Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Archive > Archives of Old Posts > MacBytes.com News Discussion

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Oct 15, 2005, 12:43 PM   #1
MacBytes
macrumors bot
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Hollywood Calls for Cut of Video iPod Pie




Category: News and Press Releases
Link: Hollywood Calls for Cut of Video iPod Pie

Posted on MacBytes.com
Approved by arn
MacBytes is offline   0
Old Oct 15, 2005, 12:44 PM   #2
Lacero
macrumors 601
 
Lacero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Effn' greedy bastards. When is an employment check enough? Creative works my ass, the studio owns it.
Lacero is offline   0
Old Oct 15, 2005, 12:48 PM   #3
maya
macrumors 68040
 
maya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: somewhere between here and there.
Smells like greed to me. So what else is new?
__________________
~V~

:. it's here!!! .:
maya is offline   0
Old Oct 15, 2005, 12:57 PM   #4
Deepdale
macrumors 68000
 
Deepdale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: New York
With their insatiable appetite for pie, it is amazing that more people in that industry are not suffering from morbid obesity.
__________________
iMac G3 450 MHz (09-00) ... likely to be replaced by my first laptop.
Deepdale is offline   0
Old Oct 15, 2005, 01:00 PM   #5
JohnHummel
macrumors member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Actually, I can see their point

Right now, under contract, actors and other workers are paid residuals for their work - every time a movie/tv show/commercial/ they are in airs or a DVD sells, they get a cut of that. So why not for a digitally purchased download?

Though, this is something they need to take up with the studios. I have the feeling that the percentages are the same - studios get 70% of the sale, Apple the rest, so the actors/workers will just have to settle for that cut, and bug the accountants for their $0.diddlysquat.
__________________
John Hummel
http://www.gamerspress.com - Gamers' Press, the wiki gaming site
JohnHummel is offline   0
Old Oct 15, 2005, 01:17 PM   #6
otter-boy
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Looks to be settled

It looks like the content on iTMS is already covered under their contracts, they just have to consider where it will be placed: pay-per-view?,DVD-like distribution?, or Internet streaming/downloads?

They have different rates for different types of distribution. It looks like the real issue is not whether these groups will get paid, but how much they will get paid.
otter-boy is offline   0
Old Oct 15, 2005, 01:24 PM   #7
PlaceofDis
macrumors Core
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
greed, no one is immune
__________________
dim my eyes on the waves of confessions...
PlaceofDis is offline   0
Old Oct 15, 2005, 01:33 PM   #8
SummerBreeze
macrumors 6502a
 
SummerBreeze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago, IL
I love how Yahoo makes sure to tell us all that this is an "expolitation" of the poor, pennyless actors. The tone of this piece is one of Apple stealing money from all the networks, although the real problem is that actors don't know what they're talking about.

Why don't they just wait until their respective networks make a deal with Apple? Then they'll know where they stand.
__________________
15" MacBook Pro // 20" Cinema Display // 1st gen iPad // iPhone 4s 16gb white
SummerBreeze is offline   0
Old Oct 15, 2005, 01:35 PM   #9
Yvan256
macrumors 601
 
Yvan256's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Canada
The title is misleading... They don't want a "cut of iPod sales", they simply want their share of the TV shows sold through iTMS.

As many others said, it's up to the studios and their contracts, not Apple.
Yvan256 is offline   0
Old Oct 15, 2005, 01:42 PM   #10
dornoforpyros
macrumors 68040
 
dornoforpyros's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Calgary, AB
Send a message via AIM to dornoforpyros Send a message via MSN to dornoforpyros
To all the people saying "greedy bastards" did you actually take the time to read the article? Their not looking to milk apple for iPod cuts (like the music industry) but mearly for the TV shows being downloaded.
It actually seems pretty fair to me that a new medium is released and they want to know what the details are.
__________________
Pointy metal guitars.
dornoforpyros is offline   0
Old Oct 15, 2005, 01:44 PM   #11
AoWolf
macrumors 6502a
 
AoWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Daytona Beach
Send a message via AIM to AoWolf
Quote:
Originally Posted by dornoforpyros
To all the people saying "greedy bastards" did you actually take the time to read the article? Their not looking to milk apple for iPod cuts (like the music industry) but mearly for the TV shows being downloaded.
It actually seems pretty fair to me that a new medium is released and they want to know what the details are.
Thats not the point the point is the studio owns the program they have the right to sell it how they want. As long as they are not breaching the contracts already signed then they are being greedy.
__________________
I do not exist
1.6 Ghz. MacBook Air
AoWolf is offline   0
Old Oct 15, 2005, 01:50 PM   #12
paulypants
macrumors 6502a
 
paulypants's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Buffalo, NY
F them, they make enough friggin money. I'm supposed to sympathize with them? Sorry, no....
__________________
Mac Pro 2 x 2.8 Quad-Core Xeon - iMac 27" Core i7 - iPad 3G - iPhone 4 - iPod 3rd G - iPod Nano 1st G - PowerMac G3 - Macintosh SE
paulypants is offline   0
Old Oct 15, 2005, 01:54 PM   #13
Stella
macrumors 603
 
Stella's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by AoWolf
Thats not the point the point is the studio owns the program they have the right to sell it how they want. As long as they are not breaching the contracts already signed then they are being greedy.
And the writers should get royalties from the profits, as currently happens with traditional broadcasting - i.e., royalties each time a show is screened. Why should there be a difference for download-able content? Studios need to adapt to the times instead of living in the past.

In case anyone hasn't read the article, a quote relating to payments to actors and writers:

"The groups already have agreements that cover the re-use of their work on the Internet or in "pay per view" models, such as video on demand. The unions also have newer agreements covering work produced for the Internet.

Under the WGA contract, writers are entitled to 1.6 percent of the license fee paid by networks to the producers of a show. The ABC hits "Lost" and "Desperate Housewives," are produced by Touchstone Studios, Disney's TV production arm.

Actors are entitled to 3.6 percent of the license fee."

At the end of the day, this is parallel to recording artists with RIAA not paying enough royalties.
__________________
Hardware / Software: The right tools for the job - be it Apple or otherwise.

Last edited by Stella; Oct 15, 2005 at 01:57 PM.
Stella is offline   0
Old Oct 15, 2005, 01:56 PM   #14
Photorun
Banned
 
Photorun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NYC
So wait, if I use my VCR to record a show FOR FREE, Hollywood doesn't want a cut of the price of my tape or the recorder I use, but if I PAY for a track on iTMS they want to get a cut of that? Seems like at every turn while Apple tries to reinvent the audio and video industry the audio and video industry wants to thrwart progress... keep things in their same sh***t state.
Photorun is offline   0
Old Oct 15, 2005, 02:00 PM   #15
Stella
macrumors 603
 
Stella's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Canada
Do you watch pay for view? If so, the artists and writers make money from the revenue from PP ( see above post ).

When you buy a track from iTMS, you are paying for the content. There is no difference between buying from iTMS and going into a shop and buying a DVD. Its just a different media type and at the end of the day you are paying for the content. Different media shouldn't mean different rules for compensating the artists and writers.

Finally, its not up to Apple set to royalty payments its up to the Studios.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Photorun
So wait, if I use my VCR to record a show FOR FREE, Hollywood doesn't want a cut of the price of my tape or the recorder I use, but if I PAY for a track on iTMS they want to get a cut of that? Seems like at every turn while Apple tries to reinvent the audio and video industry the audio and video industry wants to thrwart progress... keep things in their same sh***t state.
__________________
Hardware / Software: The right tools for the job - be it Apple or otherwise.

Last edited by Stella; Oct 15, 2005 at 02:02 PM.
Stella is offline   0
Old Oct 15, 2005, 02:16 PM   #16
winmacguy
macrumors 68020
 
winmacguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: New Zealand
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stella
And the writers should get royalties from the profits, as currently happens with traditional broadcasting - i.e., royalties each time a show is screened. Why should there be a difference for download-able content? Studios need to adapt to the times instead of living in the past.

In case anyone hasn't read the article, a quote relating to payments to actors and writers:


At the end of the day, this is parallel to recording artists with RIAA not paying enough royalties.
Agreed. I dont think the artists and actors are greedy. Some famous actors get paid very well for their work but they are not the only actors plying their trade.
__________________
With Windows iWork, with Apple iCreate
winmacguy is offline   0
Old Oct 15, 2005, 03:01 PM   #17
Macmaniac
macrumors 68040
 
Macmaniac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: A tiny spec in the "Garden State", 1 square mile in area, somewhere on the outskirts of town by the railroad tracks
Working in TV does not gaurentee you a lot of money some actors make a lot of money but your average joe is lucky to be making 35k a year. I know I guy taking an anchor position for a regional basketball team. He is making $9-$10 an hour. Imagine how much a lowly cameraman makes.
__________________
The customer is NOT always right
Macmaniac is offline   0
Old Oct 15, 2005, 03:10 PM   #18
LethalWolfe
macrumors Demi-God
 
LethalWolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Quote:
Originally Posted by winmacguy
Agreed. I dont think the artists and actors are greedy. Some famous actors get paid very well for their work but they are not the only actors plying their trade.
There are about 100,000 actors in SAG. Of that about 1% make a living wage from acting. And for every actor in SAG there are probably to trying to get in.


Lethal
LethalWolfe is offline   0
Old Oct 15, 2005, 03:52 PM   #19
arkmannj
macrumors 65816
 
arkmannj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UT
Send a message via AIM to arkmannj
Hurting them selves in the long run

Doesn't the (American) Entertainment industry understand that this mentality that we should be paid not just for our work, but the work of others crap s going to hurt them more in the long run.

Seriously, the greed of MPAA's RIAA's and many others in the Entertainment industries are loosing my interest in a increasing rate day by day. give me a week and I'll only be watching productions from those that deserve my hard earned money. Independent films, foreign (India etc).

I am the only one feeling this way ?

I go to work each day thankful that I have a job, that I am able to put food on the table, and pay my rent. Can't they be happy that they already have millions! they make more from one movie / album than most make in a lifetime (even in America). This insatiable desire for more, more more, I feel will be their downfall in the end.

thanks for tuning to to this test of the ranting session, now back to your regularly scheduled program.
arkmannj is offline   0
Old Oct 15, 2005, 04:11 PM   #20
nagromme
macrumors G4
 
nagromme's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Seems like it should work the same as any other re-broadcast. It the deal is that the actor gets paid once and that's it, then that's fine. But if the deal is that they get residuals--(which can mean they accept less money up front, speculating on future popularity of their contribution)--then I don't think it's greedy to ask for that to apply to this new medium just like any other. That IS the union's job to negotiate, and this IS a new medium. Of course the issue has come up.

Anyway, it's asking for a cut from the producers, not from Apple.
nagromme is offline   0
Old Oct 15, 2005, 05:00 PM   #21
macnulty
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Rehoboth Beach, De
Send a message via AIM to macnulty
Misleading Title

It was more like the unions wanting to protect or ensure their members get their percentage of royality, perfectly legitamate. I don't what the studios have to do with it, or even who was asking for a percentage of iPod revenue.
__________________
Semper Fi

"Only a fool looks at a hand pointing to the sky"
macnulty is offline   0
Old Oct 15, 2005, 05:27 PM   #22
LethalWolfe
macrumors Demi-God
 
LethalWolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Quote:
Originally Posted by arkmannj
Doesn't the (American) Entertainment industry understand that this mentality that we should be paid not just for our work, but the work of others crap s going to hurt them more in the long run.

Seriously, the greed of MPAA's RIAA's and many others in the Entertainment industries are loosing my interest in a increasing rate day by day. give me a week and I'll only be watching productions from those that deserve my hard earned money. Independent films, foreign (India etc).

I am the only one feeling this way ?

I go to work each day thankful that I have a job, that I am able to put food on the table, and pay my rent. Can't they be happy that they already have millions! they make more from one movie / album than most make in a lifetime (even in America). This insatiable desire for more, more more, I feel will be their downfall in the end.

thanks for tuning to to this test of the ranting session, now back to your regularly scheduled program.
I think you, and others in this thread, either aren't reading the article or are misunderstanding the article (it doesn't help that the title is misleading).

The studios aren't calling for money. It's the unions (actors, directors, writers, etc.,) that are speaking up to make sure they get the percentage they deserve from the studios/networks. And did you read my post above yours? The vast majority of actors probably work 2-3 jobs (including acting gigs) just to make ends meet. Just because a very, very, very small percentage of high profile actors make millions doesn't mean that ALL actors make millions. It's like saying everyone in the computer field must be superrich because Gates, Dell, and Jobs are superrich.

People always complain that the artists get ripped off by the labels/studios and now here were are w/the artists making sure the labels/studios don't rip them off and people are calling the artists greedy. Does that make any sense?


Lethal
LethalWolfe is offline   0
Old Oct 15, 2005, 06:00 PM   #23
ethernet76
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Photorun
So wait, if I use my VCR to record a show FOR FREE, Hollywood doesn't want a cut of the price of my tape or the recorder I use, but if I PAY for a track on iTMS they want to get a cut of that? Seems like at every turn while Apple tries to reinvent the audio and video industry the audio and video industry wants to thrwart progress... keep things in their same sh***t state.
There's a large difference between person recordings and commercial sales.

Again, I don't think it's fair to demonize these people. Apple is in no respect dissimilar from Target, Best Buy, or Wal-mart. They offer a product in a (virtual) store.

Members of these guilds already receive a percentage of DVD sales. Accordingly they should be afforded the same standards as traditional media sales.

Lastly, Apple hasn't innovated anything in the terms of downloadable content. Buying music online isn't an innovation. It was the next step. Apple was just the first company willing to take the risk.

Apple hasn't innovated much since the Newton, Quicktake days. The only real innovation they've had is the fashion over function mindset.
ethernet76 is offline   0
Old Oct 15, 2005, 06:57 PM   #24
arkmannj
macrumors 65816
 
arkmannj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UT
Send a message via AIM to arkmannj
Quote:
Originally Posted by LethalWolfe
I think you, and others in this thread, either aren't reading the article or are misunderstanding the article (it doesn't help that the title is misleading).

The studios aren't calling for money. It's the unions (actors, directors, writers, etc.,) that are speaking up to make sure they get the percentage they deserve from the studios/networks. And did you read my post above yours? The vast majority of actors probably work 2-3 jobs (including acting gigs) just to make ends meet. Just because a very, very, very small percentage of high profile actors make millions doesn't mean that ALL actors make millions. It's like saying everyone in the computer field must be superrich because Gates, Dell, and Jobs are superrich.

People always complain that the artists get ripped off by the labels/studios and now here were are w/the artists making sure the labels/studios don't rip them off and people are calling the artists greedy. Does that make any sense?


Lethal

Ok being who I am I am willing to concede when I'm wrong. and when others are right.
1) You are right, I had not read the article at the time of my initial post
Also, no I had not read your post, only the first page of comments.
I apologize for my misinformed comment, however my sentiments remain the same.

2) I suppose my initial reaction should have been rephrased, my emotion is mostly towards the imbalance of how the industry is being run, in many ragards as well as how money is distributed. Not, I repeat not at the individual artists, making it day by day doing what they love as a profession. As long a fair deal can be worked out for the Artists in the "new medium" of download songs, and they don't screw anyone else in the process, then I'm happy.
arkmannj is offline   0
Old Oct 16, 2005, 05:31 AM   #25
johannes
macrumors newbie
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by arkmannj
Doesn't the (American) Entertainment industry understand that this mentality that we should be paid not just for our work, but the work of others crap s going to hurt them more in the long run.

Seriously, the greed of MPAA's RIAA's and many others in the Entertainment industries are loosing my interest in a increasing rate day by day. give me a week and I'll only be watching productions from those that deserve my hard earned money. Independent films, foreign (India etc).

I am the only one feeling this way ?

I go to work each day thankful that I have a job, that I am able to put food on the table, and pay my rent. Can't they be happy that they already have millions! they make more from one movie / album than most make in a lifetime (even in America). This insatiable desire for more, more more, I feel will be their downfall in the end.

thanks for tuning to to this test of the ranting session, now back to your regularly scheduled program.
You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. If you had your way, the studio execs/producers would make all of the money and creative artists would basically get the shaft.

I think the title of this article is misleading.
johannes is offline   0


 
MacRumors Forums > Archive > Archives of Old Posts > MacBytes.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Snapchat Updated with Text Messaging and Live Video Calls MacRumors iOS Blog Discussion 20 May 1, 2014 05:58 PM
How to cut video with VLC cpuin Mac Applications and Mac App Store 5 Apr 11, 2013 04:01 AM
Turning off video during phone calls? hakr100 iPhone Tips, Help and Troubleshooting 2 Apr 2, 2013 08:04 PM
Strange Skype 3D like video calls. freshe iOS 6 0 Sep 21, 2012 01:38 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:31 PM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps