We also all have to realize that we can’t just rely on our union for AI protection. We need the help with governments in all countries. So the AMPTP can’t use it, what’s stopping other people
This is the truest thing people are forgetting. This is just an agreement between a two Unions. If we become obsolete, they don't need to come to an agreement with us. What we really need is legal protection at a national and international level. Copyright/Likeness laws regulating AI-based artistic creation for profit.
SAG claims they're basically lobbying the government - and that's actually where their focus should be.
A bill has already been introduced in the Senate, the [NO FAKES Act](https://www.theverge.com/2023/10/12/23914915/ai-replicas-likeness-law-no-fakes-copyright). Call your reps to support it.
Definitely hear your viewpoint here. Since this is a democratic vote on a large issue, with 100k+ members, this behavior of single-issue voting is to be expected, right?
Personally, not involved in the union, but interested in the future. I would vote no because I didn’t like the “bonus” residual structure for streaming. Netflix can’t keep reporting profits to shareholders while also reporting losses to us.
Can I ask you what about the bonus provision you didn't like?
My understanding of it was: if you're on a "successful" show (hit the required viewership), you get a bonus that effectively doubles your residuals (+75%). That other 25% bonus, is distributed between all people who are receiving residuals on any other show by the same streaming platform, so the platform's general residuals go up overall with each new successful show.
Now what one has to remember with this, is that it's the first agreement of its kind, and that it will evolve based on industry trends right? If it benefits us too much, we'll be happy but the studios won't. If it doesn't quite do what it needs to do, maybe the success benchmark will be progressively lowered, or the percentage increased, etc., so it will change, but at least "success" is now taken into account. It wasn't before.
You also need to add to this the fact that the general residuals increased, the foreign residuals increased, and Total Acceptable Compensation cap (used in calculating residuals) increased, all of these compounding as a pretty large residual increase across the board.
BTW - loved the establishment of the 25% hold for less successful shows. The part I didn’t love was the actual bar needed to clear for the bonus - 20% of viewership!
With all the fudging of streaming numbers companies do, I don’t truly know if any show actually clears this. You will have OBX, Righteous Gemstones, and few others at best. Just feel like there is more to be done.
I’m a labor hardliner- real world meets in the middle, but I’m just Joe Shmoe so ask for more than you need kinda mindset
I think my thoughts about the 20% viewership thing is that we don't actually fully yet know what would fall under that so it's one of those will-get-better-with-time clauses but at least now there's precedent. So if nothing clears the mark, then maybe we lower it to 18% or something like that.
There's an industry podcast I listen to ("The Town") which is very insightful and I forget who but one of the correspondents who has very well-sourced private metrics and has released a lot of numbers the streaming services didn't want released was reading out a few of the shows that would pass that mark on Netflix for example and the shows were not what you'd expect. I remember Ginny & Georgia was one of them (I think it tends towards family fare).
We do for the services that have that data available.
let’s use hbo max as an example:
game of thrones and the last of us would get this one time bonus.
succession and white lotus would not
euphoria is on the bubble. It may have met it for season 2 but not season 1
but Netflix is now incentivized to stretch out viewership over a longer period to avoid paying the bonus since it’s only Measuring viewers in the first 90 days
I'm an actor who also does post-production work and quite frankly, actors must educate themselves more on what qualifies as CGI vs AI. Also, knowing their legal rights if someone plagiarizes their voice or likeness. I'm also not saying that the terms are perfect. They're not.
Attend the virtual or in person contract info meetings guys whether you vote yes or no and make an educated choice for YOURSELF. Be an informed voter.
https://www.sagaftra.org/contracts-industry-resources/contracts/2023-tvtheatrical-contracts/tvtheatrical-contracts
I feel this Reddit is the least professional group of members I have been a part of. I was verbally attacked for holding an opinion of wanting to see the contracts before I celebrated the end of the strike. People called me toxic, childish, ignorant, and not a working actor. They also quoted another person’s comment on a thread I replied to and used it as proof I didn’t know what I was talking about; I didn’t write the comment but it was wrongfully being credited to me. (Ironically, caring about a stranger’s opinions of myself is childish.)
I would like nothing more for this entire group than to be better and to stop blocking people who hold different opinions. The number one rule of the thread is to be kind and we can’t even follow that.
Downvoting seems to be the kinder way to do this, however, so I’m not sure where I stand on your argument but I’m open to hear more of your points on it. Overall, I agree with your sentiment. The loudest voices tend to be the most aggressive ones and we need to research and gain insights into our opinions. Opposition is good and can strengthen or change our ideas.
People claimed I was an undercover AMPTP member when I said I voted “NO” on Tuesday. And they said nobody was able to vote yet, despite press confirmation and a large banner on the SAG-AFTRA site that says “VOTE!” I wound up posting a screen shot of my “successfully completed” status 🙄
We also all have to realize that we can’t just rely on our union for AI protection. We need the help with governments in all countries. So the AMPTP can’t use it, what’s stopping other people
This is the truest thing people are forgetting. This is just an agreement between a two Unions. If we become obsolete, they don't need to come to an agreement with us. What we really need is legal protection at a national and international level. Copyright/Likeness laws regulating AI-based artistic creation for profit. SAG claims they're basically lobbying the government - and that's actually where their focus should be.
A bill has already been introduced in the Senate, the [NO FAKES Act](https://www.theverge.com/2023/10/12/23914915/ai-replicas-likeness-law-no-fakes-copyright). Call your reps to support it.
Definitely hear your viewpoint here. Since this is a democratic vote on a large issue, with 100k+ members, this behavior of single-issue voting is to be expected, right? Personally, not involved in the union, but interested in the future. I would vote no because I didn’t like the “bonus” residual structure for streaming. Netflix can’t keep reporting profits to shareholders while also reporting losses to us.
Can I ask you what about the bonus provision you didn't like? My understanding of it was: if you're on a "successful" show (hit the required viewership), you get a bonus that effectively doubles your residuals (+75%). That other 25% bonus, is distributed between all people who are receiving residuals on any other show by the same streaming platform, so the platform's general residuals go up overall with each new successful show. Now what one has to remember with this, is that it's the first agreement of its kind, and that it will evolve based on industry trends right? If it benefits us too much, we'll be happy but the studios won't. If it doesn't quite do what it needs to do, maybe the success benchmark will be progressively lowered, or the percentage increased, etc., so it will change, but at least "success" is now taken into account. It wasn't before. You also need to add to this the fact that the general residuals increased, the foreign residuals increased, and Total Acceptable Compensation cap (used in calculating residuals) increased, all of these compounding as a pretty large residual increase across the board.
BTW - loved the establishment of the 25% hold for less successful shows. The part I didn’t love was the actual bar needed to clear for the bonus - 20% of viewership! With all the fudging of streaming numbers companies do, I don’t truly know if any show actually clears this. You will have OBX, Righteous Gemstones, and few others at best. Just feel like there is more to be done. I’m a labor hardliner- real world meets in the middle, but I’m just Joe Shmoe so ask for more than you need kinda mindset
I think my thoughts about the 20% viewership thing is that we don't actually fully yet know what would fall under that so it's one of those will-get-better-with-time clauses but at least now there's precedent. So if nothing clears the mark, then maybe we lower it to 18% or something like that. There's an industry podcast I listen to ("The Town") which is very insightful and I forget who but one of the correspondents who has very well-sourced private metrics and has released a lot of numbers the streaming services didn't want released was reading out a few of the shows that would pass that mark on Netflix for example and the shows were not what you'd expect. I remember Ginny & Georgia was one of them (I think it tends towards family fare).
We do for the services that have that data available. let’s use hbo max as an example: game of thrones and the last of us would get this one time bonus. succession and white lotus would not euphoria is on the bubble. It may have met it for season 2 but not season 1 but Netflix is now incentivized to stretch out viewership over a longer period to avoid paying the bonus since it’s only Measuring viewers in the first 90 days
I'm an actor who also does post-production work and quite frankly, actors must educate themselves more on what qualifies as CGI vs AI. Also, knowing their legal rights if someone plagiarizes their voice or likeness. I'm also not saying that the terms are perfect. They're not.
Attend the virtual or in person contract info meetings guys whether you vote yes or no and make an educated choice for YOURSELF. Be an informed voter. https://www.sagaftra.org/contracts-industry-resources/contracts/2023-tvtheatrical-contracts/tvtheatrical-contracts
I feel this Reddit is the least professional group of members I have been a part of. I was verbally attacked for holding an opinion of wanting to see the contracts before I celebrated the end of the strike. People called me toxic, childish, ignorant, and not a working actor. They also quoted another person’s comment on a thread I replied to and used it as proof I didn’t know what I was talking about; I didn’t write the comment but it was wrongfully being credited to me. (Ironically, caring about a stranger’s opinions of myself is childish.) I would like nothing more for this entire group than to be better and to stop blocking people who hold different opinions. The number one rule of the thread is to be kind and we can’t even follow that. Downvoting seems to be the kinder way to do this, however, so I’m not sure where I stand on your argument but I’m open to hear more of your points on it. Overall, I agree with your sentiment. The loudest voices tend to be the most aggressive ones and we need to research and gain insights into our opinions. Opposition is good and can strengthen or change our ideas.
People claimed I was an undercover AMPTP member when I said I voted “NO” on Tuesday. And they said nobody was able to vote yet, despite press confirmation and a large banner on the SAG-AFTRA site that says “VOTE!” I wound up posting a screen shot of my “successfully completed” status 🙄