Writer's Guild Strike of 2023 - Fuck these people

[Mothra1988]

Many of the books in the bible were not written by the apostle they are attributed to. Over hundreds of years, random people would add their own shit onto the existing word of an apostle because that was the only way to have your ideas heard by a significant number of people. There weren't exactly copies laying around in abundance to compare to and there was no such thing as a copyright.

Also, many of those composers were known to steal the work of their proteges. But since there were no copyrights, it was the word of a famous composer vs. an intern basically.

Alternatively, you have no source for that, so maybe you're adding on your own bullshit to the reddit takes you heard about the Bible.

 

[Netizennameless]

Alternatively, you have no source for that, so maybe you're adding on your own bullshit to the reddit takes you heard about the Bible.

Not sure if I struck a nerve but it's retarded to attribute my sources to Reddit before even asking if I have sources.

https://www.thenotsoinnocentsabroad.com/blog/who-really-wrote-the-new-testament

Also it's been covered in theology classes for decades at this point. The idea that some people would add their own interpretation to the word of God should not surprise you, nor does it invalidate God or his teachings.

 

[dustbuster]

Religion is the accumulation of hundreds of generations of wisdom.
Clearly that would be aided by copyrighting the bible and punishing the shit out of any generation that attempted to add to it.

 

[Random Internet Person]

@Mukhrani reading your spiel, I think I can understand what you mean by copyright being necessary. Though I think in a lot of fanfiction circles, there is some “cream rises to the top”, at least in some fandom circles where a good work or author is talked about instead of “these characters bang #545” with the only difference being some kind of kink or fetish.

Also, for all the talk of copyright holders screwing with laws to keep those copyrights longer (looking at you, Disney), I can understand why they want to hold on to keep the whole market from being “Disney Princesses as chain smoking prostitutes that swear like sailors” or “Winnie the Pooh as a horror film”, or just things where you add one gimmick to public domain authors like “Pride and Prejudice and Zombies” or the many, MANY ways that cheaply do things like Shakespeare like the film Warm Bodies that’s just “Romeo and Juliet, except Romeo is a zombie”. Maybe there’s a way the copyright ownership structure can be reformed, but it’s not the worst thing in the world.

Did my condescending tone not highlight that I do not care what excuses you make for a legal structure created by the british crown to quash free expression?

We get it, you hate the government and their laws. And modernist things apparently.

People will pay and support something if they enjoy it and are promised more of it. If someone would rather take a copy that a friend makes for free instead of supporting the creator, then either the creator needs to provide a product or service the copiers can't, or those people would never have supported the creator in the first place.

You mean like Gabe Newell and Steam?

 

[Mukhrani]

Not sure if I struck a nerve but it's retarded to attribute my sources to Reddit before even asking if I have sources.

https://www.thenotsoinnocentsabroad.com/blog/who-really-wrote-the-new-testament

Also it's been covered in theology classes for decades at this point. The idea that some people would add their own interpretation to the word of God should not surprise you, nor does it invalidate God or his teachings.

In 1 Corinthians 7, Paul preaches that people should remain single. Why worry about procreation when the Rapture is going to happen any day?

Ascribing belief in the Rapture to Paul is idiotic. The rapture is a very unique, American evangelical religious belief. It's very niche, and very recent. In the ancient world there were people who believed in premillenialism, but they lived a couple centuries after the birth of Christ - the very sorts of people this guy is railing against and accusing of forgery! They were also non-dispensationalist - their belief in the rapture didn't have this bizarre Israel-centric obsession that the American Evangelical movement has. This dude is apparently a former evangelical, so he had that level of understanding of scripture to being with, then it looks like he hopped on the New Atheist 'debunked!' gravy train.

What do we know of Peter from the Bible? He was a fisherman from the town of Capernaum in Galilee. Archeological and historical records reveal that “Peter’s town was a backwoods Jewish village made up of hand-to-mouth laborers who did not have an education,” Ehrman writes. “Everyone spoke Aramic. Nothing suggests that anyone could speak Greek. Nothing suggests that anyone in town could write. As a lower-class fisherman, Peter would have started work as a young boy and never attended school.”

In fact, in Acts 4:13, Peter and his companion John are described as agrammatoi, a Greek word meaning “unlettered” — that is, illiterate.

There’s also the issue of timing. Tradition holds that Peter was martyred in Rome under Nero in 64 CE. But the author of 1 Peter alludes to Rome as “Babylon” — that is, the destroyer of Jerusalem and the Temple. The Romans didn’t destroy Jerusalem until 70 CE, six years after Peter died.

Peter founded the church of Antioch, and was Patriarch of that large, Greek city for almost a decade. This is elementary religious history, the fact that a 'Bible scholar' wouldn't mention it when discussing the ability of Peter to speak Greek indicates one of two things. Either:

1. He has less knowledge of Church history than some dude on the internet, which means he really shouldn't be calling himself a bible scholar.

2. He knows very well that this puts a big dent in his arguments. He is deliberately ignoring it in order to grift off of credulous manchildren, who are stuck in a perpetual 'FUCK YOU, DAD' state because they resent having been forced to go to church every Sunday.

 

[FuckMeGentlyWithAChainsaw]

Also, for all the talk of copyright holders screwing with laws to keep those copyrights longer (looking at you, Disney), I can understand why they want to hold on to keep the whole market from being “Disney Princesses as chain smoking prostitutes that swear like sailors”

You are literally describing porn parodies, which are abundant. Disney princesses come from the public domain anyway, so Disney isn't safeguarding anything, they are appropriating and then trying to cut off access to anyone else.
I also don't think a controlling estate is artistically useful. Tolkiens has allowed relatively little and there's still plenty of garbage in there. Meanwhile Lovecraft is public domain and while that means there are even more garbage adaptions, there is a lot of good stuff that wouldn't exist if they needed everything rubberstamped by an estate.

 

[Ralph Barnhardt]

The AMPTP broke the law by dumping their terms to the public...kinda...well maybe. One guy sorta thinks so

https://twitter.com/slack2thefuture/status/1694507288042811836

article he's quoting

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2023-08-23/writers-strike-studios-wga-talks-amptp-actors-strike

two exchanges I'd like to highlight

The AMPTP routinely ignore what's in their contracts. Routinely. So why doesn't the WGA sue?

lol

David Slack

who's own website lists his accomplishments as

TV writer/producer whose credits include Person of Interest, Teen Titans, Law & Order, Lie To Me, Jackie Chan Adventures, Dark Crystal. Currently writing on Magnum PI. Proud union member. Pro-Democracy. Anti-Evil.

and his first credits on IMDB are

is convinced that the AMPTP broke the law because he read it in the LA Times. I actually hope they did so this becomes a retarded legal issue that never gets figured out and keeps the strikers in limbo for years. Muddy the waters, writers. You are, after all, the heroes of your own story.

 

[Random Internet Person]

You are literally describing porn parodies, which are abundant. Disney princesses come from the public domain anyway, so Disney isn't safeguarding anything, they are appropriating and then trying to cut off access to anyone else.

Okay, maybe Disney was a bad example. I still think copyright will be held onto until death or legal Smackdown because the idea of not being able to control their product and how it’s portrayed makes them shit bricks.

I also don't think a controlling estate is artistically useful. Tolkiens has allowed relatively little and there's still plenty of garbage in there. Meanwhile Lovecraft is public domain and while that means there are even more garbage adaptions, there is a lot of good stuff that wouldn't exist if they needed everything rubberstamped by an estate.

I think that could be what people have said already: people who want the prestige of working on the IP (or the only ones willing to play by EVERY SINGLE ONE of the estate’s/rights holder’s rules) without real understanding of the source material if not outright hatred. Which is how a lot of the striking writers alienated potential supporters.

Meanwhile, I’d say the public domain could just be a thing where it’s just a matter of nobody getting real opportunities to do anything because studios are risk averse and will only do a straight doing a thing in the domain without any real imagination because they want their ROI.

At least with the public domain, there’ll be nobody stopping you from making “Frankenstein In Space” or “Hunchback of Notre Dame with Quasimodo as a ninja assassin” and SOMEBODY will want that shit. Right?

 

[Flaming Insignias]

At least with the public domain, there’ll be nobody stopping you from making “Frankenstein In Space” or “Hunchback of Notre Dame with Quasimodo as a ninja assassin” and SOMEBODY will want that shit. Right?

I will not lie, a space opera of Frankenstein would probably be better than half the shit made nowadays, especially if it is at least somewhat faithful to the original story. It's already considered to be science fiction, all you really have to do is implant the themes into the trappings of spacefaring stories and you have yourself a movie that at least some people will find interesting.

 

[GunCar Gary]

two exchanges I'd like to highlight

Kevin is pro abortion: You literally only want things that are in the studios' best interests: making great products.

why isn't that guy a writer? that's the best joke i've heard about the entertainment industry in a long time

 

[Alter Ego]

I must interrupt your dumb, tangential argument to bring an update on the actual matter at hand. As previously promised, the WGA provided further information on the state of negotiations in light of the AMPTP's released proposal:

https://www.wgacontract2023.org/announcements/negotiations-update-8-24-23

ANNOUNCEMENTS
Negotiations Update 8-24-23
As promised, here’s a more detailed explanation of where we are in the negotiations.
Thursday, August 24, 2023

Dear Members,

As promised, here’s a more detailed explanation of where we are in the negotiations:

On Friday, August 11th after 102 days on strike, the AMPTP gave us the counteroffer they publicized Tuesday night, August 22nd. The Guild responded with our own counterproposal on August 15th, and there were discussions about a few issues on Wednesday and Thursday last week. On Friday August 18th late afternoon, Carol brought us in for a session that lasted under ten minutes and consisted of the companies making two minor moves on TV issues.

On Monday, the call came to meet with Carol and four of the CEOs on Tuesday night, August 22nd with an indication the companies were finally ready to get serious about bargaining for a deal.

As we reported, the basic message of that meeting was that the companies’ first and only counteroffer to the WGA since the start of the strike, made 11 days before, was and had to be the basis for the only deal they were willing to make.

During the meeting with the CEOs, we spent two hours explaining that, though progress had been made, the language of the AMPTP’s offer was, as is typical of that body, a version of giving with one hand and taking back with the other.

We repeated what we have said since day one, that our demands come directly from the membership itself. They address the existential threats to the profession of writing and to our individual careers, all caused by changes to the business model implemented by the companies in the last seven to ten years. We stressed that we could not and would not pick and choose among those threats; that we have not struck for nearly four months to half-save ourselves, nor are we leaving any sector of this Guild unprotected when we return to work. We are willing to negotiate within these areas, but every existential issue must be met with a genuine solution.

At the end of the meeting, the companies told us they intended to go directly to our membership by releasing information on their August 11th proposal to the media “within the next 24 hours.” They released a six-page document 20 minutes after the meeting concluded.

This should be seen as what it is: simply a tactic in the middle of an ongoing negotiation.

We aren’t going to negotiate by press release, so won’t go through the AMPTP’s characterization of its August 11th proposal in detail, but here are some broad strokes that may already be apparent:

Many of the current deal points they have put forward—minimums, SVOD residuals, AVOD terms—are from a deal negotiated with the DGA more than 80 days ago.

Member power—the strike—forced the companies to negotiate on more issues than they were willing to as of May 1, but still in the typical AMPTP mode of seeming to give while limiting the actual gains. Here are a few examples of areas they’ve made proposals that are not yet good enough:

• In screen, they have proposed a second step but only for a statistically tiny category of screenwriters, excluding all but the first writers of original screenplays. They dismissed the concept of weekly pay.
• They have ceded selected—but insufficient—minimum terms for some—but not all-Appendix A writers in SVOD. For example, they would not cover anything but comedy-variety.
• In television, the companies have introduced the notion of an MBA guarantee of minimum staff size and duration. But the loopholes, limitations, and omissions in their modest proposal, too numerous to single out, make them effectively toothless.
• Teams of two writers would receive P&H contributions as individuals. But not teams of three or more.
• We have had real discussions and seen movement on their part regarding AI protections. But we are not yet where we need to be. As one example, they continue to refuse to regulate the use of our work to train AI to write new content for a motion picture.
• Finally, the companies say they have made a major concession by offering to allow six WGA staff to study limited streaming viewership data for the next three years, so we can return in 2026 to ask once again for a viewership-based residual. In the meantime, no writer can be told by the WGA about how well their project is doing, much less receive a residual based on that data.

The counteroffer is neither nothing, nor nearly enough. We will continue to advocate for proposals that fully address our issues rather than accept half measures like those mentioned above and other proposals not listed here.

One last reminder illustrates why the AMPTP’s current stance is irrational. As we have repeated from the first day of our first member meeting—and on every day of this strike--our demands are fair and reasonable, and the companies can afford them. Here is the cost to each company of our current asks on the table, including the addition of increased health funding to address the impact of the strike.

Weigh this against the cost of not making a deal: the cost to 11,500 writers; to actors, crews and drivers; to anyone who works in and around the business but is not on strike; to the economies of California and New York and everywhere film and television is made; to consumers, pension plans and other shareholders; and to the companies themselves. It makes no sense. And everybody but the AMPTP knows it.

In the last 36 hours the response from the membership is that you are undeterred by this latest tactic. Despite the AMPTP’s attempt at a detour around us, we remain committed to direct negotiations with the companies. That’s actually how a deal gets made and the strike ends. That will be good for the rest of the industry and the companies as well.

Until then, we will see you on the picket lines.

In solidarity.

WGA Negotiating Committee

 

[Mothra1988]

Not sure if I struck a nerve but it's retarded to attribute my sources to Reddit before even asking if I have sources.

https://www.thenotsoinnocentsabroad.com/blog/who-really-wrote-the-new-testament

Also it's been covered in theology classes for decades at this point. The idea that some people would add their own interpretation to the word of God should not surprise you, nor does it invalidate God or his teachings.

LOL this isn't a source that refutes any claims with veracity other than throwing shit at the wall with your typical, "Durr, the texts appear anonymous, so we'll never know, here is our own un-poven speculation." This is a click-bait blog article, you moron. I knew you were a reddit midwit, but this clinches it. Anyways, this is what you said:

Over hundreds of years, random people would add their own shit onto the existing word of an apostle because that was the only way to have your ideas heard by a significant number of people.

You have NO, NONE, NADA evidence of this, because it does not exist.

 

[Ralph Barnhardt]

I really like this line.

The counteroffer is neither nothing, nor nearly enough.

I have to assume the AMPTP knew this, offered it, and then made their bullshit offering public. They were mocking the writers between each other and now they're making their mockery open and in public.

One last reminder illustrates why the AMPTP’s current stance is irrational. As we have repeated from the first day of our first member meeting—and on every day of this strike--our demands are fair and reasonable, and the companies can afford them.

I could buy that the media companies could afford to staff a writers' room of a dozen people for every project but why in the world would they hobble themselves with increasingly useless baggage who make write increasingly worthless shit? Couple that with the writers demands of weekly pay and you got yourself a real money pit.

Here is the cost to each company of our current asks on the table, including the addition of increased health funding to address the impact of the strike.

Does anybody have any idea where the WGA even got their numbers for their nifty graph that even they say is exaggerated? Also lol "pay me extra health care because I'm really stressed out because of the strike!" I'm being really mean with that characterization but I don't know how else to read it. I'm really wanting this to be death by a thousand cuts for both sides.

 

[FuckMeGentlyWithAChainsaw]

At least with the public domain, there’ll be nobody stopping you from making “Frankenstein In Space” or “Hunchback of Notre Dame with Quasimodo as a ninja assassin” and SOMEBODY will want that shit. Right?

Sometimes these crazy pitches can turn out really good. How about “Hunchback of Notre Dame, but as a Disney musical"? Or "Hamlet, but everyone is lions"?

 

[Random Internet Person]

Sometimes these crazy pitches can turn out really good. How about “Hunchback of Notre Dame, but as a Disney musical"? Or "Hamlet, but everyone is lions"?

You’re not wrong, but I have my doubts that studios are willing to gamble on crazy pitches now as they were 30 years ago.

 

[Mukhrani]

One last reminder illustrates why the AMPTP’s current stance is irrational. As we have repeated from the first day of our first member meeting—and on every day of this strike--our demands are fair and reasonable, and the companies can afford them. Here is the cost to each company of our current asks on the table, including the addition of increased health funding to address the impact of the strike.

Super scummy to use 'revenue' as the percentage. Revenue is the total income, not income minus losses (profits). A decent profit margin is like 10%. Any changes would be on top of existing costs. Also what's that * bullshit about the bottom line? Aren't those budgets included in the company's ultimate bottom line?

 

[Netizennameless]

LOL this isn't a source that refutes any claims with veracity other than throwing shit at the wall with your typical, "Durr, the texts appear anonymous, so we'll never know, here is our own un-poven speculation." This is a click-bait blog article, you moron. I knew you were a reddit midwit, but this clinches it. Anyways, this is what you said:

So more emotional outburst with nothing to support your point of view. Okay then. If you had bothered to read the article, you'd see it cited actual published works. I'd have respect for your point of view if you had bothered to read it and explain what specifically you disagree with.

You have NO, NONE, NADA evidence of this, because it does not exist.

Here is more evidence you're going to ignore without reading:

https://zondervanacademic.com/blog/who-wrote-gospels

But let's take your logic at face value: if the evidence doesn't exist, that would mean you don't actually know that the books of the bible were written by the apostles. There's no evidence to prove it. By your own logic your conclusion is bullshit.

But since there is "no evidence", let's just use our brains for a minute: What's more likely?
A) Over more than two thousand years, every scribe who ever copied the bible perfectly transcribed the words and works of the apostles, translated them across multiple languages and didn't add anything of their own to help "clarify" or "clear up" any confusions that might have existed
B) At some point during the 2000+ year history of Christianity, before there was an organized compilation of the Christian beliefs, some adherents to that religion added or removed elements to suit their own worldly views.

Super scummy to use 'revenue' as the percentage. Revenue is the total income, not income minus losses (profits). A decent profit margin is like 10%. Any changes would be on top of existing costs. Also what's that * bullshit about the bottom line? Aren't those budgets included in the company's ultimate bottom line?

It's even worse in the case of companies like Amazon and Disney, where they take the revenue of the entire company and not the media divisions.

 

[dustbuster]

Super scummy to use 'revenue' as the percentage. Revenue is the total income, not income minus losses (profits).

Anyone not demanding a % of the gross revenue in a negotiation with a soulless corpo is fucking insane.
If you accept a % of the net profit you will end up having to pay them after they twist their books into pretzels to claim a loss despite huge windfall profits.

 

[Mothra1988]

I'd have respect for your point of view if you had bothered to read it and explain what specifically you disagree with.

All you did was post some click-bait article, and say there, you go read it, because you can't pull out individual citations that prove this false premise because they don't exist:

Many of the books in the bible were not written by the apostle they are attributed to. Over hundreds of years, random people would add their own shit onto the existing word of an apostle because that was the only way to have your ideas heard by a significant number of people. There weren't exactly copies laying around in abundance to compare to and there was no such thing as a copyright.

Again no evidence this statement is true will ever be posted by you, because it doesn't exist.

Here is more evidence you're going to ignore without reading:
https://zondervanacademic.com/blog/who-wrote-gospels

Repeating the exact same play again, posting a random blog post and saying, "There go read it," is not a debate point, mr. redditor. You're not even bothering to quote specific claims, you just think posting a link is enough work, because you don't have any idea what the fuck you are talking about and can't introduce facts into a debate on your own like a rational person would.

But let's take your logic at face value: if the evidence doesn't exist, that would mean you don't actually know that the books of the bible were written by the apostles. There's no evidence to prove it. By your own logic your conclusion is bullshit.

Your claim was you KNOW the Bible was falsified and added onto by many randos over time. This is your claim. You have no evidence for this at all. Changing it to me having to prove the classically attributed authors or their scribes wrote them is changing the terms of the debate because you're losing. Note, there's more ancient sources attributing that through Christianity's history like people like Irenaus who lived in the second century (See that's not hard is it? I named and actual original source! lol) as opposed to your 2018 blog posts.

But since there is "no evidence", let's just use our brains for a minute: What's more likely?
A) Over more than two thousand years, every scribe who ever copied the bible perfectly transcribed the words and works of the apostles, translated them across multiple languages and didn't add anything of their own to help "clarify" or "clear up" any confusions that might have existed

The textual history of the Bible is actually extremely well known. No, there weren't sudden huge revisions. Yes, there were a very few number of minor scribal errors and minor tinkerings, but those are well known and have been removed in most versions of the Bible now in print. The fact you don't know this is pathetic when you're going around making ridiculous pronouncements like the one you made in this thread. Yes, we know all these answers, Bible translations are done from the original Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic. We know all these things. This isn't like the Qurarn where they burned every other version, we have ancient manuscripts like the Dead Sea Scrolls, etc.

B) At some point during the 2000+ year history of Christianity, before there was an organized compilation of the Christian beliefs, some adherents to that religion added or removed elements to suit their own worldly views.

Are you so insane that you think there was 2000 years before an "organized compilation of Christian beliefs." Wow, dude, that's pretty fucking retarded. The Torah was canonized in 6th century BC. The first standardized versions of the New Testament date to 2nd century, and the were all obviously in circulation including in compiled form before that. Yes, certain super early chruches may have preferred Matthew or Luke, etc, but that's not a contradiction since those are included in the canonized Bible.

 

[Anonitolia]

can you guys please take this discussion somewhere else so we can keep laughing at the strikers without interruption