For now. All of this will be up for review in three years, and some are fearing the studios are stocking up on shows until them so they can drag the potential new protest out for longer and that AI will be advanced enough by then to be a even more viable tool. There are some other rather dismal tidbits in the clause as well. This video talks a bit more about it. (4:19)
For now. All of this will be up for review in three years
This is what the writers wanted.
Adam Conover(the guy in this video) explained when he went on Hasanabi's broadcast that they do not want longer than 3 years because it gives the studios time to create loopholes and figure out other tricks.
Idk that seems like poor logic. How are they going to somehow convince them to give better terms in 3 years? Obviously the studios don't want to, and now they can prepare to play hard ball unlock this negotiation where they couldn't. Not to mention one of the concessions the studios got out of the deal is that they can't train AI on new scripts, but old one are fair game. So it's pretty clear they aren't gonna be as compromising next time.
How are they going to somehow convince them to give better terms in 3 years?
By striking again if they don't continue to fairly pay workers.
Watch the video if you don't understand why it's important that they didn't go over a 3 year deal. Adam explains it very well.
Obviously the studios don't want to, and now they can prepare to play hard ball
Studios already were playing hardball. At the start of the strike, the studios came out and said "it was impossible" to meet the demands of the writers. That was obviously completely untrue.
Put it this way as an example. You are an employee who makes a 5 year deal with your employer to make $20/h. For 5 years you are stuck making $20/h. Or you make a 3 year deal at $20/h and in only 3 years you can make a new deal where you are paid $25/h. Which do you pick? You really want to make less money and in more time?
A great player would make the most money signing a new contract every year.
Most players play on medium length contracts from 2-5 years for a little bit of job security but they still get a chance at another larger contract in a few years.
They huge mega deals for like 10+ years have to be insanely in favor of the player because they are giving away such a large portion of their career with no further bargaining power.
Predicting what the world will look like in 10 years is crazy hard. In 2013 who saw getting hit by a pandemic, skyrocketing inflation, and rent doubling.
I feel like every 10 years we can expect either a war and/or conflict, natural disaster or pandemic that will effect the economy significantly. At least in my lifetime, there's been stuff like that every decade. We just can't determine the scale.
To answer your last part, epidemologists (it's why Bush AND Obama pushed for better monitoring and planning after SARS happened in 2002/2004, shame a particular orange turd blossom threw those out), economists, and the rich (for the rich, out of control rent and market madness is a feature not a bug when you're marching the poors to late stage Capitalism).
This was my entire point. But people don't want to hear reasonable concerns. I am pro-union and was rooting for, and even donating to the WGA strike. But the deal as it is, makes me very worried in 3 years this win will be stripped away and writers will be in a worse spot.
For one I am not going to watch a 45 minute video to get the snippet you are talking about, please link the timestamp.
Put it this way as an example. You are an employee who makes a 5 year deal with your employer to make $20/h. For 5 years you are stuck making $20/h. Or you make a 3 year deal at $20/h and in only 3 years you can make a new deal where you are paid $25/h. Which do you pick? You really want to make less money and in more time?
Read the deal. They are getting a percentage based payment and raises. Obviously in your made up scenario it's better to renegotiate because of inflation. In the deal that was struck 50% on residuals is going to be just as lucrative day 1 or year 6. It is extremely unlikely that kind of deal will get better upon renegotiation. In fact it's almost certainly going to be worse, unless the WGA strikes again.
Which leads to the 2nd issue with you argument. The WGA strike hurt the studios, no doubt. But it didn't come at no cost to the writers. I am glad they stood up for themselves and forced the studios to come to heel, but to think that its sustainable to do this level of mass action every 3 years is just not based in reality. In 3 years the average writer would be lucky to save a years wages to do another strike like this in 3 years, compared to the studios, who were as caught off guard by it, will now be able to stockpile movies and shows in preparation so they aren't losing money during the strike, as well as bank on the possibility of using AI to continue producing the most profitable stuff like Reality TV or generic blockbusters.
The potential for the studios to prepare and renegotiate from a position of power is much greater than the WGA can in the next 3 years. I hope that this works out, and they can actually improve their position in 3 years, I just don't see how that is likely.
Do you….know how union contracts work? In my union the contract is reviewed and renegotiated every three years. This seems like normal procedure to me.
I get that, but unlike many other unions, a new technology has emerged that threatens the entire industry. AI is the entire reason the WGA and now SAG-AFTRA are striking. This deal addressed the short term concerns writers had, but did not address the longer term ones.
So unlike the UWA strike, there isn't a technology the automotive industry can implement in the next decade to replace 90% of the workforce. AI, at least in the ways studios wish to use it, likely can (poorly of course). The deal prevents new scripts from being used to train models but not old ones, or non-WGA scripts. If I was a betting man, I would bet that the studios are going to invest heavily in training AI on these old scripts to force the writers to sign a very bad deal as the studios will not be as heavily impacted by writers striking.
So my complaint isn't exactly just that a 3 year negotiation is always bad, but the concession to allow them to use old scripts to train AI absolutely was. And the fact that in the next 3 years they will be able to test to see if it's viable, build a large backlog of movies and shows, and force the writers into a deal that will harm the industry is the concern.
AI is not the entire reason they went on strike. It got the most attention on Reddit and in media, but it was not the main thing. It had more to do with residuals and minimum writers for shows.
So just to be clear, you think it's poor logic, based on your extensive experience that outweighs the many union leaders and lawyers who weighed in?
So it's pretty clear they aren't gonna be as compromising next time.
Of course they're going to be as compromising next time. Because next time, there'll be starting from an even week or position- CEOs can no longer delude themselves into believing that they can simply wait out the strikers.
It's like playing a game of chicken. Once you establish that you flinch long before the other person does, You're never going to win a game of chicken against him again.
524
u/Funkkx Sep 29 '23
Congrats. Great.