An explanation of the exact dispute, from the Writers' Guild point of view:

Now if the asshats who do the commercials would just join.

For me it's...

• Heroes
• House
• Family Guy
• Biggest Loser
• Bionic Woman
• Are you smarter than a 5th grader
• Deal or No Deal

I believe the dispute is over digital media over the internet. The writers were screwed by the studios on DVD sales. They want residuals for internet viewings of material they wrote for, and in my opinion they are way out of line.

I don't like the idea of residuals to begin with. If I hire you to do something for me and I pay you, why should I pay you every time I use it to make money? It's like a shovel maker wanting a dollar every time someone digs a hole with their shovel.

If I risk my money to hire people to write a program for me. Should I be forced to pay them money for each copy that sells? I already paid them to come in everyday and write the program for a year or two. I shelled out that money with no guarantee that I would get any money back.

The same is true of tv shows. These people risk millions of dollars on a product that is unlikely to make any money for them. Most shows tank. If their investment pays off, why should they be forced to pay someone for work they did years ago that they were already paid for when the show wasn't making any money?

Should I have to send money to Toyota ever ytime I drive my car, even though I've already paid for the car?

These are reality/game shows. They don't have writers. It's also very likely that whoever comes up with the questions for "Are You Smarter Than a 5th Grader" is considered more of a researcher and is not part of the Writers' Guild.

But I am bitter about you people with your, "Oh, I'm afraid that sometime in the Spring episodes of my favorite shows might be delayed..." I have already gone three nights without The Colbert Report. And the topical nature of the show guarantees that--unlike dramas that have a preset plot line over a season--I will never get those episodes back. :mecry:

No, it's like a shovel inventor wanting money every time someone sells their shovel. Or an author wanting money for each copy of their book that is sold.

That makes no sense. In fact I'd wager that producers would prefer to increase residuals payments and eliminate the initial wage they pay. Then they would only be paying the writers if the shows were a hit. It would eliminate some of the risk for the producers. "I'll only pay you if the show is a hit, but I will pay you handsomely."

Seems to me this hybrid system gives the writers a little stability up front and a lot of incentive to produce a good show for a big payoff down the line. If they were to eliminate the residuals, then the initial writer's wage would likely go up, and so would the risk to the producers.

Absolutely. Every time a show fails, all the writers lose their jobs. 43% of writers are out of work at any given time. During those times they are living off the residuals of their previous successes. If there were no residuals, you would have to pay writers a lot more to ensure they made it through the down times and didn't decide to take a guaranteed salary in a cubicle somewhere instead.

Most of TV is so very unoriginal, how much is a nice long stretch of reruns really matter?

I agree with that. A monkey could write better than most sitcom writers.

If the writers are paid for writing a script, that should be the end of the money they get. If I own a business and pay you to write a computer program for me, I don't owe you money every time I use it. I also don't owe you money if I choose to sell that program and make billions of dollars. I already paid for it. Your work was done. Nothing entitles you to be paid over and over for the work you did one time.

Baloney. It depends ENTIRELY upon the deal you strike at the outset. Owning a business is irrelevant.

It *could* wind up the way you describe, it *could*, just as easily, wind up differently. Are you entirely ignorant of the concept of licensing, or are you ignoring it to make your absolutist statements appear less absurd?

And sometimes it does work out that way. But those types of writers make a lot more for their one-time work than a typical writing contract that includes residuals. Residuals in fact ensure that a producer doesn't have to pay the writer as much if the show flops.

Some book authors sell their works outright to the publishing company as well. But most publishers prefer a residuals scheme in case the book turns out to be a failure. It's the same situation, because most shows have to have several episodes created before any producer or network picks them up. Producers are not hiring laborers, they are purchasing a product from the writers, and they know exactly what they are buying beforehand.

If you support the writers (which you should, in case you haven't been paying attention,) there's an organized effort to make your voice heard for a swift return to the negotiation tables at www.fans4writers.com. They cover everything from donating food to the people on the picket lines to printable postcard templates to mail to the AMPTP and/or major advertisers.

I should support the writers? I must have missed that part of this thread. Why would I support people who are trying to basically commit strong arm robbery on the studios by demanding that they get something they aren't owed and haven't earned? Why should I support a bunch of cry babies who want to get paid a thousand times for a job they did once and were already paid for. Why would I want to support any union when it unions drive up prices, close down businesses, and chase jobs out of America?

I hope every one of those writers is replaced with non-union writers who appreciate having a decent job with decent pay and don't want to bully others around.

When you bother to address the points in posts 36-38 and 41-42, maybe someone will care what you think.