Originally Posted By peeaanuut <<Again, I don't think Peeanut actually "thinks" about what he/she is posting. He/She gives every indication of simply wanting attention, by any means necessary. Maybe not creating chaos in the world at large, but definitely creating annoyance and fostering his/her own bitter and distasteful ignorance on these boards (of course, there's nothing new about that).>> You really have no idea who I am. I am not out to create chaos. I simply have an opinion and since it differs from yours and you cannot accept that others have different opinions and you want to trash them for it. Maybe YOU need to grow up and get over yourself. I could care less about what attention I draw or don't draw. It really doesn't matter to me. I simply feel that people that the kind of money that writers make should not be ruining the lives of others by striking. They are putting a whole industry out of work soon and by the video posted simply do not take it seriously. Unions are a useless entity in the US now. Writers are not being discriminated against or beaten at work as people were years ago which necessitated a union. In this day in age, you take a job which means you accept the pay. If you dont like the pay, quit, but dont hurt others in the process. Dont make others lose work because you want to throw a temper tantrum. Get another job and move on.
Originally Posted By peeaanuut and to add to your ignorance, if I wanted to create chaos and draw attention, I would be in every thread making noise. Believe me I know how to create havoc on these boards but out of respect for the owners I do not do it. Notice that NONE of my posts have been struck by the red pen while others have. I think you need to check yourself before you say something that you will regret.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>In this day in age, you take a job which means you accept the pay.<< As has been explained, that isn't how it works in some industries, including the entertainment industry. It is a unionized operation, and the various specialties are covered by various unions. At the expiration of one contract, there are negotiations. That is how it works, both sides know this. Striking is the last resort, obviously, as it hurts both sides. But knowing that, there are key issues that must be settled in this strike, and the information on what those issues are is readily available for anyone wishing to find them.
Originally Posted By peeaanuut << It is a unionized operation, and the various specialties are covered by various unions.>> Once again, Unions in this day in age are of no use. Noone is getting beaten at work and writers are not being discriminated on based on race or lack of an arm. There is no common man to fight for as no one situation is the same anymore.
Originally Posted By Rontheman If it were not for previous strikes we would not have health and pension programs, residuals... pretty much every advance. You are entitled to an opinion, of course, but we who have been walking the line for four hours a day and attended all the meetings are entitled to point out that your opinion is based on nothing but ignorant pre-conceived notions. If you are really worried about the people who would be hurt in this strike, you'd be advised to focus your attention to the media congloms that refuse to come back to the bargaining table. The studios forced this strike and the studios can end it today.
Originally Posted By cstephens Rontheman wrote: > If you are really worried about the people who would be hurt in this strike, you'd be advised to focus your attention to the media congloms that refuse to come back to the bargaining table. The studios forced this strike and the studios can end it today. Sure, if they give the WGA everything they're asking for. This presumes that the WGA is completely in the right and that the studios are completely in the wrong. I find that life is seldom that simple. /cs
Originally Posted By peeaanuut <<You are entitled to an opinion, of course, but we who have been walking the line for four hours a day and attended all the meetings are entitled to point out that your opinion is based on nothing but ignorant pre-conceived notions. >> you know the "you werente there, you will never know" attitude doesnt fly in any situation. <<Sure, if they give the WGA everything they're asking for. This presumes that the WGA is completely in the right and that the studios are completely in the wrong. I find that life is seldom that simple.>> i wouldnt go back to the nogotiating tables when the WGA is only requesting outrageous demands. Plus the dancing on the picket lines doesnt help for people to take your cause seriously.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>Once again, Unions in this day in age are of no use.<< Like it or not (and it's clear you don't like it) the reality is that everything in the entertainment business is unionized, and the media companies know they must work within that reality. At some point, compromises will take place and a new contract will be agreed upon.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>i wouldnt go back to the nogotiating tables when the WGA is only requesting outrageous demands.<< Are they "only requesting" outrageous demands? What is it you consider outrageous, specifically? Getting a cut on Internet profits? You might be surprised that most commercial artists sell one-time publication rights to their artwork. In other words, if a company hires a photographer to shoot photos of something, the company doesn't automatically "own" those photos. The photographer does. Unless they work out a deal where the photographer sells all rights over to the company. In those cases, the rates are significantly higher. This is the sort of thing the writers are asking for in a changing media landscape. There were actors on TV shows made decades ago that wound up fairly broke, getting no residuals at all even though their work was being seen again and again, and the networks profited. Why shouldn't the people involved in the creation of these things be entitled to at least some portion of future profits?
Originally Posted By Rontheman The writers have compromised. They offered to give up their request to up the resids on DVD's. Which the producers had labled a huge sticking point. It wasn't enough. The only compromise the producers have made is to try to take away residuals completely, then a week before the contract was up, dramatically go back on what was clearly a phony bargaining move in the first place. Statements like "I wouldnt go back to the nogotiating tables when the WGA is only requesting outrageous demands" only serve to show how little you know about the issues. As to the "you know the "you werente there, you will never know" attitude doesnt fly in any situation' -- How about if you weren't there and you have proven over and over again that you don't know? I think when you just continue to spout misinformed opinions, those with some skin in the game have a right to call you on it. I'm curious to about the "Unions are no use in this day and age" theory? This day and age is one where the corporate leadership has taken unprecedented (in modern times) shares of the corporate profit to line their own pockets. In case after case like citbank or Merrill Lynch, executive are almost driving companies to ruin and still walking away with over a hundred million dollars. And yet people get upset about writers getting an extra four cents a copy on something they've made possible? I don't get the hate. And then the stereotyping of people who go into creative fields as a bunch of pampered babies? Make a few CEO's fly commercial and see who the pampered babies are.
Originally Posted By peeaanuut <<You might be surprised that most commercial artists sell one-time publication rights to their artwork. In other words, if a company hires a photographer to shoot photos of something, the company doesn't automatically "own" those photos. The photographer does. Unless they work out a deal where the photographer sells all rights over to the company. In those cases, the rates are significantly higher.>> I believe you know that I know exactly that which is why you specifically chose photoraphy for your example. But unlike writers that seem to give blanket rights to their work, I negotiate use of any photo on a per basis contract. I specify out print, web, video, sale or promotional distribution. I ask for exact specifics on what the photo will be used for and how it will be distributed. My advantage, I don't work under a union that handstrings me to some ancient contract. I am an independant contractor to specifically take control of my work and i get the best deal that I can everytime. Writers give into the union mantra and they knew the contract they would agree into when they joined the union and took the job. Do I think they have the right to re-negotiate their contract? of course they do. But not at the cost of a work stopage. Either you work with the contract you have while you renegotiate or you quit. Every single writer on the picket line should not be allowed back into their job without being re-hired including drug screening and a full interview process just like a new hire would have to go through. When they walked out of work they quit their job. They broke the contract, not the studios. They agreed to work for a wage. When they failed to return to work they quit their job. And they should all work under their own contract. Noone should subject themselves to the herd mentality of a union and take the lowest possible pay grade because thats the best they could get. Oh on top of that they pay a group of people to do nothing but sit on a union board for the benefit of working for a low wage.
Originally Posted By peeaanuut <<And then the stereotyping of people who go into creative fields as a bunch of pampered babies? Make a few CEO's fly commercial and see who the pampered babies are. >> I never said people who go into the creative field are pampered babies. The CEOs are in charge of the whole company and should get the biggest wage. Its the way commerce works. Have you never owned or ran a business?
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>Either you work with the contract you have while you renegotiate or you quit<< No, that isn't how it works. I haven't the time nor the interest in bringing you up to speed.
Originally Posted By mawnck >>Do I think they have the right to re-negotiate their contract? of course they do. But not at the cost of a work stopage. Either you work with the contract you have while you renegotiate or you quit.<< I'm not going to pay you, peeaanuut. Now get out there and keep taking pictures while I continue refusing to negotiate with you. After all, we have an expired contract!
Originally Posted By cstephens peeaanuut wrote: > Every single writer on the picket line should not be allowed back into their job without being re-hired including drug screening and a full interview process just like a new hire would have to go through. When they walked out of work they quit their job. FYI, writers on a television show are employees to some extent, but writers of feature films are not employees. They're pretty much independent contractors, and they sell each individual script. They aren't "new hires" like you would have with a regular employee. /cs
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << Why shouldn't the people involved in the creation of these things be entitled to at least some portion of future profits? >> I don't really have an opinion either way, but I think some of the future rewards on these projects should be based on the amount of risk that is assumed by the parties involved. For example, if a writer stakes their claim on future rewards by taking minimal returns for being paid up front for a script or other product, this makes sense. However, if writers want to be paid a healthy income to deliver a script and still want to participate in the future gains without any risk in whether the production is a success or failure, I'm not sure that's the best model.
Originally Posted By peeaanuut <<I'm not going to pay you, peeaanuut. Now get out there and keep taking pictures while I continue refusing to negotiate with you. After all, we have an expired contract!>> I wouldnt work without being paid. If you refused to pay me I find a different job. Why would I fight to work somewhere that I feel is treating me unfairly? That makes no sense. <<After all, we have an expired contract!>> That is the key isnt it? So these people are unemployeed by their own doing and are preventing others from working. Seems a little selfish doesnt it? <<No, that isn't how it works. I haven't the time nor the interest in bringing you up to speed.>> if you agree to a contract and you fullfill that contract. If you want to renegotiate your contract you need to continue fullfilling your contract until a new contract is struck. That is good business. Noone has broken the contact in the writers strike. The writers just want a bigger piece of the pie than what they agreed to trade their services for. So you dont have the time to bring me up to speed or the knowledge to bring me up to speed? Which is it? I believe it is the latter. <<I'm not going to pay you, peeaanuut. Now get out there and keep taking pictures while I continue refusing to negotiate with you. After all, we have an expired contract!>> I would never negotiate a contract in that manner. As a photographer I get paid per job, not continued employement. You want to me photograph a game, I get paid on that job. Not for a season, not for a series. Per game. Thats the way I contract out and I make tons of money doing it. I dont picket afterwards because I think I deserve more money. My contract specifically says what they can and CANNOT use my work for. I also do not give up my rights as the artist to any work. If they break the contract, I take them to court. And I win. Thats the way it works. People need to start taking responsibility for their work and not throw it on the shoulders of ignorance. You work under a union contract, you throw any right to complain out the window.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>So you dont have the time to bring me up to speed or the knowledge to bring me up to speed? Which is it? I believe it is the latter.<< Of course you do.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>if you agree to a contract and you fullfill that contract. If you want to renegotiate your contract you need to continue fullfilling your contract until a new contract is struck. That is good business.<< Just to help you understand a little bit more before your next tirade, the writers' contract did expire. Negotiations on a new one broke down, then they went on strike. Here's an article, from back on November 1, to help catch you up on what is going on, as oppossed to what you imagine. >>A strike could happen as early as Friday, with writers meeting Thursday night to discuss whether to walk out or continue to work without a contract while seeking a deal. Their contract expired at midnight Wednesday after talks ended abruptly, with both sides saying they were still far apart on the key issue of raising payment from the sale of DVDs and extending payment to the distribution of TV shows and film over the Internet. No new talks were scheduled for Thursday. While both sides have withdrawn other proposals since talks began in July, neither has budged on what the Writers Guild of America termed "the hated DVD formula," which pays writers pennies on the sale of home video. Writers had sought to boost that payment. They wanted the richer formula applied equally to the sale of digital downloads. They were also seeking a piece of advertising dollars generated when TV shows and films are streamed for free over the Internet. Writers also want to be paid for creating original content for the Internet, cell phones or other digital devices. Producers maintain that profits from DVDs largely offset the increased cost of production. They also don't want to commit themselves to higher payment for digital distribution at a time when business models are still uncertain.<< More at: <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/TV/11/01/hollywood.labor.ap/" target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBI Z/TV/11/01/hollywood.labor.ap/</a>
