What is a professional production company? That's easy, one that is doing it for hire and is getting paid. Vloggers and podcasters that are doing stuff for fun and as a hobby aren't professionals, strictly speaking. Which is not a slight on the quality of their work--but we all know that there are many people in this space that aren't motivated by making money and never will be interested in it. What is at issue here is when companies are hiring people to produce video content for the web (and they will only do that because they believe that there will be some profit in it) then the terms of the contracts can either be negotiated one on one or collectively through a union. Which one do you think will result in the most favorable terms for the most people? Yeah there will always be that top 10% that will always be able to write their own ticket and get anything they want in a contract, but there will also be the ones that will be hired to cover a conference or an event or a beat--and those are the ones that will benefit the most from organizing. In Hollywood and Television most of the "stars" usually support collective bargaining because many of them benefited from it on their way up, and most of them understand that fame is often fleeting and they may benefit from it again. Unions are hardly perfect, but they're one of the best ways to protect rights and guard against abuse.
Bill Streeter LO-FI SAINT LOUIS www.lofistl.com www.billstreeter.net --- In [email protected], "Gena" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What you say seems ok, but what happens if Google/YouTube, Blip or the > other online distribution places sign agreements with the unions that > could eventually push out non-union and non-commercial productions? > > Currently we have the choice to say "Bugger off, I don't need you." > > If the online distribution joints are collecting revenue and braking > off a piece for the union wouldn't the unions at some point force or > make it known that they would "prefer" union talent in as many web > based productions as possible? > > I don't know how to say this correctly but theoretically the union > could tell you (Actor McVicar) to stop your production because you > (Producer/Vlogger) are not paying union dues as an actor. > > It goes back to the question what is going to be considered a > professional production? Is a one person vlogger exempt but if you > have three or more working together that makes it a production > company? This could set the precedent that allows the other > entertainment unions jump in. > > I have too many questions about this. Gut feeling it seems like a > creativity killer in the making. > > Gena > http://outonthestoop.blogspot.com > > > --- In [email protected], "danielmcvicar" > <danielmcvicar@> wrote: > > > > Hi Everybody, > > I've been a member of SAG and AFTRA for decades, and sometimes serve > > on committees in preparing for negotiation. > > > > It is my observation that this is a new area for unions, producers, > > performers and distributors of media. The business models are being > > disrupted. > > > > The union has always been there to protect performers from abusive > > work conditions, to improve pay and conditions, and has also taken the > > responsibility for insuring performers. > > > > Regarding net video, the union doesn't know what to do yet. There are > > some plans in place that allow producers of net video to be brought in > > under AFTRA rules that are not very expensive. They would be similar > > to lowbudget film deals. > > > > Really, it is at what point does the video become professional, and is > > distributed in a way that makes money. You may always operate outside > > the union, if you are an independent producer, but there may be > > limitations in using union members or in distributing videos through > > union signatories. That is the same in preexisting video and film > > formats. > > > > There are more shared points that the union would have with producers > > and distributors of content. One in particular is piracy, and the > > violation of copyright. I have suggested that in the coming > > negotiation with the networks and producers for the AFTRA contract, > > that the performer and union retain their right to sue Youtube or > > another entity that profited illegally from their work and image. > > This would be an adjustment in language, because the current release > > transfers copyright to the producer, and it is the producer's > > responsibility to seek damages. > > > > Without drilling down into more specifics, I would like to say that a > > union can serve performers, creators and producers well. It is the > > loss of revenue from work that is the biggest threat to all. Just ask > > people in the music industry. > > > > Perhaps there will be an adaptation of the unions to include small > > producers who perform and create, and the rights for all can be > protected. > > > > I don't think there is a way to bully anyone out of the sphere now. > > Not as long as there are video cameras, and places to post videos. > > > > What they can do is to help the performer and creator earn some > > revenue from the further distribution of their work in digital > > formats, and recover part of that revenue stream be it in paid > > download, or on a site or format that includes advertising. > > > > Ciao! > > D > > > > --- In [email protected], "Steve Watkins" <steve@> wrote: > > > > > > Wel I am a fan of unions in general. I just think there will be some > > > growing pains if they try to apply this stuff to net video > > > prematurely, especially as there is currently so much hype about > > > internet video $$ which doesnt match the reality for most. > > > > > > So I do look forward to the day when unions get in the way of someone > > > exploiting people whilst making lots of money, but do not look forward > > > to the day that some small player with no money gets bullied out of > > > this sphere by unions. > > > > > > Cheers > > > > > > Steve Elbow > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "Jan McLaughlin" > > > <jannie.jan@> wrote: > > > > Is this a 'problem' for indie talent and technician? Or a blessing? > > > > > > > > Health insurance, retirement benefits, fiscal protections from > > > abuse, etc? > > > > > > > > There either will or will not come a time when the things you > > > produce are > > > > popular enough to sustain real livings for lots and lots of > > people. When > > > > that entertainment tipping point happens, why not provide yourself > > > and the > > > > people you work with living wages and benefits? > > > > > > > > Serious talent wishing to cross over to MSM will be folded into > > unions; > > > > those who don't want to play in the MSM sandbox will stand > > outside, not > > > > looking in, but looking out to recruit new, hungry talent to feed > > > the hungry > > > > long tail of entertainment. > > > > > > > > Jan > > > > > >
