The sorry state of streaming residuals shows why SAG and the WGA are striking.

  • MxM111@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    63
    arrow-down
    74
    ·
    1 year ago

    Warning: unpopular opinion here.

    From the article:

    That means that despite the show being a resurgent hit, there were no big secondary payouts.

    So, I am an engineer/scientist. Products that I have developed/contributed to development are used by billions of people. Most likely you, the reader of this comment are using it right now, because some of the products I worked on are telecom products, that are widely used to transfer information.

    The amount of secondary payouts I receive is EXACTLY ZERO.

    My honest question is, why those writers should be any different? They should be paid when they make their products, according to the contract they signed. But why many think they entitled to something more?

    And no, I do not think that argument “but it is difficult work, it is not constant” works here. There are lots of difficult, non-constant, seasonal, whatever jobs there that pay even less.

    • alienanimals@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      156
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      Crab in a bucket mentality.

      “I don’t receive residuals, so why should these writers? The executives are entitled to all the profit.”

      • yiliu@informis.land
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        37
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        1 year ago

        If all us engineers got paid every time our code was used, the Internet as it exists would be absurdly expensive. Really, it couldn’t exist. Thank god engineers don’t have the same “I need to be paid every time something I created is used by anybody” mentality. You’re building on the work of millions of people before you, you owe it to others to contribute (and make a living in the process).

        Of course, the industries are different in important ways. But you should be able to explain the differences, not just wave them away with “ur just jelly lol”

        IMHO, copyright and IP law is ridiculously protective. People should get a few years to benefit from their creations, then they should be public domain. This lifetime-plus-70-years bullshit is stupid. Companies are exploiting those stupid laws to milk us on every platform for decades with each media artifact, and artists and writers just want to get a cut of the action. IMHO, it’s the wrong fight, and I can’t really support them in it: “give writers a share of the rent you milk from us” is not a cause I wanna get behind.

          • yiliu@informis.land
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            No, they shouldn’t be profiting from rent on IP any more than anybody else does. The government should make some major changes to intellectual property law to stop that.

            Anyway…do sales & marketing people get paid an unreasonable amount? Are they rolling in cash while writers suffer? Seems to me that most the marketing people I’ve met in my life were just getting along like everybody else. They don’t seem like the right people to be angry at.

            • InverseParallax@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              10
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              You worked in a shitty industry, I’m in the valley and the marketing guys make top bank, I was a Sr principal at one of the biggies and they blow me out of the water.

              Sales is often on a different level, commission is incredible.

              Where do you think the money is going?

              • Gsus4@feddit.nl
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                I was reading a book on this recently and it had a good reason for why some departments get all the money and some don’t. Imagine you have a market that is saturated with products, you decided you can and want to buy, but can’t choose. In that case, sales/marketing is what brings in the most money, so they have the most power and get paid accordingly.

                Now imagine the post-war booming economy where every car made gets sold and cars are fairly established as a product. Sales and engineering performance are not that important, but financial departments grew immensely, because the competition was on optimizing, cost-cutting, investment and consolidation.

                Last example: new industry, still figuring out the best methods, newest products and killer apps: engineering has the most power.

                Given the economy we’re in right now, where money is tight, new products outside the AI hype/boom are going to be companies fighting to sell you their product, so marketing is winning right now, but it may change.

                • InverseParallax@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Easier answer: social skills + their whole job is ass-kissing, they get very good at it.

                  Imagine how good engineers could be if they didn’t have to waste all their time doing actual work.

                  • Gsus4@feddit.nl
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Yes, that same book also talked about how success and pay is only 5% performance and the rest is self promotion and sucking up…that helps put a lot of life in perspective

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              The estimated total pay for a Marketing Executive at Walt Disney Company is $106,208 per year.

              https://www.glassdoor.com/Salary/Walt-Disney-Company-Marketing-Executive-Salaries-E717_D_KO20,39.htm

              The estimated total pay for a Writer at Walt Disney Company is $69,619 per year. This number represents the median, which is the midpoint of the ranges

              https://www.glassdoor.com/Salary/Walt-Disney-Company-Writer-Salaries-E717_D_KO20,26.htm

              Disney pays higher than average. Writers can get paid a hell of a lot less. And it’s often only a part-time job that lasts only a few weeks or months a year.

              So yeah, I’d say the marketing executives get paid an unreasonable amount compared to the writers who actually make a huge contribution to creating the product.

        • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          Copyright law is ridiculously protective. You can thank Disney, the corporation, for that. The original law said 30 years. That was enough for the creator to make a career being creative. Micky would look a whole lot different by this point.

        • Zalack@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Why shouldn’t we, as engineers, be entitled to a small percentage of the profits that are generated by our code? Why are the shareholders entitled to it instead?

          I worked in Hollywood before becoming a programmer, and even as a low level worker, IATSE still got residuals from union shows that went to our healthcare and pension funds. My healthcare was 100% covered by that fund for a top-of-the-line plan, and I got contributions to both a pension AND a 401K that were ON TOP of my base pay rather than deducted from it.

          Lastly, we were paid hourly, which means overtime, but also had a weekly minimum. Mine was 50 hours. So if I was asked to work at all during a week I was entitled to 50 hours of pay unless I chose to take days off myself.

          Unions fucking rock and software engineers work in a field that is making historic profits off of our labor. We deserve a piece of that.

        • Ready! Player 31@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          I guess it depends right? If a show or movie or other piece of art continues to bring income in, where does that money go? Particularly when the team that created it have effected disbanded and therefore aren’t technically on the same payroll that income is arriving on. I would argue it should not solely go to the owners of that production house.

          Residuals makes sense in a way that doesn’t really apply to engineering because typically engineers will remain at a company and their continued employment is how they continue to gain income from their work.

          You could maybe say an actual equivalent would be engineers getting shares in their company, which would function the same as residuals. I think that is a more apt comparison.

          • AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I think the shares in a company thing is a good comparison, because I went to university at a place that churns out a lot of grads who found or work for startups. It’s a minefield because often the reason early employees get paid in partly in shares is because they couldn’t afford to pay them the “true amount” upfront.

    • downpunxx@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      75
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You get what you demand, and what you bargain for, which is why they are now on strike. You valued your knowledge, experience, and expertise in telcom, in different ways, and less over the long term, than workers in the entertainment industry, who, for the majority of the entertainment industry’s existence, have been taken advantage of by the producers of that entertainment. You decided to work for a salary and benefits, and got yours upfront, their industry works a different way as a result of historically predatory entertainment industry practices.

    • Squizzy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      55
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      You should also be paid more, you have been instrumental in creating billions in wealth for people who cannot do what you can do, you should get more.

    • min_fapper@iusearchlinux.fyi
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      49
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Like others have said, this is the wrong mentality. Instead of asking “why should they get it when I don’t?”, You should simply be asking “why don’t I get it?”

      Turning us against each other is how the ruling elite stay in power. 💪

      • blanketswithsmallpox@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        What’s he’s saying is those ruling class shouldn’t be getting it either because it’s a silly concept lol.

        Road crews don’t get paid from tolls. Power plants don’t get paid beaucoup. Etc. Etc.

        The root issue is the company profiting endlessly or simply not paying appropriate wages. IP law absolutely needs to change.

        Melancholy Elephants is a great Hugo Award winning short story about this train of thought.

    • cbarrick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      1 year ago

      My honest question is, why those writers should be any different?

      So I am also an engineer. Products that I have developed/contributed to development are used by millions of people. (I’m being a bit cheeky here by copying you, but this is true of me too.)

      The compensation packages of engineers are wildly different than that of writers because our jobs are steady.

      The compensation structure of writers is designed to carry them between shows when they are not making any money. They also need excess cash to fund retirement savings, insurance, and other benefits because they are unemployed for long and unpredictable stretches.

      The residuals system was designed to address this very specific structure of the writing profession. As engineers, we don’t have these wildly unsteady employment schedules, so the residuals system is not warranted in our profession.

      Your experience as an engineer/scientist is valid, but you have to understand how wildly different writing is as a career path, and how compensation packages are different out of necessity.

      And no, I do not think that argument “but it is difficult work, it is not constant” works here. There are lots of difficult, non-constant, seasonal, whatever jobs there that pay even less.

      Sure, industries like retail, tourism, and food service have similar weaknesses, but those industries are unskilled. Writing is highly skilled labor. WGA members are responsible for writing the most valuable media on the planet, American film and television.

      The distinction between writing and these other industries can be measured in dollars.

      • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Sure, industries like retail, tourism, and food service have similar weaknesses, but those industries are unskilled.

        I understand what you are trying to say, but no they really aren’t. They require a very different skill set than being an engineer or a doctor, but I guarantee that you do not have the skills that I do with knives, playing with fire, and making knives. I know this because an engineer doesn’t have the time to spend 20 years working as a cook/chef, and 2 as an apprentice blacksmith. That being said, I’m useless if you hand me math above pre-calculus. I can remember algebra and pre-calc, but I don’t remember calculus any more.

        There’s no job that is “easy.” In all actuality the lower the pay, the harder the job is to do. There are very few exceptions to this rule.

        I took hard jobs because I’m a pyromaniac and so I made that work for me. Cooking and blacksmithing are just playing with fire.

        • cbarrick@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Smithing is definitely skilled labor. It’s the classic example of an artisan.

          But work in most of the food service industry (front and back) is unskilled. And by “most” I mean things like fast food, cafeterias, diners, chain restaurants etc. In all of these cases, you can hire Joe Shmoe off the street to wait tables.

          Fine dining is a special case. Obviously you need significant skill/training to be the chef at a Michelin star restaurant, for example.

          And I’m not saying that unskilled labor is easy. It’s not. I spent a decade in food service as an unskilled laborer (mostly fast food and cafeterias). It’s exhausting and difficult. And I’m not saying that unskilled labor is undeserving of a living wage. What I am saying is that the labor pool for unskilled work is much much larger, so it’s near impossible for that kind of worker to demand residuals or equity in the same way as an engineer or screen writer.

    • matter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s because of people like you that scientists get treated like crap. You also deserve to get paid for the things you create.

    • 1stTime4MeInMCU@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t have an answer but I don’t necessarily agree either. However I updooted because it’s interesting discussion and you were nice about it.

    • cbarrick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Another counter argument:

      Residuals are analogous to equity in the tech industry.

      You almost certainly received part of your compensation as stock or stock options. You can hold onto your shares and receive dividends long after you have left the company you contributed to.

      Residuals are like equity in a movie or film, rather than a company.

    • Magrath@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      As the other poster stated, you get what you negotiate for. If you don’t negotiate for those secondary payments then you don’t get them. It’s right to argue when it’s “right or wrong” for those payments but you can argue whether it’s fair.

      The corporations take on the risk but when it pays the payout isn’t fairly distributed. It unfairly goes to the top players who didn’t take any risk on because they are seperate from the corporation.

      Also just because you don’t get any doesn’t mean nobody else should. You can try and negotiate that with your employer if you want. If you keep that mentality then you’re only bringing everyone else down to your level. We should be elevating each other. That mentality is just jealousy and it will keep you where you are.

      • Evil_Shrubbery@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Sure, but when the risks the capital takes are so low & long-term as in showbusiness (everything got consolidated af), and the payouts so huge compared to cost (especially excluding like top 5 most payed ppl on the project) … you might think that the negotiations weren’t made fairly on equal grounds.

        Otherwise, if there were meaningful risks, the corps would have no problem sharing (=lowering) that risk at least with immediate stakeholders/workers. I bet most writers would take minimal or no pay to get in on the profits (that can last decades). Most writers work on several projects a year so so if business risks would be actually important, lowering them via lower initial costs for shared uncertain future profits would be a win-win scenario.

    • offbyone@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think you’re missing a detail here, which is that before streaming was a thing writers would make significant amounts of their money by getting a show syndicated on a network, that was the whole deal. Streaming is being treated differently, effectively resulting in then receiving a very large pay cut because even if they make a successful show the payout doesn’t come.

      And it’s true they could structure things so that they don’t receive a secondary payout, but their base salary was negotiated with that later payout in mind. You and I don’t receive secondary payouts for our work, but our salary is also adjusted to recognize that.

    • TerryMathews@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      So, I am an engineer/scientist. Products that I have developed/contributed to development are used by billions of people. Most likely you, the reader of this comment are using it right now, because some of the products I worked on are telecom products, that are widely used to transfer information.

      You’re an employee, actors are (generally) independent contractors so the comparison breaks down. Most people who don’t understand the situation have been making this comparison.

      The closer analogy for you would be if you, as an independent engineer, created a library that Oracle licensed instead of bought. Something they are bundling into their latest database server.

      Should you, as a developer, take less per unit because Oracle starts selling through a new channel? Say the Windows app store instead of through their website directly?

      I mean, it’s ok if you feel like that’s ok but I don’t think most people would agree with you when they really understand what’s going on.

      The unions gave the studios a sweetheart deal in the infancy of streaming so that it wouldn’t smother in the crib. Now that it’s profitable, don’t the artists and writers deserve the same level of compensation for streaming as they get through other channels? Not more, just the same.

    • ScrivenerX@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Who is getting money from your work? Do they deserve it? More than you?

      Having the good fortune to have money earlier shouldn’t entitle someone to more money later. Investors are important, but shouldn’t be allowed to have all of the benefit.

    • Copernican@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Do you get stock RSU, Stock options, or other in incentive for general success? For writers residuals are more directly tied to their work. And there’s a bit of a difference in terms of residuals being understood as part of the upfront contract risk/reward.

    • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I worked on products that many Lemmy users are using to read and post. I don’t expect residuals because that’s not how my industry was built / ever worked.

      Writers are in an industry that previously paid them every time their work made money. That’s the difference.

    • Evil_Shrubbery@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Bcs taking someone’s work & capitalize on it just because the original worker didn’t have the means to do so … some people might see as immoral in a lot of cases.

      One of the cornerstones of capitalism tho.

      Also note the huge difference scales, bcs it matters a lot: if you sell a peace of tech, or business, or property at fair price (like dcf or whatever), then you already got compensated justly or as close to that as possible with the information available at the time. But if you were forced to sell at an arbitrary fixed rate bcs the buyer forced you into it from their position of power over you (and made a huge profit in a short amount of time from that) … you might feel different about the situation.

      Like, even your, if you would be able to get secondly payouts, would you not collect them?

      Also, if the negotiations & payout would be fair, the strike would not make financial sense for any party, or have an effect on the business.

    • Dukeofdummies@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Well what jobs are you thinking about?

      • farmhand fits your description, but they pay less because they don’t need skilled workers, anybody with a working body can do it. Can’t just drag in a random guy to do your writing, acting, or VFX.
    • sadreality@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Bootlicker spotted…

      Don’t ask why they should be getting pay pay outs… Ask why you aren’t!

    • InverseParallax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m an engineer too.

      You’re an idiot, we should get paid more, the money goes to the moron marketing druids, not the ones who actually make/patent things like us.

      You don’t seem smart enough to be a very good engineer, but then again you typed this almost certainly using tech I worked on.

      • cantstopthesignal@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Engineers are absolutely the shittest negotiators. They bring so much fucking value and are happy to get a mug and a pat on the back for inventing something that makes a company millions. Compare that to sales where often the top performer can make close to the CEOs pay.

      • Zeth0s@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I am not that guy, but this is not how science work. Science and engineering are the product, and scientists and engineers do it as writers do it…

        They are absolutely comparable

          • Zeth0s@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            A lot of people kwows how to write. Less people know how to use autocad.

            As said it looks like you don’t have a clear idea how science and engineering work.

            “Someone else’s idea” is the idea of scientists and engineers. They are the people who have the ideas, design products and implement ideas. Products are created by them. There is no suit who come up with ideas, and you cannot replace scientists and engineers with suits. Considering them as easily replaceable is the way companies fail. This is the reason their contracts come with more perks and benefits than other positions. You could compare them to writers, directors and crew members in a movie. What science and tech are missing are actors. The 2 guys you mentioned are more comparable to actors than writers.

            That said, scientist and engineers deserve a piece of long term profits of the products they contributed creating, similarly as writers. Unfortunately they don’t have strong unions as writers… But they should

      • Zeth0s@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I am not that guy, but this is not how science work. Science and engineering are the product, and scientists and engineers do it as writers do it…

        They are absolutely comparable.

        Actors would be a stretched comparison, but writers… It’s a pretty good one

    • Parabola@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      22
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ooh boy you’re gonna get the “anyone rich is evil give me free stuff because you have more” mob all animated.

      But you’re right. They have a contracted rate to do a job (good or bad, fair or not). It makes for a flashy headline to say “look what the downstream revenue was”.

      • echo64@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Only 14% of SAG members made enough money this year to get health insurance. Similar is true for the WGA. The low income economy that industry is fueled by only ever worked because of the residual system.

        Okay you weren’t picked for any shows the past three months but that’s okay because your residuals cover rent and health insurance.

        Not anymore, because the streamers refuse to pay residuals.

        You couldn’t make a less informed comment about this affair if you tried, really. There was an existing system, companies took advantage of a loophole in that system to profit more and give execs massive pay days whilst giving the people who did all the work nothing, and now the people who did all the work are refusing to work until they get paid again.

        I don’t know what people like you are hoping to achieve here other than demonstrate a profound level of dumbassary.

      • Fapper_McFapper@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Instead of making up a scenario in your head and then getting riled up over it, why don’t you read the level headed and educated responses that have been written?