[NEohioPAL]Mary Mary, Quite Contrary

Fri Mar 25 05:07:48 PST 2005

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_00B0_01C53111.BBA3DAD0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Mary, Mary, quite contrary; how does your anger grow?

=20

With a rather unusual misconception about what went on at the GotPay? =
meeting the other night, apparently. I am quite stunned at your post. It =
seems to me just about everyone there was in agreement about what we all =
were saying. In fact, I led off by asking what the controversy was =
about, and I got but one well-reasoned response. The only "attacks" were =
what I thought was a rather good-natured volley of rhetoric between Jean =
Zarzour and Bill Johns. And judging from his delightful follow-up email =
on the subject, he apparently agrees.

=20

Bill is a good and honest fellow of considerable drive and talent. He =
works very hard at producing his films with a minimal budget. Some of us =
simply disagree with his approach to making money off of them; we feel =
if he really wants to be successful, he should get great talent to do =
so. Problem is, most of the really good actors realize their worth and =
ask money for their efforts. We think he would have greater success =
making money if he spent some up front to end up with a better finished =
product (with no offense to anyone who has appeared in one of his =
films).

=20

NO ONE is saying not to work for free for an indie movie or other =
non-commercial project that you want to be in for love/experience/food. =
We are saying that if there is any downstream potential for profit, =
protect yourself up front. Either get a stipend for your efforts, or the =
producer should have the huevos to offer you a contract that protects =
your interests in the future. If not, draw up a contract for yourself; =
it's just good business.=20

=20

May I point out that the meeting was three hours (!!!) long; during =
which time you were completely silent. For those who are piling on with =
Mary and were NOT at the meeting, I would suggest that her take on the =
outcome is exaggerated. Of the three (!!!) hours, only about three =
minutes were taken up with what Mary considered "an attack".

=20

A couple of points on your post:

=20

>Telling newcomers to negotiate union wages or "walk away" from the job =
is  ridiculous.<

=20

At no time did anyone recommend this. What I said was that union wages =
are not arbitrary or "pie-in-the-sky" numbers; they are wages that have =
been negotiated in good faith between artist's representatives and =
representatives for "management", in this case, advertising agencies, =
film producers, etc. They represent the honest negotiated value of these =
services.=20

=20

I went on to say that you should ask for MORE than union scale if you =
believe your talent is worthy of it, especially in light of the fact =
that independent contractors have to pay their own self-employment tax.=20

=20

In regards to negotiating pay, I said "Start high, you can always come =
down. If you say $50, you can't change your mind and say $150 later". No =
one ever said to "walk away" without union wages. The video of the =
meeting bears this out.

=20

>What gives ANYONE the right to shame, demean, or subtly threaten Email =
>attacks to those who wish to offer no-pay gigs...or those who choose to =
accept >such "opportunities" to work for free...for the reel, or =
experience or "fun of it?"=20

=20

I think it is right and fair for a group of people who feel there is =
injustice to speak out against that. Shaming is fine, as long as your =
position is right. Demeaning and subtle threats are below the belt, but =
you are dealing with rather opinionated people on both sides of the =
aisle, so fur flies from time to time. At least we're not getting hit in =
the head by the Pinkerton's.

=20

The point we are trying to make (and it is a good, honest and worthy =
point) is that artists tend to stand alone; they are independent spirits =
and have a desire to be seen as unique. From a business perspective, =
this is an incredibly bad position to be in. We only wish for all =
creative people (not just actors) to realize that the intellectual =
property they create has real value. When anyone (whether it is a car =
dealer or independent film maker) tries to exploit that talent for =
profit without compensation, it is simply wrong. Standing together and =
demanding just compensation (even unjust compensation for a start) is =
the correct thing to do when the downward pressure on the individual =
artist by business entities large and small is so great.

=20

As we said at the meeting, and will continue to repeat; when money is =
made, the talent gets paid. The percolating upward pressure of artists =
demanding proper compensation for their efforts creates the perception =
that this is not a free lunch. If you want to do something for the love =
of it, by all means do so.

=20

I would recommend you read the earlier posts on this subject in the =
Yahoo forum, of which there is a link at the bottom of this page. And I =
would also recommend that all further discussions (this one included) on =
this matter be posted there as well.

 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/neopal/=20

=20

Mike Kraft

=20

------=_NextPart_000_00B0_01C53111.BBA3DAD0
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2604" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV>
Mary, Mary, quite contrary; how does your anger =
grow?
<?xml:namespace =
prefix =3D o ns =3D=20
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p> </o:p>
With a rather unusual misconception about what went on at the =
GotPay?=20
meeting the other night, apparently. I am quite stunned at your post. It =
seems=20
to me just about everyone there was in agreement about what we all were =
saying.=20
In fact, I led off by asking what the controversy was about, and I got =
but one=20
well-reasoned response. The only =93attacks=94 were what I thought was a =
rather=20
good-natured volley of rhetoric between Jean Zarzour and Bill Johns. And =
judging=20
from his delightful follow-up email on the subject, he apparently=20
agrees.
<o:p> </o:p>
Bill is a good and honest fellow of considerable drive and =
talent. He=20
works very hard at producing his films with a minimal budget. Some of us =
simply=20
disagree with his approach to making money off of them; we feel if he =
really=20
wants to be successful, he should get great talent to do so. Problem is, =
most of=20
the really good actors realize their worth and ask money for their =
efforts. We=20
think he would have greater success making money if he spent some up =
front to=20
end up with a better finished product (with no offense to anyone who has =

appeared in one of his films).
<o:p> </o:p>
NO ONE is saying not to work for free for an indie movie or =
other=20
non-commercial project that you want to be in for love/experience/food. =
We are=20
saying that if there is any downstream potential for profit, protect =
yourself up=20
front. Either get a stipend for your efforts, or the producer should =
have the=20
huevos to offer you a contract that protects your interests in the =
future. If=20
not, draw up a contract for yourself; it=92s just good business. =

<o:p> </o:p>
May I point out that the meeting was three hours (!!!) long; =
during which=20
time you were completely silent. For those who are piling on with Mary =
and were=20
NOT at the meeting, I would suggest that her take on the outcome is =
exaggerated.=20
Of the three (!!!) hours, only about three minutes were taken up with =
what Mary=20
considered =93an attack=94.
<o:p> </o:p>
A couple of points on your post:
<o:p> </o:p>
<FONT=20
face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D3>>Telling newcomers to negotiate =
union wages or=20
"walk away" from the job is =20
ridiculous.<
<o:p> </o:p>
At no time did anyone recommend this. What I said was that =
union wages=20
are not arbitrary or =93pie-in-the-sky=94 numbers; they are wages that =
have been=20
negotiated in good faith between artist=92s representatives and =
representatives=20
for =93management=94, in this case, advertising agencies, film =
producers, etc. They=20
represent the honest negotiated value of these services. 
<o:p> </o:p>
I went on to say that you should ask for MORE than union scale =
if you=20
believe your talent is worthy of it, especially in light of the fact =
that=20
independent contractors have to pay their own self-employment tax. =

<o:p> </o:p>
In regards to negotiating pay, I said =93Start high, you can =
always come=20
down. If you say $50, you can=92t change your mind and say $150 =
later=94. No one=20
ever said to =93walk away=94 without union wages. The video of the =
meeting bears=20
this out.
<o:p> </o:p>
<FONT=20
face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D3>>What gives ANYONE the right to =
shame, demean,=20
or subtly threaten Email >attacks to those who wish to offer no-pay =
gigs...or=20
those who choose to accept >such "opportunities" to work for =
free...for the=20
reel, or experience or "fun of it?" 
<o:p><FONT=20
face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D3> </o:p>
I think it is right and fair for a group of people who feel =
there is=20
injustice to speak out against that. Shaming is fine, as long as your =
position=20
is right. Demeaning and subtle threats are below the belt, but you are =
dealing=20
with rather opinionated people on both sides of the aisle, so fur flies =
from=20
time to time. At least we=92re not getting hit in the head by the=20
Pinkerton=92s.
<o:p> </o:p>
The point we are trying to make (and it is a good, honest and =
worthy=20
point) is that artists tend to stand alone; they are independent spirits =
and=20
have a desire to be seen as unique. From a business perspective, this is =
an=20
incredibly bad position to be in. We only wish for all creative people =
(not just=20
actors) to realize that the intellectual property they create has real =
value.=20
When anyone (whether it is a car dealer or independent film maker) tries =
to=20
exploit that talent for profit without compensation, it is simply wrong. =

Standing together and demanding just compensation (even unjust =
compensation for=20
a start) is the correct thing to do when the downward pressure on the =
individual=20
artist by business entities large and small is so great.
<o:p> </o:p>
As we said at the meeting, and will continue to repeat; when =
money is=20
made, the talent gets paid. The percolating upward pressure of artists =
demanding=20
proper compensation for their efforts creates the perception that this =
is not a=20
free lunch. If you want to do something for the love of it, by all means =
do=20
so.
<o:p> </o:p>
I would recommend you read the earlier posts on this subject in =
the Yahoo=20
forum, of which there is a link at the bottom of this page. And I would =
also=20
recommend that all further discussions (this one included) on this =
matter be=20
posted there as well.
 
 <A=20
href=3D"http://groups.yahoo.com/group/neopal/">http://groups.yahoo.com/gr=
oup/neopal/</A>=20
 
<o:p> </o:p>
Mike Kraft
<o:p><FONT=20
face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D3> </o:p></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></BODY></HTML>

------=_NextPart_000_00B0_01C53111.BBA3DAD0--