The message below went out from AFTRA’s leadership to its membership just now. In my opinion, it sure looks as if the union is preparing members for a major cave-in on the clips issue. But I must say that hiding behind a Los Angeles Times opinion piece is ridiculous to the extreme. When it comes to clips and their use and compensation for actors, the issue is not so much the Internet but the fact that the studios and networks want to make free and unfettered use of clips for any purpose, including commercial entertainment compilations for which only their Big Media companies would benefit financially. SAG recognizes that any breach in the wall around clips is a disaster. There is no way actors should cave on this just so retiring AMPTP prez Nick Counter can have a last hurrah at their expense.
May 25, 2008
Dear AFTRA Member:For more than two weeks, your Primetime Negotiating Committee has been working hard to achieve significant gains in wages and working conditions for AFTRA members who work under our contract covering primetime network dramatic programs (Exhibit A of the AFTRA Network Television Code). Here is where things currently stand.
Our talks with the employers have been both constructive and productive, and your committee remains committed to reaching a fair agreement with the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP). To that end, I can report that we are prepared to bargain continuously, for as long as it takes, including working straight through the Memorial Day Weekend.
Based on our experience in this year’s AFTRA Network Code talks — as well as that of the DGA and WGA in their respective negotiations earlier in the year — we went into this round of collective bargaining knowing we would be confronted with some very challenging issues. This is why we felt it was so important for negotiations over actors’ contracts to begin sooner rather than later, and why we worked so hard to make that happen.
It’s also why we are taking a business-like approach to negotiations. We face a formidable adversary across the table. While we appreciate the challenges the companies face as a result of new technology and fragmenting audiences, our concern is performers’ well-being. Your committee is smart and well-educated about both the issues we’re confronting and what we’re dealing with. So ignore the grandstanding rhetoric — your committee understands what is at stake. We all depend on these contracts for our livelihoods, and your committee is completely focused on improving them and the lives of all working performers.
In this spirit, I want to note that the AFTRA Negotiating Committee is grateful for the input of SAG staff observers, and the other union observers, all of whom were extended the same invitation and courtesy that the SAG Negotiating Committee extended to the AFTRA observers during the SAG talks. We also intend to brief SAG on our talks with the AMPTP before SAG resumes its negotiations with employers.
Your committee’s priority is to get the best possible contract that protects actors. As I’ve mentioned in previous updates, in addition to seeking improvements in compensation, coverage, and health and retirement benefits, we are also confronting a number of tough challenges involving New Media. Because many of the issues we face in this area are completely unprecedented — most notably, the knotty problem of clip consent — we are trying to think out of the box in order to reach pragmatic resolutions. An editorial in Friday’s Los Angeles Times noted that rather than recoiling from new technology, the entire industry must seize the opportunities presented by the Internet. The Times suggested that performers need to “focus as much on protecting income streams as images, because the latter is simply beyond their control in the Internet era. That doesn’t mean giving carte blanche to any use of clips. But it does mean shifting from a self-protective crouch into a more market-oriented stance.” To this end, AFTRA is focused on working with employers to find a creative solution that will protect our members’ images while at the same time encouraging the growth of the new market.
On a final note, I want to report that AFTRA members ratified the Sound Recordings Code on Friday. This national contract covers royalty artists and session singers who work with more than 1,200 recording companies, including the four major labels — EMI, Sony BMG, Universal Music Group, and Warner — and most of their subsidiary labels. The agreement is a great step forward for AFTRA recording artists and singers as it provides increased compensation and benefits for recordings in both physical and digital formats.
I am hopeful that we will soon reach a similarly groundbreaking agreement for primetime that will once again include significant gains for working performers.
In solidarity,
ROBERTA REARDON
AFTRA National President
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.


I hate to say it, but AFTRA (soon to be followed by SAG) have only themselves to blame.
The differences between them should have been settled years before this contract negotiation started. They way things were handled were a terrible sign of weakness that the AMPTP pounced on like a fat house-cat on a limping mouse.
They should have seen the AMPTP’s plan of sitting back and waiting for them to melt down coming from miles away, and prepared for it. But they didn’t, and now they run the risk of a serious screwing.
The whole clip thing is beyond simple business into a serious case of territorial pissing on the part of the AMPTP. And these sorts of decisions are the chief reason Hollywood production costs are skyrocketing like inflation in Weimar Germany.
People are feeling screwed, so they demand more up front money and fatter back ends. Costs go up, so they try to screw people over more, making people demand more up front money, etc…etc…
Then the whole business just collapses under the weight of its own BS.
Plus when I read the link, so kindly provided by AFTRA, I do not see a name on the op-ed piece. I looked 3 times, I always like to know whose opinion I am actually reading and who they are beholden too, but I could not find a name . So quoting an opinion of a nameless someone, is no way to base the entire future of union, AFTRA. They could just an easily run a link to Nikki’s blog, but NO………
This issue has become the entire future of both acting guilds, and it sure sounds like AFTRA is dying to give in and make a deal just to keep the town working. A deal which down the road in years to come, will cost us all dearly.
Peggy Lane O’Rourke
At the SAG meeting last week, leadership expressed the guild’s very serious concern about consent for clip use. As one member pointed out, he doesn’t want his image in a police officer’s uniform used in a cop killer video. The same clearly applies to actors who do not wish to have their images associated with products or lifestyles they would never endorse, and run entirely contrary to the job they signed on to do in the first place.
The AMPTP doesn’t want to be required to obtain actor consent before using clips (which is the current rule), and they’re offering only miniscule compensation. Given what the current contract calls for, the AMPTP is asking for a HUGE rollback. While both of these issues related to clips are important, the more important of the two is consent, as inappropriate clip use can cause significant long-term damage to the public perception of an actor, hence their career.
The AMPTP argues that it is in their interest to use the clips judiciously, so that they protect, I’m assuming, the integrity and perception of their product. However, we have numerous examples of what happens when someone other than the artist controls the commercial exploitation of their creative output. One instructive example outside the acting world: Michael Jackson licensed the Beatles’ song “Revolution” to Nike to hawk tennis shoes, in clear contradiction to how Lennon & McCartney (and Lennon’s estate under Yoko Ono’s control) allowed the music under their control to be exploited.
Or what happens when star X pissses off producer Y who controls clips from one of star X’s early movies, before star X earned the leverage to get more control over such things in their contracts? Does the star’s image from the early film get licensed for toilet bowl cleaner ads?
Actors also must be concerned with image oversaturation. See a face seemingly everywhere associated with seemingly everything, and the public perception of the actor, hence their future earning power, is significantly diminished.
I certainly hope AFTRA hangs tough on the clip usage issue, and I do take heart that my worst fears about AFTRA’s negotiating acumen apparently may not be realized. I am also glad to read their emphasis in this missive that they are consulting with SAG, and I would encourage them to continue to do so, as I believe this will be of great benefit to both unions.
This image issue is a back-door approach to using actors’ work on the Internet with little-to-no pay. If the AMPTP didn’t think it would make them money, then they would not be lobbying hard to negotiate for it. But the fact that it has become a thorny issue means that it is viewed as a massive income generator — both now and in the immediate future.
If you doubt, just take a look at Charlie Rose’ May 2008 interview with Jeff Zucker — you can probably find it on YouTube. Zucker still sees network television as a cash cow but in the line of income opportunity priorities, he sees cable and the Internet as rising sources of income. In a nutshell, NBC Universal has already developed Hulu.com in which it is continually adding shows and movies from its archives, supported by advertising. He sees Hulu.com as a sort of online TV network that reruns original programming or box office films. NBC.com, where a lot of people are going to watch programming online right now will become, in his opinion, more of like the DVD-extras approach where you can find interviews with cast members and more in-depth info about the show or film. He says that the U.S. lags behind other countries like Japan, for instance, that gets a good deal of their programming as a download — so we only have to look overseas to see where we are going. Additionally, Zucker sees international exploitation of U.S. media company-generated film and TV content as their biggest income growth generator — which brings up a whole other issue of how actors would track their international income in a global media world.
While Hulu.com is in its infancy, so was video and DVD technology once upon a time. But, it is clear that there is a pattern developing with online “reruns”: they are supported by advertising, just like advertising supports network TV. To allow them to run those shows without paying the artists, like it were a rerun or DVD/video sale, would seriously undermine the current entertainment-compensation system and would cause artists to require more money up front — making future new entertainment more cost prohibitive. As a result, it is in everyone’s best interest, for mutual economic benefit, that a fair contract is made and that residuals are not cheapen on any platform/medium.
You and your stand in pal O’Rourke are so on top of things. There’s a conspiracy behind every corner at AFTRA, and you’re exposing them all.
Wow.
That is the collective opinion of the LA Times Editorial Board:
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-op-edboardbios23oct23,0,4130157.htmlstory
(Scroll down for members)
What was the LAT thinking? The recent Marilyn Monroe fake sex film should have been a wake-up call. Clips can be mashed together to make anything, and if actors have no say in the use–well, expect to see lots more fakes.
I wonder how Nick Goldberg would feel to see his creative work handed out for free.
So background dancer number 3 (SAG/AFTRA cardholder, Starbucks counter day job) objects to his clip being used and thereby the clip cannot be used or compensated for anyone else in the cast. This is what you would strike for? And again the losses would NEVER EVER offset any gains to anyone.
Fold that hand or we all lose.
399
Please, everybody, just give the moguls what they want and let’s all get back to work.
Sincerely,
The DGA
(slurp)
@Comment by mheister — May 25, 2008 @ 4:48 pm
I get what you are saying about clips being used in ways you didn’t want them to be, but coming from someone who’s had a billion clip use forms come my way I can tell you they are pretty non-negotiable unless you are a big star. If Don Bellisario sends you a clip use form to sign so he can use the image of you as dead corpse #3 in a upcoming episode; you better sign off on it. If Don’s company decides he wasn’t to use the same clip as a corpse that was just skull-f’d by someone you find personally distasteful, you better sign it.
Why? Because everyone seems to ignore the biggest problems in this town: illegal black balling and nepotism.
If you don’t sign that clip form, you may as well pack your bags and move back to Omaha. We had a girl who didn’t want to sign one because she thought she looked like crap. She was told in no uncertain terms that if she didn’t sign it; she wasn’t going to be working for a long long time. It was a producer who could follow through on the threat as well.
Also, striking over this would be moronic. The clip use fee is miniscule. I don’t think networks should be able to re-use things without paying, but losing work over a $250 fee that pays no residuals is just plain retarded.
If anything, they should just negotiate a fee into every contract that allows re-use for anything by that particular producer. Seems to be the easiest, most painless way to get around it.
To All Actors: See Lugosi v. Universal Pictures (1979) 25 C3d 813 [L.A. 30824 Cal Sup Ct Dec., 3, 1979]. It’s an important decision that says, among other things, that if an actor does not take steps while alive to protect his/her name and likeness, his heirs cannot claim that right after his death. In other words, if your name and likeness are your source of income (and what SAG and AFTRA member’s isn’t?), you should, for example, build a website, copyright its original contents, post photos of yourself NOT as a character, and do your best to establish yourself as an individual. See also: Spahn v. Julian Messner, Inc. 21 NY 2d. 124 (1967), application dismissed, 393 US 1046 (1969) which has to do with appropriation of image. Neither of these will necessarily forestall what is essentially an “appropriation” for commercial purposes, but they should get our unions thinking. (The foregoing is not offered as a legal opinion, only a scholarly suggestion).
Whether the right to “consent” or not is maintained or given up has absolutely NOTHING to do with the people who pirate, morph and mash our images. They’re doing it now (while we have consent) and they will continue to do it even if we’re fools enough to allow producers to join in the piracy. I even know the identity of at least one moron who pirates, morphs and mashes my and others’ images on the internet – whattaya gonna do? Sue?
And what’s all this “AFTRA’s gonna bend over now, I betcha” talk? Membership First already took actors out of serious contention in these negotiations. When will SAG members in Hollywood wake up and vote in some actors who care about actors?
Dear Actors –
You are fucked. It’s a bummer.
Use the next three years to heal the AFTRA-SAG breach and strengthen the resolve of the membership or the Moguls will rape you again in the next negotiation.
Good luck.
Writer Bob,
It’s truly a shame that you simply cannot let go of your vitriol over an argument you lost over three months ago. In all of your attacks on the DGA, you have never presented a positive solution to the impasse that existed when the DGA finally started its talks over two months after its own schedule. Your inability to do this casts a shadow on all of these subsequent statements of anger.
For right now, we’re all aware that both SAG and AFTRA are trying to get through a difficult negotiation period. Admirably, they have avoided most of the vitriol that surrounded the WGA negotiations. It really would be a good idea to stop trying to fan any flames, and to put your energy into other areas. If you truly wish to see another strike happen, or if you would have preferred to see the WGA strike continue, wouldn’t it be easier to just say so?
Well no offense but SAG and AFTRA brought this on themselves arguing with each other, instead of banning together to form a united union.
Instead of going to the AMPTP together as one, they are divided.
I would offer that the Phase I split, despite all the negative ramifications, may have one desirable outcome, which is to show the AMPTP that no matter where they go, no matter whom they talk to, they will still get the same answer on the consent issue. Notwithstanding how one may feel about his or her own consent, no one wants to vote away the right of consent of another member when it has such longstanding effects. It’s just not the way a union operates.
This not a typical give-and-take contract issue. This is a new business venture that both want to take advantage of and it should be treated as such. Make it a rider to the collective bargaining agreement and spend however many months it takes to hammer it out. There’s money to made. The ship is not sailing. There’s plenty of time to make it work without shutting down the town.
The two unions should merge. Not SAG and AFTRA, but AFTRA and the DGA. Think how much more effective they’d be in fucking over the rest of the unions by working together.
I sure hope there isn’t another strike. I only just now got my house back out of the pawn shop.
Remember back during the strike, when anyone who said anything dissonant to the WGA-righteousness fervor was immediately labeled a plant, a shill? And people started climbing atop their soapboxes regarding how all the PR firms had their miscreants posting here to dissuade the public from the WGA’s intentions?
Those posts were silly and stupid. That being said, ‘Taco’ Carbone over there, well, I’d believe that dude’s a plant (and despite my anonymity, I guarantee being the biggest skeptic you’ll ever meet. BTL’er that got involved against the WGA in the strike. Got tired of getting laid off, sorry). Either he’s a plant, or one of the largest idiots to ever post here. (For the slower readers, he’s a plain idiot).
Yeah, Taco. AFTRA and the DGA are destroying this business. By making it possible to work three of the past six months. You’re fighting the good fight for our future. By destroying us today. That’ll show ‘em. That’ll show everybody but the Canadians and the Eastern Europeans. Anybody that can take domestic jobs. While you’re at it, please reassure us that the ’04 Bush election was best for everybody, right?
Shut the hell up. Quit wasting our time. Idiots like you make me sad to think a forum like DHD might actually exist as a mouthpiece for the film & television proleteriat. You should be ashamed of yourself.
The writers lost. They lost every single thing they went on strike for plus some very important elements.
-They are getting a fixed flat fee for internet residuals. The exact number that the amptp offered to begin with.
-They won zero gains in dvd residuals
-Most people lost their overall studio deals
-There are now less writers staffed on shows. These are the very people that needed the union to win because showrunners make their deals with agents who get them overscale anyway.
-pilots simply went away
Lets remember the last SAG strike. Commercials went away. Completely out of the country for buy out deals. No american actors working for years after that one. Canada loves you though.
Do you really think that any producer is going to be held hostage by your signature on a clip usage element? They will just put that language into your start up deal and you WILL sign it to get the job. If your an actor with enough power to negotiate that element of the contract then you are having your agents and lawyers negotiating a better deal anyway.
Think about it.
Hey “Bad Taste,” just curious, when you say you got involved against the WGA in the strike, what exactly does that mean? I too was looking for a way to help end the WGA’s massive unemployment action sooner, but was frustrated because there wasn’t much we could do except post on blogs and march in that one counter-rally. Woo hoo.
If SAG strikes I want to be a lot more proactive. What can you suggest?