Sunday, July 5, 2009

SAG President’s Anti-SAG Suit Continues

For those who like keeping up with legal dockets, SAG a few days ago filed its Respondent’s Brief in the appeals court case that stems from the lawsuit filed by SAG president Alan Rosenberg and three other Membership First hardliners (1st VP Anne-Marie Johnson and board members Diane Ladd and Kent McCord) against their own union.

Rosenberg et al will shortly file another brief, then (as I’ve previously outlined) there may be oral argument and then there will ultimately be a decision. But that’s just on the appeal. The case also proceeds in the lower court as well, and will probably continue to do so regardless of the outcome in the appellate court. Not that there’s any good reason for this case to continue in either court . . .

———————

Subscribe to my blog (jhandel.com) for more about entertainment law and digital media law. Go to the blog itself to subscribe via RSS or email. Or, follow me on Twitter, friend me on Facebook, or subscribe to my Huffington Post articles. If you work in tech, check out my new book How to Write LOIs and Term Sheets.

Monday, June 22, 2009

Film on the Downswing

Factoid: Kodak gets 70% of its revenue today from digital products, and an outgoing Kodak exec says that the company plans to stay in the film business “as far into the future as possible,” which isn’t exactly a ringing endorsement of analog formats. This all is courtesy of an AP story in the NY Times on the discontinuation of Kodachrome (yes, the story mentions the Paul Simon song), which also points out that Kodak has introduced new still and motion picture stocks in the last few years.

———————

Subscribe to my blog (jhandel.com) for more about entertainment law and digital media law. Go to the blog itself to subscribe via RSS or email. Or, follow me on Twitter, friend me on Facebook, or subscribe to my Huffington Post articles. If you work in tech, check out my new book How to Write LOIs and Term Sheets.

WGA Candidates for President and Board Announced

SAG’s upcoming elections have been getting some attention, but the WGA West is having an election this summer as well. The ballots go out sometime in late July or August, and are apparently due back September 17. Current WGA West president Patric Verrone is running for one of the open board seats, but not for president (I believe there are term limits). Instead, the candidates for president are John Wells and Elias Davis. For more details, see the press release below.

———————

Subscribe to my blog (jhandel.com) for more about entertainment law and digital media law. Go to the blog itself to subscribe via RSS or email. Or, follow me on Twitter, friend me on Facebook, or subscribe to my Huffington Post articles. If you work in tech, check out my new book How to Write LOIs and Term Sheets.

———————

WGA press release:

WRITERS GUILD OF AMERICA, WEST ANNOUNCES CANDIDATES FOR 2009 OFFICERS AND BOARD OF DIRECTORS ELECTION

LOS ANGELES – The Writers Guild of America, West’s Nominating Committee has announced its initial list of candidates for the 2009 WGAW Officers and Board of Directors election. The officer candidates are as follows: President – John Wells, Elias Davis; Vice President – Tom Schulman, Howard Michael Gould; Secretary-Treasurer – Christopher Keyser, David N. Weiss.

There are 16 candidates nominated to run for eight open seats on the WGAW’s Board of

Directors, as follows: Luvh Rakhe, Linda Burstyn, Mick Betancourt, Jan Oxenberg, Howard A. Rodman (inc.), Patric M. Verrone, Dan Wilcox (inc.), Eric Wallace, Jed Weintrob, Chip Johannessen, Andrea King, Steven Schwartz, Jeff Lowell, Billy Ray, Carleton Eastlake, David Wyatt. [The list is in random order. “inc.” means incumbent.]

In addition to the candidates selected by the WGAW Nominating Committee, eligible members may also be nominated by petition. Members seeking nomination for the office of President, Vice President, or Secretary-Treasurer must obtain 50 member signatures in support of their petitions. Members seeking nomination for the Board of Directors must obtain 25 member signatures in support of their petitions. The deadline for submitting signed petitions to the WGAW is Thursday, July 23, by 5:30 p.m. Members may submit online nomination petitions by visiting the members-only section of the WGAW’s website at: www.wga.org.

The WGAW will host its annual “Candidates Night” town-hall election forum for Guild members to meet and pose questions to their prospective Officer and BOD candidates on Wednesday, September 2, at WGAW headquarters in Los Angeles.

Guild members will receive candidate and non-candidate statements and rebuttal statements, if any, with their ballots prior to the election. Members may mail additional campaign materials at their own expense. Members may vote by mail or in person at the WGAW’s annual membership meeting on Thursday, September 17. Ballots will be counted on Friday, September 18.

LA Goatherd Wanted

Sometimes going off-topic can't be resisted. I live in Laurel Canyon, which as LA residents know is in the middle of the city yet is a still-rustic hilly area from the 1920's that even has a few dirt roads remaining. The ethos still has echoes of the 60's and 70's (can an ethos have echoes?).

Usually the echoes are faint, but not always. Here's an email I received today:

We live in laurel canyon and have two mini-mancha dairy goats. Currently I am milking one doe and will start milking the other in a few months when her kids are big enough to wean. We have more milk and cheese than we can consume. I'm hoping that there is someone in the neighborhood who would be interested in some fresh goat milk or cheese in exchange for doing some goat chores. Can you send this request out for me please?

Who'd have thought? And, by the way, if anyone does want to do some goat chores (whatever that may entail) in return for milk or cheese, let me know and I'll pass your info on.

Wednesday, June 17, 2009

WGA Institutes Qualified Voting

The WGA membership has approved new rules limiting members’ eligibility to vote on strike authorization and ratification of the feature-primetime contract: members now have to have earnings of $30,000 under a WGA agreement during the six years preceding the vote or 15 or more qualified years as a pension plan participant, Variety reports.

The change passed by a margin of 96% to 4%, with turnout a low 15%. This level of support, and lack of angst as signaled by the low turnout, contrast with the reaction within SAG when a “qualified voting” or “affected voting” system having income requirements was proposed in that union. Of course, a higher percentage of SAG actors would have been disqualified since more than 2/3’s of SAG members earn little or money from the TV/theatrical contracts in any given year, even when residuals are included in the calculation.

———————

Subscribe to my blog (jhandel.com) for more about entertainment law and digital media law. Go to the blog itself to subscribe via RSS or email. Or, follow me on Twitter, friend me on Facebook, or subscribe to my Huffington Post articles. If you work in tech, check out my new book How to Write LOIs and Term Sheets.

Tuesday, June 16, 2009

Independent New Media Productions

There are casting notices out there for SAG new media productions under the “SAG New Media Contract.” A few notes may help clarify what these are, and help performers enforce a few of their rights.

First, this is not the new media sideletter recently negotiated with the AMPTP (major studios) as part of the theatrical contract. Rather, it’s a new media contract (the SAG New Media Agreement) that’s been available to independent producers for a number of years—that is, producers who are not signatories to the theatrical and/or TV agreements. So, disagreements that a performer may have with this agreement simply don’t relate to the compromises in the new TV/theatrical deal.

Second, under sec. 3 of the SAG New Media Agreement, wages are freely bargained by the employer and the performer.

Third, performers should recognize that independent producers are unlikely to make much, if any, money on these productions. Even the studios are shutting down their new media production entities (Stage 9, 60 Frames). And CPMs (advertising rates) for new media are at about $10 rather than $40-$50 (TV) or more, and with viewership on new media much less as well. These two factors, as well as the difficulty of finding any new media distribution at all, mean that independent producers will generally receive very little income from their new media efforts.

Fourth, it’s reasonable for performers to negotiate for back end (a piece of the producer’s gross or net revenues), so that if the producer does make money, so will the performer.

Fifth, when the producer offers to compensate you only in the form of “credit and meals,” or “credit, meals and tape,” that’s illegal. They have to pay you the greater of California minimum wage (if the production is in California) and federal minimum wage. California’s is higher—$8/hr.

Overtime requirements are more complicated. See complex discussion of exemptions and exceptions (also here) regarding overtime for actors. Also, for workers with less than 160 hours of “employment in occupations in which they have no previous similar or related experience,” the producer can pay 85% of minimum wage. (I don’t know if acting classes count toward the 160 hours, since they’re not employment.)

In any case, if the producer doesn’t pay you the required minimum, you can file a wage claim with the state. You can also call SAG. Although they don’t enforce the minimum wage laws, they may call the producer and suggest that he follow the law.

Sixth, SAG does enforce terms of an agreement between the performer and the producer. So, rather than relying simply on the minimum wage law, it would be a good idea for the performer to include an explicit wage in the SAG new media deal memo with the producer (or a rider), even if the wage is just $8 per hour. SAG would then enforce the agreed wages, meaning that the performer wouldn’t have to rely on the vagaries of the state.

Original made for new media productions are still experimental, and the difficult reality for performers and other talent and workers, above and below the line, as well as their representatives, is that compensation is dramatically lower than in TV and theatrical, just as the revenue for producers is. However, that doesn’t mean that performers shouldn’t insist on some minimums, and hopefully the above suggestions are helpful.

Note: This blog post is intended as general information, not specific legal advice. Check with a lawyer about your particular situation if you want definitive advice.

———————

Subscribe to my blog (jhandel.com) for more about entertainment law and digital media law. Go to the blog itself to subscribe via RSS or email. Or, follow me on Twitter, friend me on Facebook, or subscribe to my Huffington Post articles. If you work in tech, check out my new book How to Write LOIs and Term Sheets.

Monday, June 15, 2009

SAG Lawsuit Still Grinds On; Court Denies SAG’s Motion to Dismiss Appeal

As I previously reported, SAG’s counsel in late May filed a motion to dismiss the appeal by SAG president Alan Rosenberg and three other Membership First hardliners (1st VP Anne-Marie Johnson and board members Diane Ladd and Kent McCord) of a Superior Court order that denied their application for a temporary restraining order. On June 5—just days before the new TV/theatrical contracts were ratified—Rosenberg et al. filed a brief opposing the motion to dismiss.

Unfortunately, the Court of Appeals on June 9 issued a one-sentence order denying the motion to dismiss, presumably meaning that the appeal is too complex to be decided without oral argument (or, at least, full briefing). So, the appeal grinds on. Rosenberg et al. previously filed their brief in the appeal. SAG’s responsive brief is due July 1. Thereafter, Rosenberg et al. get to file a reply brief, and then there will probably be oral argument at some point. Within 90 days after the oral argument, the court will issue its ruling.

In other words, the appeal will probably drag on until sometime in November unless Rosenberg et al. are persuaded to drop it. Meanwhile, the suit itself proceeds in the trial court as well. Confused as to how a case can proceed in two courts at once? Well, it happens, and the legal fees aren’t cheap. All of this sounds like a campaign issue that Unite for Strength will probably raise—why reelect a president who persists in suing his own union? UPDATE: Indeed, as SAGWatch points out, by continuing to pursue their lawsuit, Rosenberg et al. are reneging on a promise Anne-Marie Johnson publicly made to withdraw the suit if the TV/theatrical contracts were approved.

———————

Subscribe to my blog (jhandel.com) for more about entertainment law and digital media law. Go to the blog itself to subscribe via RSS or email. Or, follow me on Twitter, friend me on Facebook, or subscribe to my Huffington Post articles. If you work in tech, check out my new book How to Write LOIs and Term Sheets.

Friday, June 12, 2009

Union-Focused Journalist Departs to Academia

Andrew Salomon, the National News Editor of Back Stage and author of the magazine’s Espresso blog, is leaving his job effective July 31. He’s joining the faculty of SUNY Purchase (Purchase College at the State University of New York) as a tenure-track assistant professor of journalism.

Andrew is one of a small corps of journalists whose beats include entertainment labor. He reports with intelligence and humor, and his coverage and camaraderie will be missed. He's a friend, and I wish him all the best.

———————

Subscribe to my blog (jhandel.com) for more about entertainment law and digital media law. Go to the blog itself to subscribe via RSS or email. Or, follow me on Twitter, friend me on Facebook, or subscribe to my Huffington Post articles. If you work in tech, check out my new book How to Write LOIs and Term Sheets.

Thursday, June 11, 2009

SAG Resolution Resolves Little for Film Business

With the SAG contract ratified, will the film business finally get back to normal?

Unfortunately, no. Although we'll see a brief spike in production, the business we once knew may never reappear, for a host of reasons. . . . to read more, see my piece in Variety

———————

Subscribe to my blog (jhandel.com) for more about entertainment law and digital media law. Go to the blog itself to subscribe via RSS or email. Or, follow me on Twitter, friend me on Facebook, or subscribe to my Huffington Post articles. If you work in tech, check out my new book How to Write LOIs and Term Sheets.

Wednesday, June 10, 2009

Trademark Protection and Facebook User Names

Trademark protection just got a slightly more complicated, but in a good way. Starting now, there’s a new step that trademark holders or their attorneys should take to protect their trademarks or service marks.

You probably already know that registering domain names corresponding to your marks gives you important practical protection. Now Facebook has entered the equation. Starting this Friday, June 12, users will be able to register a Facebook user name on a first-come, first-served basis at http://www.facebook.com/username/. It’s about time—the old format for accessing someone’s profile included a string of random digits. My old Facebook URL looks like this: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=551052414. My new one will be nicer.

Competing social networking sites, such as LinkedIn and MySpace, have had plain-language user names for a while now. But the new Facebook scheme has something built in that the other sites apparently don’t: a mechanism for trademark protection. That’s welcome news for rights-holders. Here’s how it works.

At http://www.facebook.com/help/contact.php?show_form=username_rights, there’s a “Preventing the Registration of a Username” form for entering your company name, title, email, trademark, and registration number. (Oddly, there’s no place to enter your own name.) As that last data item suggests, only registered marks are eligible, although I’d recommend that holders of trademark applications in process simply enter the application number instead. Filling in the form will prevent someone else from using your trademark as a user name.

What happens if an infringer registers your trademark before you fill out the form? In that case, fill out Facebook’s “Notice of Intellectual Property Infringement (Non-Copyright Claim)” at http://www.facebook.com/copyright.php?noncopyright_notice=1 and hopefully the matter will be taken care of. Facebook doesn’t describe the procedure it follows for these forms.

Finally, what if someone maliciously fills out the “Preventing the Registration of a Username” form and blocks you from using your own mark as a user name? Facebook’s FAQ (at http://www.facebook.com/help.php?page=899) doesn’t address that, but I’d suggest filling out the Notice of Intellectual Property Infringement (Non-Copyright Claim) form and providing as many details as known.

———————

Subscribe to my blog (jhandel.com) for more about entertainment law and digital media law. Go to the blog itself to subscribe via RSS or email. Or, follow me on Twitter, friend me on Facebook, or subscribe to my Huffington Post articles. If you work in tech, check out my new book How to Write LOIs and Term Sheets.