Seems like a good day for a reminder of how quick studios are to screw over writers. In 1999, NBC moved a series from their regular network to Sci Fi Channel. My pay went from $240,000 to $0. Because my contract paid "per broadcast episode" instead of just "per episode."
'no use of material permitted outside of this compensation agreement, each violation occurrance to be compensated by 10.000.000 USD, which amount is to be index regulated from time of signature to time of payment'
IMO, it could be argued that each single use of a viewer using #VOD to watch one of your episodes is a "#broadcast".
Here is the #legal definition by one by one of the biggest legal databases in the west:
...You need to read it to the end (**= "check"; ♧♧= does not square):
"A broadcast is a copyright work which is electronic transmission of visual images, sounds or other information which is transmitted for simultaneousreception by members of the public and is capable of being lawfully received by them ♧or is transmitted at a time determined solely by the person making the presentation to members of the public♧.
"...work does not, however, include ♧any internet transmission♧ unless ♧it is a transmission taking place simultaneously on the internet and by other means, a concurrent transmission of a live event♧, or a transmission of recorded moving images or sounds forming part of a *programme service..."
"...offered by the person responsible for making the transmission, being a service in which programmes* are transmitted at ♧scheduled times determined by that person♧.
Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, s. 6"
So, if you has been in the #UK after 1988, it seems that by that definition you'd have lucked out when the technology changed from #NVOD to #VOD, b/c...
...then users decided exactly when to watch the show. 😞
US law seems to be outdated in contrast, if this is the whole story:
"#Broadcasting#Law and #Legal Definition
Pursuant to 47 #USCS § 153 (6), Title 47. Telegraphs, Telephones, and Radiotelegraphs; Chapter 5. [#Wire or Radio #Communication; General Provisions] the term #broadcasting means “the dissemination of radio communications intended to be received by the public, directly or by the..."
According to 37 #CFR 262.2 Title 37 Patents, [#Trademarks, and #Copyrights; Chapter II #CopyrightOffice, Library of Congress; Subchapter B Copyright Arbitration #Royalty Panel Rules and Procedures; Part 262 Rates and.."
(1) A simultaneous #Internet#transmissionor retransmission of an over-the-air terrestrial AM or FM radio broadcast >this would IMO apply for re-tuns of previously #broadcast episodes ;)], including one with previously..."
"...broadcast programming substituted for #programming for which requisite #licenses or clearances to transmit over the Internet have not been obtained Did your contract even include "new means of transmission, i. e. The [#internet; usually, all uses must be explicitly granted] and one with substitute advertisements, and
(2) An #InternetTransmission in accordance with 17 U.S.C. 114(d)(2)(C)(iii) of an archived #program, which program was..."
...you are probably not the only one (in some countries "standardized contracts" intended to repeatedly put the smaller party in a unfavorable position are null and void) you might give it a second try?
@Devilstower Loopholes and escape hatches in contracts like this that allow evasion of payment seem like a real problem.
I learned recently how residual incentives in contracts encourage networks like Netflix to mothball even popular shows or sell to another to avoid paying. That's a very customer-hostile, near-sighted approach but consumers don't have much leverage.
I worry that any contractual gains in residuals won't be realized in practice unless these loopholes are reigned in...
@axleyjc@Devilstower The worst part is that half the time those loopholes and escape hatches won’t actually stand up to scrutiny in court. If a show doesn’t broadcast and only goes to cable then maybe the value drops, but not to zero - no court would entertain that. But if you sue them, you’ll never work for them again - so it’s a dirty equation of getting your money vs. (lost) future earnings and not burning bridges in an industry with a handful of big players.
@Devilstower is that a play on cable not being broadcast because it does not go via RF frequencies? I'm not from US, so no idea what in SciFi is different.
@gunstick Yes, exactly. It's what the studios are doing now with streaming -- using a delivery medium change to make more money for themselves, while screwing creators.
Add comment