reside in the domain of ignorance, that person can learn quite a bit. It's the essence of an open and growing mind. Clearly, you have demonstrated no such desire to learn.
Originally Posted By peeaanuut So because I do not agree with you I am ignorant? Hmmm. Interesting. Ok, well you just keep yapping and not working.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA This in the LA Times this morning. Here's hoping that both sides can resolve this issue. - - - - - - - - - - - - - <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-fi-strike5feb05" target="_blank">http://www.latimes.com/news/lo cal/la-fi-strike5feb05</a>,1,5851107.story?ctrack=1&cset=true Guild board favors deal, with caution An affirmative vote could send writers back to work in a matter of days. By Richard Verrier and Claudia Eller, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers February 5, 2008 The West Coast board of the Writers Guild of America has reacted favorably to the outlines of a pending agreement reached between guild negotiators and Hollywood studios. But the board is holding off on giving its blessing until it sees the exact language in the contract, according to people familiar with the situation. The 19-member board was briefed Monday by union leaders on the major points in a tentative deal reached Friday. If the board approves the contract, it is expected to end the strike immediately, these people said. A vote could be held this weekend. Time is of the essence in getting the board to sign off on a deal with the upcoming television pilot season, and the Feb. 24 Academy Awards show, hanging in the balance. While the negotiating committee, headed by John Bowman, is expected to recommend the pending contract, approval by the board is not necessarily a slam-dunk because it is composed of several hard-liners who may be tougher to win over. Furthermore, any approval would come only after a formal accord is drawn up by lawyers on both sides. Attorneys are putting in writing what guild negotiators and studio representatives verbally agreed to Friday when they bridged key differences over how much writers should earn for work distributed over the Internet. The proposed agreement is modeled largely after a deal studios recently clinched with directors. The deal includes a doubling of the residual rate for movies and TV shows sold online and secures the union's jurisdiction over content created specifically for the Web, above certain budget thresholds. It also establishes payments for shows streamed online that improve upon what directors were given in their new contract. On Sunday, presidents of the guild's West and East Coast branches, Patric M. Verrone and Michael Winship, sent a joint letter to members cautioning them not to put down their picket signs just yet. "We are still in talks and do not yet have a contract," they wrote. "Until we have reached an agreement with the AMPTP [Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers], it is essential that we continue to show our resolve, solidarity and strength." Also on Sunday, veteran screenwriter Larry Gelbart, best known for the 1982 movie classic "Tootsie" and the long-running TV series "MASH," weighed in with a mass voice mail to members urging them to continue walking the picket lines. "In all my decades as a member of the WGA, I've learned a few lessons about strikes and negotiations, the most important being that it's never over till it's over, no matter how much the lady singer might weigh," he said. Meanwhile, the union's strike captains called on members to show up for pickets planned this week at various studios and media companies across Los Angeles and New York. The latest round of talks came about after studios quickly reached a deal with directors. However, the directors' contract sparked heated debate among members of the writers guild. Last week, one of the guild's prominent board members, writer-director Phil Alden Robinson ("Field of Dreams") picked apart several aspects of the directors' pact. "It's my strong conviction that if an unaltered DGA [Directors Guild of America] deal were put before our membership for a vote today, it would fail resoundingly," Robinson wrote in a blog on the United Hollywood website. "If they insist on trying to shove this deal down our throats without improvements, this strike will not end any time soon." Reaction to Robinson's missive was mixed, with some members supporting his message and others privately blasting him for what they viewed as an inappropriate move for a board member at a crucial juncture in the writers talks.
Originally Posted By jonvn Unions are really very important. Everyone should be in one. They got messed up over time, and screwed themselves over, but they are the only hedge the average person has against the corporations people work for. When folks yell about unions, and they live in near squalor in an apartment somewhere, it boggles the mind. I don't know how they did it, but corporations in this country have managed to get people to think that things in their own best interest are the worst thing in the world for them. I hope the writers bring the studios down to their knees.
Originally Posted By BlueOhanaTerror Thank you, Jon. Much appreciated. I personally don't want to bring the producers to their knees, per se. I'm a producer as well as a writer, and I know there are real costs involved with every aspect of production, and it's getting tougher and tougher to make a profit in this industry - most movies don't make much of a profit. That said, we're mostly dealing with complications in the domain of broadcasting... As such, the networks and related television production institutions have VERY deep pockets, they definitely ARE trying to get away with murder here, and there's a salient explanation of the situation near the bottom of this link. <a href="http://www.aintitcool.com/node/35514" target="_blank">http://www.aintitcool.com/node /35514</a> Also, when DVD's disappear, the DISTRIBUTION costs will also drastically drop, as downloading involves no packaging costs. Right now, packaging for a DVD can run anywhere from about 75 cents to 1.25 a unit, plus transportation costs and the moneys absorbed by the companies that physically distribute and stock the DVDs in stores across the nation. When DVDs disappear, that money will be funneled into two places: 1) additional marketing and 2) pure profit. KNOWING THIS, the producers have been trying to withhold future residuals ANYWAY, knowing that THEIR percentage of revenues will actually INCREASE per unit. It's a pretty crazy mindset, and they've got some big brass ones to try to pull it off. It's critical then, to add some sanity and reason to the debate, knowing that 1) more money will be available, not less and 2) writers will have an entire revenue stream eliminated (home video in physical media formats). Finally, to answer for the nth time to you-know-who, someone who disagrees with me is not ignorant simply because they disagree with me. A person is ignorant when they display an complete cluelessness to facts, and refusal to even entertain/learn about the same, in post after post after post, even when those facts have been entered and offered repeatedly and clearly.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA BlueOhanaTerror, serious question -- Do you really think DVDs are going to go away? I read about movies being distributed via broadband, and renting them via appleTV or through cable et al ... But for gosh sakes, there's a large portion of the U.S. who still don't have cable, or know what the Internet is. To me, DVDs are akin to books. Like books, people love to collect DVDs, and have them, and look at them. And while there may be a new gadget where you can download books, and read them on your iPod-like thing, people still love to go into a bookstore, browse the stacks, flip through a volume or two, and pick one out to buy and read. And add it to their collection. If the DVD is truly going the way of the Dodo bird -- what sort of time frame do you give it? 2 years? 10 years? I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this concept. <--[popping a BetaMax version of 'Raiders of the Lost Ark' into my BetaMax player]
Originally Posted By ecdc I just can't see DVD's going away - or at least some form of physical product. I can buy a DVD and know that it'll play in my DVD player until my kids finally scratch it too much But downloading a movie? Dealing with DRM, wondering if this format or that will play on which machine? What to do when my hard drive gives out and crashes? Dealing with Microsoft's draconian rules trying to control their product? Ugh. Sorry, I truly believe artists and producers deserve revenue for their product, but force a physical product to go extinct, and you're just begging me to download illegally. I can download movies via bitorrent and know that they don't have DRM, and know that if my computer does crash or there's something wrong with the file, I'm out exactly zero dollars. And then I don't have to call customer service and speak with "Mike" in New Dehli to try and get my money back. I genuinely don't want it to go that way; I really have cultivated a nice DVD collection and I look forward to continuing to do so. But I just can't see myself feeling good about paying for digital files; and I frankly can't see myself feeling all that guilty about downloading pirated files if the industry forces it on the consumer.
Originally Posted By jonvn DVDs will go away, but not for at least another 5-10 years. You'll get everything via downloading. I do it now via my Xbox. It works pretty good, but it is not quite there yet. For me personally, I need captioning. And tha xbox does not do that. The other thing that is a problem with downloading is that the extras you get on DVD aren't there. So, you just get the movie or whatever it is you downloaded. Your DVDs will always work on your player. But in the future, if you just want to watch a movie, you're going to be downloading it.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>Your DVDs will always work on your player. But in the future, if you just want to watch a movie, you're going to be downloading it.<< I'm still not convinced. But if that's the case, then I'll most likely be downloading it illegally. I'm just a really firm believer in having a physical product, and there aren't words to describe how pissed I'd be at the industry if they deliberately forced physical products out to try and increase their revenue. Of course, there's some circumstances when I might consider paying to download something. I'd pay if it was a rental-type system like Apple just unveiled. That way I know I don't own it and have to worry less about hardware failure or DRM issues. It'd have to be mighty cheap - I don't see myself paying more than $2 or $3 for a 24 hour digital rental.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << It'd have to be mighty cheap - I don't see myself paying more than $2 or $3 for a 24 hour digital rental. >> That's essentially the cost of video on demand services that the cable companies operate now.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>That's essentially the cost of video on demand services that the cable companies operate now.<< But they're already charging people a lot for a package subscription. So this charge would be on top of that. Right now I don't have to pay Hollywood Video or iTunes a monthly fee.
Originally Posted By BlueOhanaTerror >>>BlueOhanaTerror, serious question -- Do you really think DVDs are going to go away? I read about movies being distributed via broadband, and renting them via appleTV or through cable et al ... But for gosh sakes, there's a large portion of the U.S. who still don't have cable, or know what the Internet is.<<< Like Jon says, about 10 years. I think it's almost inevitable. Unlike books, DVDs are just plastic. There's nothing to be read/looked at on the actual physical recording medium. Yeah, it's a little weird not having a shelf full of titles to grab, but that "shelf" will be virtual, on your TV set. You'll file through it like a TV Guide listing on your cable display. Storage capacity will go up, prices will go down, etc. It'll be good for consumers and distributors. An awful lot of factories that press and package DVDs are going to go out of business though... that kind of sucks. One of those people is a friend of mine, and their factory is a family business. But this is just evolution. It's important then, to have some kind of assurances in advance, because the current terms we're under for DVD residuals date back 20 years now. And they're hopelessly antiquated. So if we don't deal with internet now... you know, in a few years, the amount of money lost will be huge.
Originally Posted By BlueOhanaTerror Meeting tomorrow night (Saturday). Looks like everyone's about to go back to work.
Originally Posted By Spooky Ghost Glad to hear it's going to be resolved. Did everything turn out in favor of the writers BOT?v
Originally Posted By Spooky Ghost Glad to hear it's going to be resolved. Did everything turn out in favor of the writers BOT?v
Originally Posted By EdisYoda One problem I see with buying movies and downloading them. What happens when whatever storage medium you're using (like a hard drive) crashes or gets infected with a virus that wipes it out? (You could use flash type drives, but that still wouldn't resolve the virus issue.) I'd assume they'd make you pay to buy it again.
