His argument is simple. Studios aren't making money from online distribution so neither should the writers. However, that logic doesn't hold up very well to scrutiny. Unlike the studios, writers don't finance television shows or movies. Both the risk and reward go primarily to studios and networks. Also, it seems unlikely that actors or directors would be incliined to reduce their pay simply because the studio hasn't established a good revenue stream from internet delivery. The writers just happen to rely more heavily on royalties than others in Hollywood, so it makes them an easier target.
However, he's also critical of studios that he says have hyped the success of internet delivery to the point where most people think they're more profitable than they really are. He said "It's a double-edged sword. The studios deserve what they're getting, because they've been announcing how great (the Internet) is. But then they open their books."
His final jab was reserved for Apple, whom he believes shares some blame for online revenue problems. He says that the studios "make deals with Steve Jobs, who takes them to the cleaners. They make all these kinds of things, and who's making money? Apple! They should get a piece of Apple. If I was a union, I'd be striking up wherever he is."
For anyone who's followed the saga of NBC Universal's very public split with iTunes over TV show pricing that's a familliar complaint. But it doesn't seem to hold much water either. Television sales have always been a direct result of programming, but networks have never gotten a cut of their profits. If the industry doesn't like Apple's model they can do what NBCU did and create their own content delivery Channel. There's no law guaranteeing automatic revenue for Hollywood. They have to run their businesses correctly just like everyone else.
Source: CNet News
Written by: Rich Fiscus @ 8 Nov 2007 10:18
