Slashdot Mirror


Battlestar Galactica 'Webisodes' Conflict Brewing

nebaz writes "MSNBC has an article saying that there is tension between NBC and Ron Moore and team about the royalties on the 'Webisodes' of Battlestar Galactica. The episodes have been seized by NBC, balking at Ron Moore's refusal to produce any more episodes, due to compensation issues."

199 comments

  1. You're kidding right? by Adult+film+producer · · Score: 0

    How many episodes of season 3 have been produced so far? Please please tell me it's more than 10.

    1. Re:You're kidding right? by tomhudson · · Score: 4, Informative

      The article is talking about "webisodes" - 3-minute promotional mini-episodes you can get off the net - not BSG itself.

      I'm waiting for the DVD, like the last 2-1/2 seasons. Much more fun to watch it all in a couple of sittings.

    2. Re:You're kidding right? by denebian+devil · · Score: 5, Informative

      FTA: "NBC Universal, the studio behind "Battlestar," refused to pay residuals or credit the writers of these "Webisodes," claiming they're promotional materials. So "Battlestar" executive producer Ron Moore said he wouldn't deliver any more of them, including the 10 that were already in the can."

      10 refers to the Webisodes, not to the episodes of Season 3 running on SciFi itself.

    3. Re:You're kidding right? by TubeSteak · · Score: 5, Funny

      You can see 'em here
      http://www.scifi.com/battlestar/video/

      Or go find them on bittorrent as .avi's
      (which is what I did)
      (it's not like the writers are getting residuals anyways)

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    4. Re:You're kidding right? by snuf23 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Uh, he goes to scifi.com and clicks on all their ad banners for 20 minutes a week.

      Seriously though, the webisodes were free to view online. I think getting a torrent of them serves the same promotional purpose. IMO the best way to watch the 10 that were released is as the single recut episode that combines them all.

      --
      Sometimes my arms bend back.
    5. Re:You're kidding right? by CrackedButter · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Considering they are free, it seems nobody from outside the North American mainland can view them. I tried last week and got stopped because it located my IP. What's the point when a determined person can get round the block anyway and then dump them on a P2P network and in the process create that avenue for your future non-american customers?

    6. Re:You're kidding right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My god, man, you didn't even have to RTFA to get an idea and you managed to even fuck that up. Right there it says in the article topic (what, too lazy to read one line before posting?) that these were the WEBisodes. Way to waste a first post AND karma in the process.

    7. Re:You're kidding right? by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Considering they are free, it seems nobody from outside the North American mainland can view them.
      Eventually, if they ever decide to take this show overseas, they'll want to reuse all the same content & promo materials.

      It can also be a matter of contract rights.
      IE Sci-Fi doesn't have the overseas contract rights for he show.
      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    8. Re:You're kidding right? by CrackedButter · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah I'm aware of this and thought it was most likely, but I still wanted to mention it. I also want to mention that the internet sucks, not in a post dot.com bubble ironic sort of way but as a fact. I think we have to accept the fact that the internet isn't going to change the world, but the internet is being changed by the world to suit their existing business models. Its the reason why iTunes isn't 1 store but 21 stores.

    9. Re:You're kidding right? by kwark · · Score: 1

      For some people downloading is still legal use of copyrighted materials!

    10. Re:You're kidding right? by M1FCJ · · Score: 1, Interesting
      You can't get more overseas than UK where the BSG gets shown before US.

      I don't even have a TV but I know that quite a lot of people travel over the Atlantic in their private jets to get the UK aired shows regularly (as opposed to downloading them from a torrent).

    11. Re:You're kidding right? by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      Find a friend in the US to do an SSH or SSL tunnel for you.

    12. Re:You're kidding right? by jackhererUK · · Score: 1

      It was only the first series that was shown first in the UK, series 2 and 3 are US firsts.

    13. Re:You're kidding right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually there is quite a few countries in europe who air BSG.

    14. Re:You're kidding right? by Hijacked+Public · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Please do not blaspheme the internet. It has changed everything, its just that the rest of the entire world has not kept up with frenetic pace set by our beloved internet.

      Like, you know, how all content, all entertainment, all information, is now freely available to everyone everywhere, which is so tantalizingly similar to the abundant economies predicted by our favorite sci-fi shows (now, by the way, freely available for free download) that we cannot restrain ourselves from making ever more boastful predictions covering things we know nothing about apart from our certainty that they will be fundamentally changed by the internet. Like in the 90s only we're right this time.

      I do not care what you say. The internet is not owned by the same corporations that own everything else. The packets that come to my house are not carried over wires owned by a profit seeking ISP, carried at their whim rather than mine. By virtue of my birth into this world I have earned an inalienable right to these packets and any other packets I might want to receive or send. The internet is not dependent on routers and switches owned by telcos that can decide to allow or reject packets based on their specific business needs or the constraints placed on them by the governments that allow them to operate. No one can sue me for doing something wrong, like piracy or theft of information or slander, as long as I am using the internet because the internet is a playground of limitless freedom that no man, no government, can ever hold back. Not even a nation of millions.

      If you don't recognize that the internet has ushered in a new era of free, and freedom, then you way off in the weeds. We disciples praying at the altar of the internet are leaving you behind, old man.

      --
      "Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
    15. Re:You're kidding right? by boarsai · · Score: 1

      What really gets under my skin, is as an australian... I can't even buy the real episodes online if I wanted to. This is due to the way itunes is setup and the fact australian TV stations suck and we're always behind the seasons anyway. None the less we can't even buy season 1 FFS. God knows I'm WILLING to pay for episodes as they are released... but it feels like I'm forced to pirate them each week or wait for the DVD's. Which I might add I buy regardless - still it really annoys me that I don't have the option of supporting them via purchases on itunes or any other service for that matter.

    16. Re:You're kidding right? by fernandoh26 · · Score: 0
      I know that quite a lot of people travel over the Atlantic in their private jets to get the UK aired shows regularly
      No. Fsckin. Way. Ok, I'm sorry but I call bullshit on that.
      --
      Chums up, let's do this!
    17. Re:You're kidding right? by L33t+Windozer · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Please do not blaspheme the word "blaspheme" since it can only be used in combination with a god-like entity (which i think the internet isn't, just to be clear)

    18. Re:You're kidding right? by Have+Blue · · Score: 1

      I hope you're being sarcastic, because you're just as off-base as the post you're replying to.

      The Internet is changing the world. The world, likewise, is changing the Internet at the same time. Neither is, or will ever be, free from the other's influence.

    19. Re:You're kidding right? by BorgCopyeditor · · Score: 1

      Cow poop is changing the world, too. (Though I'm not sure the world is changing cow poop.)

      The point of the parody above is not to claim that no change is happening, but that the internet is not changing everything.

      For example, it's not exactly making people better readers.

      --
      Shop as usual. And avoid panic buying.
    20. Re:You're kidding right? by gkhan1 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, because an open proxy is SO hard to find :P

    21. Re:You're kidding right? by CheShACat · · Score: 1

      The Internet gets a capital lettr, kind of like God and it's also everywhere and it knows everything?!!

    22. Re:You're kidding right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I do not care what you say. The internet is not owned by the same corporations that own everything else. The packets that come to my house are not carried over wires owned by a profit seeking ISP, carried at their whim rather than mine. By virtue of my birth into this world I have earned an inalienable right to these packets and any other packets I might want to receive or send. The internet is not dependent on routers and switches owned by telcos that can decide to allow or reject packets based on their specific business needs or the constraints placed on them by the governments that allow them to operate. No one can sue me for doing something wrong, like piracy or theft of information or slander, as long as I am using the internet because the internet is a playground of limitless freedom that no man, no government, can ever hold back. Not even a nation of millions.

      Try handing that speech to a judge in a copyright violation suit and watch as he laughs and awards the plaintiff the full amount demanded of you as the defendant.
    23. Re:You're kidding right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm in Canada, and I couldn't watch them.

    24. Re:You're kidding right? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1
      Please do not blaspheme the word "blaspheme" since it can only be used in combination with a god-like entity (which i think the internet isn't, just to be clear)


      Not yet, anyway.

      Muahahahahahahahaha!

      -The Internet

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    25. Re:You're kidding right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      there will be a total of 21 for season 3. 22 if you include the fact that the first ep. was a double header. I think right now they are shooting ep 15 or 16 right now. but VFX is still working on ep 5. the VFX gets worked on right up till last minute. (I'm VFX)

    26. Re:You're kidding right? by UpnAtom · · Score: 1

      The AVIs are dreadful quality. Very blocky and about 12 FPS (even tho rendered at 25 FPS).

      Being in the UK, I can't access the webisodes directly but I'd be surprised if they released something so far below broadcast quality.

    27. Re:You're kidding right? by bluephone · · Score: 1

      THey didn't, someome ripped them form FLV format the Flash Video format from Adobe/Macromedia, and transcoded them (poorly) into AVIs. FLV is usually a high compression rate to start with, so transcoding FLVs to something else just REALLY sucks.

      --
      jX [ Make everything as simple as possible, but no simpler. - Einstein ]
    28. Re:You're kidding right? by JudgeFurious · · Score: 1

      Based on all of the assembled evidence from the dawn of human existence (and the fossil record that preceeded it) I'd say the Internet has a better claim to being a "god-like entity" than some musty old Judeo-Christian made-up story "god" who supposedly did everything but who's existence cannot even be proven, much less measured and studied to prove or disprove any claim of god-like status.

        That's just me though and I never believed any of that junk before the Internet existed.

      --
      Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
    29. Re:You're kidding right? by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      Please do not blaspheme the Internet as it is a god-like entity.

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
    30. Re:You're kidding right? by Snaller · · Score: 1

      Or go find them on bittorrent as .avi's
      (which is what I did)


      Or not waste time (which is what i did)

      (it's not like the writers are getting residuals anyways)

      Its not like the deserve it anyways.

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    31. Re:You're kidding right? by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Please point me to the snail mail version of /. to convince me that the internet is not changing the world.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
  2. Simple solution by tomhudson · · Score: 5, Funny

    Send in 6 to negotiate. That cylon seems to get her way most of the time, for some reason.

    1. Re:Simple solution by ericdano · · Score: 4, Funny

      Gee, I wonder why. Could it be the legs? The lips? She's no 6, she's an 11 for sure.

      --
      It's either on the beat or off the beat, it's that easy.
      I moderate therefore I rule!
      --
    2. Re:Simple solution by nytes · · Score: 1

      The writers were created by the studios.

      They evolved.

      They rebelled.

      There are many copies.

      And they have a plan.

      --
      -- I have monkeys in my pants.
  3. To clarify by TheGreatHegemon · · Score: 1, Informative

    This is NOT the actual BSG series! Sci-Fi will keep screening all of BSG. These referred to the webisodes that were online just before Season 3 was released, and narrated the formation of the the resistance.

    1. Re:To clarify by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That must have been why the summary said the 'Webisodes' of Battlestar Galactica.

    2. Re:To clarify by Legion303 · · Score: 2, Funny

      "These referred to the webisodes"

      Like it says right there in the title and writeup. Thanks for clearing that up.

  4. Uh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is an industry-wide battle between creatives and network/studio execs that goes way beyond this one show. Most of the unions completely messed up years ago negotiating residuals for the home markets (VHS and DVDs especially), so there's a LOT of resistence to giving away the farm this time. (Many writers, for example, in movie animation get zero residuals.) Unfortunately, there's a lot of momentum and precedents that resulted from the previous mistakes, so it's kind of an uphill battle for the writers, directors, actors guilds. The future gets even more complicated when writers, actors, and other artists work directly for the Internet, for phones, for games, etc. and when "reality" shows claim to not have writers at all or won't allow their writers to organize. Plus there's the issue of residuals for older content that wasn't even imagined when the shows were produced in the first place.

    So yeah, it's a mess, and there's gonna be conflict in this arena for a while.

    1. Re:Uh.... by Livius · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What is wrong with TV executives? Most TV writing is appallingly bad - and they pick a fight with the best writer they've got? (And since it sounds like NBC is in the wrong anyway.)

    2. Re:Uh.... by Malfourmed · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Agreed - it's all about driving a wedge between what the writers (and others) get, and what they - the studios - keep, a gap that will get substantially wider as the net takes off as a distribution channel.

    3. Re:Uh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      They obviously are very concerned that the artists get their fair share.

    4. Re:Uh.... by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      This is Hammer and Stern. Their goal is to be as stupid and evil as possible.

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
    5. Re:Uh.... by dominator · · Score: 2, Interesting

      NBC's Monday Night headliner, "Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip", is a show about how studios desperately need to attract and retain good writing and producing talent and stop showing so much reality TV garbage. Clearly, the NBC execs aren't watching their own network, making this whole debacle fraught with irony.

    6. Re:Uh.... by alexo · · Score: 0, Offtopic


      > What is wrong with TV executives? Most TV writing is appallingly bad - and they pick a fight with the best writer they've got?

      I'm still upset about the treatment of these people.

  5. free witing, but nbc owns it? by ackthpt · · Score: 4, Insightful

    NBC Universal, the studio behind "Battlestar," refused to pay residuals or credit the writers of these "Webisodes," claiming they're promotional materials.

    not pay writers? sheet. if these people worked for nbc, would nbc not pay them for the time during their work day they wrote?

    "you get no pay, peon, that was your break!"

    see how they feel if you lift the webisodes an puth them on your own site.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:free witing, but nbc owns it? by BladesP9 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Right now NBC Universal is in the process of doing a lot of quirky things. I heard just today they're scaling back production of their "8-9pm dramas" to make room for more game a reality-type shows because they are cheaper to produce. NBC Universal is rumored to be about to lay off 700 people as a result of dropping profits and what not. Personally, I think it's a crock of crap and is just the studio making a cash grab and trying to screw the creative types out of their money. It's been a historical theme that business people will always try to screw creative people.... however the creative types today are a lot smarter than they used to be. It should be interesting to see how it shapes out. With all of the on-demand and downloadable styles of content, I think it's prudent to make sure these businesses remain viable - but screwing the artists isn't the way to do it.

    2. Re:free witing, but nbc owns it? by psiphiorg · · Score: 5, Interesting

      > not pay writers? sheet. if these people worked for nbc, would nbc not pay them for the time during their work day they wrote?

      Nobody said that they weren't paid at all. The article just says that they don't get paid residuals, which are extra payments, above and beyond what they are initially paid for their work, that writers (among other professions) get paid when their material is aired again, whether as a regular rerun during the season, during a marathon, or in syndication.

      There are some good debatable issues here. When the show is broascast on television as a rerun, that is obviously a second airing, which generates residuals. But when is the "second airing" for a downloadable episode?

      If one million people download an episode over the course of one week, should that count as one million "airings", or seven (one per day), or just one (for the week)?

      If residuals are to be based on how long an episode is available for download, will that cause networks to remove episodes after a week, because to keep it up longer would trigger more payments to the writers (et al.)?

      davidh

    3. Re:free witing, but nbc owns it? by bm_luethke · · Score: 5, Informative

      One of the other issues is that revenue is not a standard term. If it were then you could negotiate that you garner a specific percentage of that revenue.

      The problem is that no one will do gross. That is reasonable - there are many places where a real gross is really really high and the real net is zero or a loss. Take advertising for instance - pretty much all a loss (and this is where the OP is talking about). While it is purely a cost, it still increases net revenue by quite a bit.

      If you do net then the studios play with costs - every thing becomes one and non-solid costs are greatly inflated. Say, for instance, one could say the five minutes by the studio exec to read over a document and sign it cost the company 5 million, to be deducted from the gross (and since it grossed 4 million that is a loss). Therefore you get no money. This occurs quite often.

      If the studios were somewhat honest this wouldn't be such an issue. You could simply do a percentage of net income (or maybe even gross income). However the powers that be try and actively screw people out of money and are in a position to do so easily. Do all of them do it? I do not know - I suspect there are honest players out there who figure a happy well compensated employee makes you MUCH more than a screwed one (which is very true). However from my view it seems pretty much all the big players do not do this - including trying hard line DRM initiatives that screw customers (read - the RIAA and MPAA).

      Eh, this is what a union is for. I've seen many cases where unions demand unreasonable ideas (it has resulted in more than one company moving labor out of country). Yet, this is precisely what they are intended to fix. If nearly everyone decides to do this there is no choice, if enough choose to go around the union then maybe it isn't that harsh on you and you need to re-evaluate your complaints. That's a free market for you.

      --
      ------- Sorry about the spelling, I suffer from two problems. Dyslexia makes it difficult to spell well, lazy makes it
    4. Re:free witing, but nbc owns it? by M1FCJ · · Score: 1
      It's a business. If the creative people want to make art but not a living, they can always go and to theatre.

      The lack of good content on TV made me get rid of mine years ago, I haven't looked back. You Tube is as bad as TV, it is just more stupid stuff but any time you want it! :)

    5. Re:free witing, but nbc owns it? by maxume · · Score: 1

      Unions only help here if you think you are replacable. If you think you are a better writer than most everybody else and you aren't getting a fair deal, you say 'well fuck you then' and go work with somebody willing to pay what you are worth.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    6. Re:free witing, but nbc owns it? by Malakusen · · Score: 1

      That sounds an awful lot like when FOX went from cool to suck. Now they've gone from suck to blow.

      --
      Never give in--never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to conviction
    7. Re:free witing, but nbc owns it? by AceCaseOR · · Score: 1

      Agreed - the only show on FOX I watch is House. That's it. No American Idol, no Bones (though I've been tempted to watch it because David Boreanaz is on it), no Standoff (though I've been tempted to watch it because Gina Torres is on it) and no 24 (I'd rather just get the DVD and just watch the series at one whack).

      --
      Zagreus sits inside your head, Zagreus lives among the dead, Zagreus sees you in your bed and eats you in your sleep.
    8. Re:free witing, but nbc owns it? by jandrese · · Score: 1

      The only problem is that you miss out on the occasions where something good does come on TV, like the new Battlestar Galactica.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    9. Re:free witing, but nbc owns it? by Tiger4 · · Score: 1

      NBC is in the wrong only in the sense that they dont want to pay "the usual" fees. The writers would be paid for delivering a script that was produced and shown. The problem then comes in, "how do you value it for residuals?"

      Most ordinary productions are licensed and metered. Everyone knows (roughly) how many times it was shown, what rates were charged, and where the money should go. Not so for Webisodes. Hit counts don't matter, downloads don't matter much, and the WGA contract doesn't cover it anyway. So what is one individual download, multiplied times 100,000 suppsed viewers, times 10 webisodes, worth to the X to X+5 writers that worked on one or more of the webisodes?

      Flat fee or flat rate may not be exactly right, but it is as right as anything can be when you have no metrics. Calling the things strictly promotional materials may not be right, but is it entirely wrong? If Moore could show he had always intended for them all to be strung together into an online episode he might have a leg to stand on. But even then, how do you value it compared to the TV eps that do fit into the predetermined rate structures? This is basic contract management. If if you do something that isn't in the contract, how do you charge for it? CAN you charge for it? And as most people know, negotiating a fee AFTER the service has been delivered is always a bitch.

      --
      Behold, this dreamer cometh. Come now, and let us slay him... and we shall see what will become of his dreams.
    10. Re:free witing, but nbc owns it? by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1

      Fox killed me, Mal. Killed me with cancellation...

      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
    11. Re:free witing, but nbc owns it? by 2short · · Score: 1

      To probably misquote Napoleon: "The graveyards are full of irreplaceable men."

      The trick here is that the writers don't know how they will be treated until after they've written something and it has become a smashing success. Sure, then they can go elsewhere, but many things besides their own talent will decide if the next thing they write will be a smashing success. So going elsewhere won't necessarily make up for getting screwed on residuals for their big hit.

    12. Re:free witing, but nbc owns it? by RobertLTux · · Score: 1

      the problem is if you have things setup so that you get paid a base wage/salary that is just about what it costs you to have the job but things are written so that you get some sort of "bonus" for.... The studios are simply rigging things so that the bonuses don't get paid.

      --
      Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
  6. Beyond Jericho? by SleepyHappyDoc · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I wonder if this is related or similar to what happened to the Jericho webisodes...there was one, corresponding to the pilot, but now the CBS website has been re-worked to remove all references to it.

    --
    Stasis is death. Embrace change.
    1. Re:Beyond Jericho? by psiphiorg · · Score: 1

      According to Kevin Mooney, a web developer at cbs.com, the reasons for removing "Beyond Jericho" from the website were unclear, but may be related to the WGA situation. See the Jericho talk page at Wikipedia for more info.

      davidh

    2. Re:Beyond Jericho? by NiteShaed · · Score: 1

      That thing was so incredibly bloody awful, if I were CBS I'd want to remove all evidence of its existence as well.

      --
      Some bring out the best in others, some the worst. Some bring out far more.
  7. Pay them by Tod+DeBie · · Score: 3, Insightful
    As I recall, actors were not initially paid for VHS sales because they were not covered in the contract...

    These things are clearly more than commericals and the actors should be paid. Heck, even actors in commericals get paid.

  8. Re:I like BSG as much as the next guy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Obviously, you're not a writer.

    I am. And if I write something, I get paid for it. End of story.

    If you RTFA, you might note that the network is claiming it doesn't have to pay for the webisodes because they're "promotional materials," as though that somehow means that the content just magically appeared. The network is trying to get something for nothing, and they're giving the content creators - without whom the network is nothing - the shaft.

  9. [BLEEP] by CrtxReavr · · Score: 3, Funny

    Frak!

    -CR

    --
    "So is the BSD licence even more 'free' (than GPLv2)? Yes. Unquestionably." --Linus Torvalds (TinyURL.com/2vugzl)
  10. Pfff by Kingrames · · Score: 5, Funny

    I give Baltar 1 hour before he caves in and the situation is "resolved."

    --
    If you can read this, I forgot to post anonymously.
  11. Re:I like BSG as much as the next guy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am in a union. I wish the truth was even a fraction of the way closer to your assessment.

  12. follow the money... by samnice · · Score: 1

    i wonder how much of an issue this would be if this weren't such a good show/season for scifi.
    "The show saw bigger gains in the viewers age 25 to 54 demographic (seven percent), and viewers 18 to 49 (4 percent)." http://www.gateworld.net/galactica/news/2006/10/se ason_three_premieres_with_strong_ratings.shtml
    seems like everyone was cool with the arrangement last month. or else, why would the first three have gone up without a problem?

    1. Re:follow the money... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      from Instapundit.com:


      October 19, 2006

      BIG LAYOFFS AT NBC, to the tune of $750 million in cost cuts.

      Plus, plunging profits at the New York Times. No wonder the Big Media are acting as if the economy is in dreadful shape. For them, it is.

      posted at 04:02 PM by Glenn Reynolds

  13. Maybe since there is a new medium? by Warbringer87 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I know some people must have seen this comming, but you'd think they'd act before this became such a big issue. As time goes on, I am sure some new method of distributing stuff or new forms of media will eventually cause this problem again. If they didn't think of this being a problem all those years ago, what lies down the road in 10, 20 years time?

  14. scripts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    why can't I get residuals for the applicaton I wrote last year? it was a script and I wrote it.....

  15. Please don't fuck this up NBC by be-fan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Whatever BSG's writers want, give it to them. They're far better than the writers on nearly every other one of your shows, and is one of the highlights of a network this is otherwise deservedly in last place among the big four.

    --
    A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    1. Re:Please don't fuck this up NBC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Clearly you have not seen Studio 60.

    2. Re:Please don't fuck this up NBC by powerlord · · Score: 1
      Clearly you have not seen Studio 60.


      Well ... if it hadn't been on after Heros, neither would I. :)

      NBC used to known for great shows that put it in the top of the 'big three' networks. Since WB, UPN, and the prevalence of cable TV, its significance has dropped (although considering I watch SciFi channel owned by NBC, its influence may have grown).

      I find it interesting that two of the "hot" shows produced by NBC right now are Battlestar Galactica and Heroes. Could this be the dawning of a "SuperHero blitz" of shows as everyone gets on the bandwagon? (a'la the 'reality TV' craze thats died down a lot)
      --
      This space for rent. All reasonable inquiries will be entertained at proprietors discretion.
  16. from someone in the biz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I write music for some of these shows and let me tell you, you have no idea how deep the well goes. Most of us get ZERO royalties per download off of shows on itunes. ASCAP/BMI refuses to track them on the internet. Thus, as the viewing audience shifts, they are trying to squeeze us out. It's amazing really.

    1. Re:from someone in the biz by bm_luethke · · Score: 1

      "It's amazing really."

      It is? It seems pretty much par for the course to me. Apparently you do not pay that much attention to the business end of your industry. This is what occurs when you fail to do so.

      --
      ------- Sorry about the spelling, I suffer from two problems. Dyslexia makes it difficult to spell well, lazy makes it
    2. Re:from someone in the biz by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      could you clarify what you mean by that? are you telling me that they do in fact track downloads of tv shows on itunes? Last time I checked they do not. What is it that I "failed" to do? if by fail you mean failing to forsee that itunes would sell tv shows four years ago than yeah, you got me.

    3. Re:from someone in the biz by clymere · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I believe his point was that you shouldn't be "amazed" at their attempt to squeeze you out. That sort of thing is business as usual for any large corporation.

      --
      once you go slack, you never go back
    4. Re:from someone in the biz by demallien2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Wait, if that's true (I note that you posted as an AC...), I just had a horrible thought. We have DRM on the iTunes episodes because we are told that this stops pirating, so people pay for the episode instead. The networks tell us this is a good thing, because it means more money to pay for more shows = more content for us. But now we are being told that the money doesn't go back to the creative talent, ie presumably it goes into the oversized pockets of company execs/shareholders. Come again?!?!

      Please note, I am one of the rare /.ers that actually believes DRM to be a reasonable idea. I write software for a living, and don't like the idea that others can just take my products that I have worked hard on without me getting anything in return. I even do DRM for a living just at the moment! But still, DRM is ONLY justifiable if the money made means more content (better content!) is produced.

    5. Re:from someone in the biz by Xugumad · · Score: 1

      Do you get royalties based on viewing figures, normally, then?

    6. Re:from someone in the biz by hardburn · · Score: 5, Interesting

      But now we are being told that the money doesn't go back to the creative talent, ie presumably it goes into the oversized pockets of company execs/shareholders.

      Quite so. See also Hollywood Accounting, which caused movies like Forest Gump to officially have no net profit (and thus screwing over the writer of the orginal book, as his contract specified that he gets a percentage of the profit).

      The real pirates are in movie and music stuido board rooms.

      --
      Not a typewriter
    7. Re:from someone in the biz by rickwood · · Score: 1

      That's why you always, and I mean always, hold out for a cut of the gross. A cut of the net is for chumps.

    8. Re:from someone in the biz by PCM2 · · Score: 1
      We have DRM on the iTunes episodes because we are told that this stops pirating, so people pay for the episode instead. The networks tell us this is a good thing, because it means more money to pay for more shows = more content for us. But now we are being told that the money doesn't go back to the creative talent, ie presumably it goes into the oversized pockets of company execs/shareholders. Come again?!?!

      I know. It's terrible. Execs and shareholders get 75 percent, 25 percent goes to that set-painter guy, and the creatives get zip.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
  17. Tomorrow, on MSNBC by Gerocrack · · Score: 4, Funny

    Marc Graboff, West Coast president of NBC Universal TV, was torn in half by a conflicted Victoria's Secret model.

  18. Watchmen by dunsurfin · · Score: 5, Informative

    DC Comics pulled a similar stunt on Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons with Watchmen badges ("pins" to the American audience). The badges were sold in comic stores and used the iconic designs that Moore had envisioned and Gibbons had illustrated. DC Comics happily cashed the proceeds but did not send any of the profits to Moore and Gibbons since these were "promotional items." Alan Moore did not react well to this....

    1. Re:Watchmen by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That was sleazy. If the item is intended to be purchased by the person getting the item, it's definitely not a promotional item, or at least in my opinion, it shouldn't be. That's one of the kind of things I am not surprised to read about with regards to the comic book industry.

    2. Re:Watchmen by Malakusen · · Score: 1

      On the one hand, that's pretty screwed up. On the other hand, that's still pretty screwed up, but I really really wish I had one. Loved the Watchmen.

      --
      Never give in--never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to conviction
    3. Re:Watchmen by jandrese · · Score: 1

      Ultimately, these guys need to kick their union and get them to specify that promotional materials cannot be purchased by the consumer, and must be of lesser value (based on market value) than anything they come bundled with. Reclassifing stuff that they're selling as "promotional materials" is clearly bogus, and they need to be called on it.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    4. Re:Watchmen by PCM2 · · Score: 1
      Ultimately, these guys need to kick their union and get them to specify that promotional materials cannot be purchased by the consumer, and must be of lesser value (based on market value) than anything they come bundled with.

      Ah, but here we're not talking about Hollywood people. These are comic book writers and artists. There is no union.

      I have sympathy for some of Alan Moore's kvetching. Some. But the truth of much of it, including Watchmen, V for Vendetta, and the other properties Moore now says were "stole" from him, is that he signed a lopsided contract. I'm not even going to use the word "bad," because it sounds to me like DC Comics bought his works for what, at the time, was fair consideration. Now, hindsight being 20/20, he wants to rewrite those contracts and get a bigger piece of the pie than he originally signed up for. Unfortunately, he doesn't have much ground to stand on there.

      Even this Watchmen button issue discussed here is probably something of a red herring, because in the 1980s it was routine that many comics artists got zero recurring payments of any kind. If an artist drew a panel of Spider-Man and that image later wound up being used on a lunch box, the artist got squat. I'm not even sure if that particular policy has changed at Marvel, to this day.

      Alan Moore claims that the Watchmen is the sole brainchild of himself and Dave Gibbons, and indeed it is one of the most creative comic books to come out of the superhero genre. But the truth is that, in the mid-1980s, DC Comics bought a group of superhero character properties from a defunct company called Charlton Comics. Alan Moore wrote Watchmen as a re-visioning of those characters -- much in the same way that his earlier Miracleman character was a re-imagining of an earlier character, the British equivalent of Captain Marvel. DC later decided that it didn't want to wreck those characters with a plotline like Watchmen, that it would rather publish their adventures in a more mundane, mainstream way, so Moore changed the likenesses of the characters in Watchmen so that they were more or less original. It's not hard to guess which Watchmen character is supposed to be which Charlton Comics character, though. So while Watchmen is a creative book, to be sure, the fact that it exists at all is wholly dependent on the fact that the superhero comics publishers exist, that their characters exist, and that they gave Moore an opportunity to work with their characters. To claim Moore and Gibbons came up with it out of whole cloth is a little disingenuous.

      Bottom line: Alan Moore wishes he had self-published all that old work, but he didn't. And if he had, it wouldn't have been as successful. It might not have even found an audience. That's what DC Comics gave him, in addition to money. To say he got a raw deal is stretching the truth considerably. He got a much better deal than the creators of Superman got, for example. Could he have gotten a still better deal? Maybe. Maybe his next one will be better. He would have to try, though, instead of just stomping his feet and waving his fist.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
  19. It may be "promotional," but... by denebian+devil · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Seems to me as much creative energy went into creating those webisodes as did the full TV episodes (albeit 3 minutes at a time). It's not like the webisodes are just clips of scenes from other episodes all strung together into a 30 second commercial... they are all unique content, things you can't get from just watching TV episodes.

    I wonder if the actors got paid for the time they spent shooting those "promotions." Or makeup, costume, cameramen, the list goes on.

    1. Re:It may be "promotional," but... by sakusha · · Score: 0
      Seems to me as much creative energy went into creating those webisodes as did the full TV episodes (albeit 3 minutes at a time). It's not like the webisodes are just clips of scenes from other episodes all strung together into a 30 second commercial... they are all unique content, things you can't get from just watching TV episodes.

      Did you actually watch the webisodes? The new content is about 30 seconds per webisode, the rest is titles and a commercial made from clips of the upcoming series. They ran the same 2 clip commercials over and over, across the 10 webisodes. So this whole fuss is over 5min of original made-for-the-web content.
      There are other obvious problems with this new season's shows. Apparently they got tired of spending so much money on computer graphics, so almost all of the new shows are set in a muddy field, with some tents and some junk. It's turned into a freaking soap opera about mommies and babies. Fuck that shit, I want to see some nuclear explosions in space!
    2. Re:It may be "promotional," but... by Benaiah · · Score: 0

      I only started watching BStar because it looked cool. I dont want it to become a soap :(

      With reguards to the issue. The gap between rich and poor will keep getting wider until disgruntled workers on 50 times less income than board directors go to Annual GM's with UZI's spraying blood all over the place. Pretty soon directors will start paying attention to the little guys.

    3. Re:It may be "promotional," but... by Bishop923 · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm sure that everyone got paid for the time they put in, just like anyone else with a normal job. This boils down to residuals, or a share of the profits from distribution. Imagine that you are a programmer working on some application. You get paid for the time you put in, but 99% of the time, it doesn't matter wether the company sells 1 copy or 1 million, you don't see a cut of the profits. The entertainment industry is different, since most of the jobs are short term contract work, the actors/writers/directors etc get paid x amount specified in their contract and they rely on residuals to get them thru the times when they don't have work.

      In some ways it is hard to feel for either side, The networks are the typical bloated-big-company-screw-the-little-guy types and the creatives whine about not getting more money beyond what they were already paid.(I'd love to see the Photoshop team decide that they aren't going to deliver CS3 unless Adobe gives them a cut of each sale...)

      Ultimately this is going to come to a head and the creatives will figure out that they don't need the networks to distribute their content

    4. Re:It may be "promotional," but... by ZachPruckowski · · Score: 5, Insightful

      NOTICE: Possible Spoilers

      Apparently they got tired of spending so much money on computer graphics, so almost all of the new shows are set in a muddy field, with some tents and some junk. It's turned into a freaking soap opera about mommies and babies. Fuck that shit, I want to see some nuclear explosions in space!

      OK. First of all, Galactica is a drama set in space. It's not a scifi kill-fest. The awesome explosions and Viper vs. Raider battles are incidental to the plot. The show gets all its acclaim and awards (and most of its audience) from the script and acting. Without that, the show won't have lasted into season 2.

      And the current situation on the planet is symbolically critical - recall the line last week when Tyrol said "We're going home" in reference to reassembling the fleet, when the whole first 2 seasons they wanted a planet to call home, they've found out (both before and during the occupation) that maybe there's more to a new home than soil. Also, you'll be getting your wish in Exodus Part 2, I bet, with 2 battlestars vs. 5 basestars, and 1000 resistance fighters versus the Cylons on the ground.

      Back on topic: The webisodes were short (a total of about 15 minutes of content), but they are vital to introducing Duck and Jammer and their choices. Seeing the webisodes helps with the Duck-related scenes in "Occupation", and Jammer's conflicts in the other two episodes. It also really reveals the full irony of Tyrol's conversation with Jammer about Gaeta. That will echo through to at least Episode 5 "Collaborators".

    5. Re:It may be "promotional," but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Duck and Jammer both perviously existed. References: http://en.battlestarwiki.org/wiki/Tucker_Clellan http://en.battlestarwiki.org/wiki/James_Lyman

      You are correct that the webisodes help greatly in understanding their motives, though.

    6. Re:It may be "promotional," but... by jacobw · · Score: 1

      In some ways it is hard to feel for either side, The networks are the typical bloated-big-company-screw-the-little-guy types and the creatives whine about not getting more money beyond what they were already paid.(I'd love to see the Photoshop team decide that they aren't going to deliver CS3 unless Adobe gives them a cut of each sale...)

      Actually, a better analogy might be if Adobe had lured the programmers to their jobs with the promise that they WOULD get a cut of each sale. And then Adobe asked them to stay at work even later than they normally do and work on porting CS3 to web-browsers. And then Adobe said, "Even though from your point of view 30 hours spent programming is 30 hours spent programming whatever platform its ends up being used on, we are viewing the web version as a promotional item, and you won't get a cut."

      And the programmers said, "But you're selling ad space on the webpage. You're making money off it."

      And Adobe said, "Sorry. If you don't like it, take it to your union."

      Now imagine that computer programming was a highly unstable profession, where any project you worked on could get canceled at any moment, and in any case, once you hit your 40's, you would cease to be hot and hip and might never work again--which means you'll be living off your software "residuals" for many years to come.

      And you've got a pretty good idea of how the Battlestar Galactica writers feel.

    7. Re:It may be "promotional," but... by $1uck · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Now imagine that computer programming was a highly unstable profession, where any project you worked on could get canceled at any moment, and in any case, once you hit your 40's, you would cease to be hot and hip and might never work again--which means you'll be living off your software "residuals" for many years to come.

      Why would one have to imagine? Isn't this the case? I suppose maybe at 40 you don't cease to be hip in the programming world, but if you don't keep up with whatever tech its the same and could happen when you're 25 or 35 or 55 and we don't get residuals. Although I thought some programmers or designers earned royalties? is that only in games? Or is it even in games? Are royalties anagolous to residuals?

    8. Re:It may be "promotional," but... by cyberdanx · · Score: 1

      Spoiler: (a depressed fat) Lee Adama will take the second battlestar and the ships to search for Earth. They will not be part of the fight. Just the Gallatica. It was a big part of Exodus part 1, Apollo resolving stuff with his father and maybe getting back to his old self. That is unless they bring it back to save the day.

      I agree it's more like a drama. Lots of interesting stuff will happen in the next few episodes. Giaus time is running out. It's going to be interesting to see what happens and maybe we'll find out why six is in his head and he in hers. It would be too predictable if he was a cylon. I also wonder what Odama means in the clips when he says he started it. Will be interesting.

    9. Re:It may be "promotional," but... by Aqualung812 · · Score: 1
      Yes, but in the preview for part two, Sharon walks into Colonial 1 and says "Two battlestars just jumped into orbit. Adama is back"

      Now, that can mean Lee changes his mind at the last minute, or maybe they launch a ECM pod that looks like a battlestar for a decoy, but we have not seen them do that before. Maybe a raptor has ECM ability to look like a battlestar.

      --
      Grammer Nazis - I mod you "troll" unless you actually add something on-topic. Yes, I know I have mispellings in my sig.
    10. Re:It may be "promotional," but... by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the spoiler warning. I didn't read the rest of your post because of it, but this seemed an opportune moment to point out that those of us outside the US couldn't even download the webisodes before this mess all came down, apparently (if I read the blogs right) because of similar problems over who had rights to what. So even if they were "promotional", the only thing they promoted to the non-US audience was that the studio were trying to screw us. Of course, given the whole "Series 2.0" DVD box set fiasco (check out the comments on Amazon) it's not a great surprise. What a shame, for a show that's one of the better ones of recent times, to be backed by such silly politics.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    11. Re:It may be "promotional," but... by kria · · Score: 1

      People should go here, and read these recaps, particularly the ones for the two pieces of season opener.

      Anyway, what you said about looking for a planet, and then the fleet becoming home instead reminded me strongly of a point that the recapper Jacob makes - that everyone is getting exactly what they want, in the worst possible way.

    12. Re:It may be "promotional," but... by jacobw · · Score: 1

      Why would one have to imagine? Isn't this the case? I suppose maybe at 40 you don't cease to be hip in the programming world, but if you don't keep up with whatever tech its the same and could happen when you're 25 or 35 or 55 and we don't get residuals.

      The key phrase is "if you don't keep up with whatever tech." In any profession (or, at least, any knowledge-based profession), you'll become obsolete if you don't keep up with developments in the field. In TV writing, however, you will become obsolete no matter how well you keep up. If you take a look at any TV staff, you'll find a bunch of people in their 20's and 30's, a much smaller number of people in their 40's, and almost nobody 50 or above. And it's not because the 50-year-olds have been promoted to managerial status, as I suspect might happen in the progamming world. Those 50-year-olds have either switched fields entirely, or are just not working.

      There is much debate in Hollywood as to why this is. Some people argue that the intense hours of a TV show staff job make it an inherently young man's game. Others argue that it's blatant age discrimination--in fact, a group of writers have filed a class-action age discrimination lawsuit. I don't know which is the case

      Just to be clear, I'm not arguing that everybody should weep over the plight of TV writers. I don't think they deserve any more sympathy than any other group of middle-class Americans doing their best to make a living. I'm just saying they don't deserve any less.

    13. Re:It may be "promotional," but... by kalidasa · · Score: 1

      Royalties on a patent are in a vague way analogous to residuals. So are stock options: something that is giving to an employee as part of his compensation that will continue to earn additional money for him in the future, perhaps long after he has left the employer.

    14. Re:It may be "promotional," but... by denebian+devil · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Did you actually watch the webisodes? The new content is about 30 seconds per webisode, the rest is titles and a commercial made from clips of the upcoming series. They ran the same 2 clip commercials over and over, across the 10 webisodes. So this whole fuss is over 5min of original made-for-the-web content.

      First, 30 seconds per webisode is an exaggeration. It was probably more like 1.5-2 minutes per. And while that is still short, the actual "meat" of the webisodes are all original content, and content which is integral to understanding what's going on relationships-wise when Season 3 starts. I actually watched the start of Season 3 before watching the webisodes, and it made so much more sense after seeing that little bit of content.

      There are other obvious problems with this new season's shows. Apparently they got tired of spending so much money on computer graphics, so almost all of the new shows are set in a muddy field, with some tents and some junk. It's turned into a freaking soap opera about mommies and babies. Fuck that shit, I want to see some nuclear explosions in space!

      Then BSG was clearly not meant for you. Stop watching.

    15. Re:It may be "promotional," but... by sakusha · · Score: 2, Insightful
      OK. First of all, Galactica is a drama set in space. It's not a scifi kill-fest. The awesome explosions and Viper vs. Raider battles are incidental to the plot. The show gets all its acclaim and awards (and most of its audience) from the script and acting. Without that, the show won't have lasted into season 2.

      I've been pondering this issue, especially considering the decline of SciFi Channel's signature show SG-1.

      First, SF Channel discovered its ratings boost was largely coming from women, who have traditionally not been part of the SF demographic. So we get story lines about mommies and babies. Spare me.
      Second, the new season of BSG suffers from the same problem that ruined SG-1, they're losing. Nobody wants to watch a bunch of losers, it isn't very inspiring. It is even worse watching your formerly-glorious heroes get defeated over and over, without even the slightest foreshadowing of an eventual victory.

      IMHO the BSG writers totally jumped off the deep end in this season, I can hardly watch it anymore. Character development is all fine and good, but I don't want to watch a soap opera, I want to watch an action show.
    16. Re:It may be "promotional," but... by Ultra64 · · Score: 1

      Why is any show that has a plotline and character development branded a "soap opera"? Can anyone explain this to me?

    17. Re:It may be "promotional," but... by Yunzil · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So we get story lines about mommies and babies. Spare me.

      The "mommies and babies" story line has been there from at least the second episode of the first season. Remember Boomer and Helo?

      Nobody wants to watch a bunch of losers, it isn't very inspiring.

      To each his own. I think it's great.

      IMHO the BSG writers totally jumped off the deep end in this season, I can hardly watch it anymore.

      So don't watch it.

      Character development is all fine and good, but I don't want to watch a soap opera, I want to watch an action show.

      I don't want to watch an [all] action show. I want character development.

    18. Re:It may be "promotional," but... by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      There are other obvious problems with this new season's shows. Apparently they got tired of spending so much money on computer graphics, so almost all of the new shows are set in a muddy field, with some tents and some junk. It's turned into a freaking soap opera about mommies and babies. Fuck that shit, I want to see some nuclear explosions in space!

      You must still be caught inside the last episode of the previous season, before the Cylons' arrival. The rest of us managed to jump forward past that year.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    19. Re:It may be "promotional," but... by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      "Two battlestars just jumped into orbit. Adama is back"

      Or maybe it was just a mistake that made it into the preview and the line will be looped for the episode, changing "Two battlestars" to "A battlestar".

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    20. Re:It may be "promotional," but... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the spoiler warning. I didn't read the rest of your post because of it, but this seemed an opportune moment to point out that those of us outside the US couldn't even download the webisodes before this mess all came down, apparently (if I read the blogs right) because of similar problems over who had rights to what.

      Don't be silly. Here's a handy website you can find the webisodes at, along with all the currently-aired BSG season 3 episodes (1-3).

    21. Re:It may be "promotional," but... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Second, the new season of BSG suffers from the same problem that ruined SG-1, they're losing. Nobody wants to watch a bunch of losers, it isn't very inspiring. It is even worse watching your formerly-glorious heroes get defeated over and over, without even the slightest foreshadowing of an eventual victory.

      What the hell are you talking about? They're currently losing, yes, but that's how most wars go: you win some battles, and you lose other battles. You want them to win everything right away? Then it'd be a remarkably short-lived show. You can't squeeze 3+ seasons out of a show without a lot of conflict and setbacks along the way.

      It's been pretty obvious (especially with the latest episode title: "Exodus") that the humans are going to be rescued from New Caprica very soon. You don't consider that "foreshadowing of an eventual victory"? And if you mean a total victory of the humans over the cylons, why would they do that, at least at this point? That would spell the end of the show.

      It sounds like you want to watch a show where the protagonists only suffer very small setbacks and otherwise completely wipe the floor with the bad guys, and do this episode after episode. I remember a show like that back in the 80s called "The A-Team". I'm sure you can find the episodes for download somewhere.

    22. Re:It may be "promotional," but... by bluephone · · Score: 1

      No way, as Adama gets PISSED in another preview, and also, Adama didn't raise no pussy. Lee will find his balls under all that blubber and come back to kick some skin-job ass. :)

      --
      jX [ Make everything as simple as possible, but no simpler. - Einstein ]
    23. Re:It may be "promotional," but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not a spoiler, that's extrapolation of what's already been said, and isn't even known to be true yet.

      A spoiler would be this:

      [SPOILER WARNING]

      The pegasus will be lost in the battle to rescue the colonists.

    24. Re:It may be "promotional," but... by binarysins · · Score: 1

      How do you get 15 minutes of content if there were 10 and they averaged 3-5 minutes apiece ?? It's more like a whole extra episode.

    25. Re:It may be "promotional," but... by ZachPruckowski · · Score: 1

      There was about 30 seconds of identical opening/closing stuff on each one, and a 30-second trailer at the end.

  20. phew... god damn misleading slashdot post by atarione · · Score: 1

    luckily FTA the dispute appears to be limited to "webisodes" the producers are refusing to make any more of the webisodes until the compensation issue is resolved. it does not appear to impact that actual episodes of the TV series however.

    --
    actually I am happy to see you, however that is in fact a banana in my pocket.
    1. Re:phew... god damn misleading slashdot post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny stuff: It says "webisodes" in both the headline and the quoted text from the original article. Silly person.

  21. Preemptive strike by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Since the web is likely to be the future of television this is more of setting a standard for compensation for web based content. If they get cut out now they may be in the future if and when broadcast and potentially cable goes away. The viewers might not notice a big difference but if content switches to technically a web based broadcast the creative people may get cut out. It's happened a lot in the past. One of the classic examples were old movie stars. Shirley Temples mother was known as one of the toughest negoiators but she couldn't have predicted TV and Temple never got a dime off any of the films shown on TV inpsite of tens of millions being made from their broadcast. 20 years ago no one would have predicted web broadcasts. The internet was new so browsers and email were still essentially in the future. Who can say what is possible in twenty more years. There's even talk about redoing the internet itself since it was never designed for this much traffic. That could be another openning to renegoiate. The suits are the ones trying to screw everyone over. The artists are mostly trying to pay rent.

    1. Re:Preemptive strike by davidsyes · · Score: 1

      "20 years ago no one would have predicted web broadcasts. The internet was new so browsers and email were still essentially in the future. Who can say what is possible in twenty more years."

      Maybe telepathy? The studios will "beam" the episodes into the heads of subcribers. 3D glasses not provided, but Kim Jong-Il-sized shades with starry-eyed nukes clouds will be available for $1,000 each lens. Then, the BSG fans wanting to see nukes and rads can feel dizzy when the effects heat up...

      --
      Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  22. Problems across NBC Universal by Dachannien · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's amazing how much ineptitude seems to be rising to the top at Sci-Fi and NBC Universal.

    Bonnie Hammer cancels Farscape, a show with a dedicated fan base, because she thinks that the serialized plotline is too hard for the fans to follow. She makes this decision just as the Internet is starting to become a good way for fans who miss an episode to keep up with the series (iTMS started months later, and it should have been obvious to anyone that television and movies would eventually make their way to iTunes). She replaces it with the single-season flop Tremors: The Series, and is rewarded for her poor judgment by being promoted to President of USA Network and Sci-Fi Channel.

    Mark Stern shoots the company in the foot by cancelling Stargate SG-1 (another show with a dedicated fan base) despite strong backing from its production company, MGM. To add insult to injury, Stern refuses to let MGM court other TV networks for a new home for SG-1. This is combined with the decision to separate the SG-1 franchise from its follower, Battlestar Galactica. Shortly thereafter, the nature of the synergy between Stargate and BSG is revealed, as BSG's season premiere ratings were substantially lower than last season's premiere. MGM plans to release new SG-1 content direct to DVD, and they may end up producing a full Season 11 for iTunes and DVD. NBC Universal won't see a dime from those projects.

    Sci-Fi Channel is also diluting their brand by airing professional wrestling, despite it already being carried on USA, in an apparent effort to mimic Spike TV, which at least runs five hours of Star Trek every weekday.

    Now, Marc Graboff gets on the BSG production team's bad side by screwing them out of residuals, and tries to justify it by blaming it all on the BSG production team.

    And finally, NBC decides to yank dramas and comedies from the 8pm time slot because they're "too expensive" compared to reality shows. Never mind that NBC rode the top of the rating charts for years on the backs of shows like Seinfeld and Friends (and, later in the evening, ER and Law & Order). It's almost as if NBC decided that being in last place with crappy-but-cheap shows was better than being top dog, and if they put Deal or No Deal on five nights a week, last place is where they'll end up.

    Today there was also a big story about how NBC Universal is laying off about 5% of their workforce. I wonder if they're taking suggestions for whom to axe.

    1. Re:Problems across NBC Universal by Danse · · Score: 1
      And finally, NBC decides to yank dramas and comedies from the 8pm time slot because they're "too expensive" compared to reality shows. Never mind that NBC rode the top of the rating charts for years on the backs of shows like Seinfeld and Friends (and, later in the evening, ER and Law & Order).


      See, the great thing about reality shows from the perspective of NBC is not just that they're cheap. It's that they're cheap and they stay that way. The "actors" aren't going to demand more money next season if it becomes a hit, because they'll be gone. So if a reality show becomes a hit, they don't have to share with anyone!

      MGM plans to release new SG-1 content direct to DVD, and they may end up producing a full Season 11 for iTunes and DVD. NBC Universal won't see a dime from those projects.


      While I'm not averse to making use of bittorrent if I happen to miss an episode of a show I like, that doesn't mean I won't shell out for an online only show. Price them reasonably, and I would be first in line to hand over my cash. I will do so just for the inkling of hope that it takes off in a huge way and network execs start jumping out of 30th floor windows.
      --
      It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
    2. Re:Problems across NBC Universal by freedom_india · · Score: 1
      Corporates like NBC are not very intelligent. Unless their sole bread winner happens to be the BSG or SG-1, they really will muck around based on a few ego-driven executives driving Mercs and Jaguars and who have nothing to lose if NBC lost a few million.

      Unless these executives (who are MBAs and not actual actors/producers themselves) pay is directly based on the popularity of a TV show, these stupid executives will continue to muck around and run the company and its property into ground.

      BSG will be canceled soon. Its too big for NBC executives and they don't want this kind of limelight stealing popularity.

      Better save up on those episodes nowitself and rewatch it later.

      --
      "Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
    3. Re:Problems across NBC Universal by maxume · · Score: 1

      Farscape, SG1 and BSG are all pretty expensive to produce for cable. They need to have great ratings to justify production. Maybe they are, but it isn't really obvious that the decisions being made regarding these shows are bad business decisions, even for the long term.

      Part of the problem is things like the writing on SG1 getting *way* better in the last few seasons, and die hard fans complaining that it went to hell, because they don't know what they are talking about. Watch, someone will jump in here to tell what a dumbass I am for saying that.

      They might be making mistakes with their target market, but they have a better idea of their actual demographics than you or I do, and a better picture of how much they make on a given show.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    4. Re:Problems across NBC Universal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Farscape, SG1 and BSG are all pretty expensive to produce for cable.


      I find that hard to believe.

      Think about it. Advertisers pay to be on cable, just like on regular broadcast stations. Then you pay between $40 and $100 a month for cable too. It sounds to me like an awful lot of money is changing hands for a show on cable.

      On top of that, you have to consider the home video market. I know, there wasn't one 10 years ago. Wait, no, there was a market but the studios couldn't be bothered to respond to it. Today, though, damned near every show on the air and alot of old ones are getting DVD releases. Even "reality" TV shit (excluding Drawn Together, actual effort went into that one)!

      So you mean to tell me that SG1 is expensive for a show that gets paid for by cable subscribers, advertisers, and home video enthusiasts?

      No, the real problem is the ridiculously disproportional pay scales that the entertainment industry is only part of. Perhaps if the retards who cancelled Futurama and Family Guy or any other favorite show weren't pulling down several hundred million a year plus generous rewards for repeated failure, these shows wouldn't be "pretty expensive." Those jackasses and their cronies are scared to death of the Internet because, in the absence of performance dictated pay, the complete abandonment of corporate TV is the only threat left.
    5. Re:Problems across NBC Universal by maxume · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Show A costs $5, gets ratings of 4 and ad revenues of $6. Show B costs $1, gets ratings of 2 and ad revenues of $3. Show B is better for the network. Fake numbers, probably wrong, good illustration of my point.

      It isn't about the shows being better, it is about how much better they are, and how much it matters.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    6. Re:Problems across NBC Universal by rickwood · · Score: 1

      Don't forget their cack-handed bungling of Mystery Science Theater 3000.

      Sometimes I swear they sit in their offices with their $20,000 furniture and say to themselves, "Fuck those nerds. Fuck them up their stupid asses. They like Farsape? I'll destroy it because I hate fucking nerds. Stargate is one of the most popular shows on our network? Cancelled! How ya like me now, nerds? I'm gonna put wrestling on, and next I'm gonna put golf on. I hold the rights to almost all the shows you love but I'm gonna put on Ghost Hunters five nights a week. I hate you all you fucking nerdy bastards. You'll watch what I want or I'll throw you down onto your eight-sided dice!"

      Sorry about that. The SciFi network people have been pissing me off with this bullshit for years. Seems like they'll never figure out that they aren't gonna get that teen and 18-24 demographic they'd like no matter what they put on, unless they just give up on SciFi altogether.

    7. Re:Problems across NBC Universal by renoX · · Score: 1

      If find some of the parts of your post quite weird: you're talking about the size of the 'dedicated fan base' but that's not a factor to decide if the show worth the money or not, what matter is the total number of viewers (and their age/income composition).

      >To add insult to injury, Stern refuses to let MGM court other TV networks for a new home for SG-1.
      Well, that's a logical decision, otherwise SG-1 on the other TVnetwork might have competed with their own offering. Sure it probably upset even more fans but as they are probably upset already by the end of SG-1 on NBC, it doesn't really matter.

  23. True, she's not a 6...but.... by CFD339 · · Score: 5, Funny

    She's no 7 (of 9) either.

    --
    The problem with quotes on the internet, is that nobody bothers to check their veracity. -- Abraham Lincoln
    1. Re:True, she's not a 6...but.... by mikelieman · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Every single damn time I think of the Saga of Jeri and Jack Ryan, I can't help but feel, what's that word....

      --
      Technology -- No Place For Wimps! Grateful Dead and Jerry Garcia Chatroom -- http://www.wemissjerry.org
    2. Re:True, she's not a 6...but.... by antoinjapan · · Score: 0

      sticky?

    3. Re:True, she's not a 6...but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yourself?

    4. Re:True, she's not a 6...but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      From the almighty Wiki:

      "It was revealed that, six years previously, Jeri had accused Jack Ryan of asking her to perform sexual acts with him in public, and in adult clubs in New York, New Orleans, and Paris. Jeri Ryan described one as "a bizarre club with cages, whips and other apparatus hanging from the ceiling." These disclosures led Jack Ryan to withdraw his Republican candidacy for an open United States Senate seat in Illinois."

      I wonder if "asking her to perform" is a pleasant euphemism for "coerced her into performing", which would be a little surreal if you happen to frequent the adult clubs in New York, New Orleans, and Paris:

      Guy 1: "Hey, did I just see 7 of 9 giving head over there in the corner?"
      Guy 2: "Shit, where do I sign up?"

    5. Re:True, she's not a 6...but.... by tdemark · · Score: 2, Funny

      Every single damn time I think of the Saga of Jeri and Jack Ryan

      I don't seem to remember seeing any assistance from the Borg during the liberation of that Russian submarine or Project Reciprocity.

    6. Re:True, she's not a 6...but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      She can act.

  24. For those with limited horizons by Telvin_3d · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I am seeing a lot of comments here with the commenter's saying things along the lines of "The webisodes are free anyway, so what is the issue with residuals? Who cares?" This is an amazingly short sided view.

    Yes, the webisodes and similar media may be shown free at the moment, but that is a temporary thing at best. Say a year from now the show gets exported to another country and instead of showing the webisodes for free there, they decide to sell them through whatever the local equivalent of the iTunes store is at 50 cents a pop. I know all sorts of people that would happily pay for 2-5 minute chunks of extra content for their favourite series during the off season.

    Or, (and this is very likely), the season 3 DVD releases of Battlestar Galactica include the webisodes as 'bonus content' the same way that movie DVDs include the trailers. And the studios will say 'hell, no one gets paid extra for including the trailers with the DVD, they're promotional material, so why should the actors/writers get paid extra for it?' At the same time, you can get that it will be advertised as the DVD set including the 'bonus episode worth of content' that it really is. The writers get paid for the episodes on that DVD, so why don't they deserve to get paid for the webisodes?

    any one with minimal imagination can come up with other ways that content like this can be used or changed in ways that we are not seeing yet but that cross lines. If it doesn't happen with the Battlestar Galactica content,it will happen tot he next popular series that is inventive enough to reach out to the fans in new ways with new content. In a lot of ways, we are lucky that it is happening with an example that is clear cut in many ways in favour of the creative team and with people who are willing to fight. Otherwise, these types of rights and incentives might disappeared before anyone recognised they existed, and that would be the end of this type of content.

    1. Re:For those with limited horizons by bigpat · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't it be that once they cross the line and start actually making money directly from the content, as reruns do with commercials, then that is when you would start getting residuals? Or if they were sold as downloadable episodes or packaged as DVDs. Sure the studios could engage in funny business and say they aren't making money off of them, but that seems easier to show by following the money. Well, whatever the contract says... if they would otherwise get residuals if an entire episode were released as downloadable content without commercials or web ads for "promotional purposes", then these should be treated the same way.

  25. Re:I like BSG as much as the next guy by hibbs02 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Here is the bottom line: If the company is making money off of the webisodes then the writers deserve their piece under union rules. However, if they are given away for free then they are indeed promotional materials and as such the writers/actors don't deserve any extra cash. For example, should the writers get paid for each time a BSG commercial airs? No, its just promotion for the show for which they do get paid.

    I got the webisodes for free, did you guys pay? Really, I don't know.

  26. huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't get it... I watched all 10 webisodes for this show, and it pretty much led right up to the season premiere. So were they pulled or not?

    Hopefully the writers will get the money they're due... and I hope these webisodes get included on the eventual DVD release, because they're very well done.

  27. Feh. by illuminatedwax · · Score: 3, Funny

    That's what they get for calling them "webisodes".

    --
    Did you ever notice that *nix doesn't even cover Linux?
  28. You know what I want from BSG? by glwtta · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Some fucking space battles!

    So far this season it's all "Let's go start some shit up and blow up our own hovels - that'll show the Cylons!", or whatnot.

    (admittedly, I may not have paid particular attention to the specifics of TFA)

    --
    sic transit gloria mundi
    1. Re:You know what I want from BSG? by rossifer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You probably pissed and moaned about the desert scenes in Star Wars too. :)

      It's a story about people in the future. People have lots of desires, including the desire to not live in cans. So they give living on a mudball a shot. And it turns out to be a "Bad Plan(tm)". So now we have to get them off the mudball and back into some sort of fighting shape again. With the lessons learned, we can assume that they won't be satisfied until they reach earth (as a friday night special six months after the regular show gets cancelled).

      Personally, I'm curious as to how they'll do it. I'm really enjoying the break in the action, as it were.

      Regards,
      Ross

    2. Re:You know what I want from BSG? by cyclocommuter · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Personally, I am enjoying the humans play the role of rebels/insurgents versus the militarily superior cylons... strapping bombs on their chest on suicide missions, but at the same time those captured have sacks put on their heads just like prisoners in Iraq / Guantanamo. Watching the conflicts within number 6 and number 8 (Sharon) who have been "exposed" to humans is also heady stuff. With plot twists like these, who cares about blowing up stuff in space?

    3. Re:You know what I want from BSG? by Fallingcow · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Don't forget that the Cylon occupational government is called the CPA. The US occupational government in Iraq was called the CPA, as well (Coalition Provisional Authority).

      The parallels are not suble, but they are quite appropriate.

    4. Re:You know what I want from BSG? by Wylfing · · Score: 1

      First they have to get past the Eastern Alliance with the help of some friendly androids!

      --
      Our intelligent designer has never created an animal that we couldn't improve by strapping a bomb to it.
    5. Re:You know what I want from BSG? by vision864 · · Score: 0

      Get to Earth Jeez Come on it is NOT Starfleets Job to bail out every lowlife in the universe.

    6. Re:You know what I want from BSG? by LunaticTippy · · Score: 1

      I can't wait for Galactica 2012 where they're back on earth and the only original characters are Adama and Tigh. Waiting in space for some reason.

      --
      Man, you really need that seminar!
  29. Re:Problems across NBC Universal and ineptitude by Nitewing98 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The sort of clumsy handling of sci-fi programs you're talking about is, unfortunately, endemic in the TV industry. Good shows get cancelled (the original Star Trek and The Vistor come to mind right away). Other shows get so little in the way of resources that they become ridiculous (Lost in Space and (I'm sorry) the original Galactica).

    Face it. TV doesn't "get" science fiction. These corporations are run by corporate suits with MBA's and degrees in marketing and have no soul and no imagination. These shows are nothing but product to them. Nevermind that Star Trek did more for encouraging research in a bunch of fields of science. It's no accident that the generation raised on Trek created PC's, PDA's, cell phones, and other technology. I'm reading now about the (real) experiments in bending microwaves (a cloaking device), matter teleportation, and energy weapons.

    Clearly, to those of us in the tech industry and the sciences, these shows are NOT silly, mindless, childish or merely a "product." They are the source of many inspirations. We care about these shows.

    TV doesn't. And the probably never will.

    Perhaps a consortium of web geeks should approach Moore et al and offer them the services of a dedicated streaming server and a loyal fanbase. Maybe we can help good content make the jump FROM TV to the 'net.

    What are the Google guys doing? They've got the money...and advertisers...this could actually work!

    --

    Nitewing '98

    Everything works...in theory.

  30. Youtube, baby. Go watch them now. by Picass0 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Go to Youtube.com and search for "galactica webisode" and you'll find they've all been posted. If you use the Firefox browser, you can install the Videodownloader extension and that will let you save youtube videos to your harddrive. So say we all.

    1. Re:Youtube, baby. Go watch them now. by CrackedButter · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well done friend, may the gods guide you along your path.

    2. Re:Youtube, baby. Go watch them now. by zero_offset · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yay! Then you can watch them in depressingly over-aggressive hyper-compressed format. Awesome.

      --

      Slashdot quality declines as the number of hot grits posts decreases. - Provolt's Law, Apr-09-2005

    3. Re:Youtube, baby. Go watch them now. by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      Go to Youtube.com and search for "galactica webisode" and you'll find they've all been posted. If you use the Firefox browser, you can install the Videodownloader extension and that will let you save youtube videos to your harddrive. So say we all.

      By your command.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    4. Re:Youtube, baby. Go watch them now. by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      Great. Choosing one annoying flash player that stutters and overheats my machine over another. That's useful. Now if somebody had an MPEG 2 version or something moderately usable, I might care. I got three kernel panics playing through those Webisodes on my laptop from overheating. Why don't people realize that flash video is truly the lowest of the lows in terms of usability?

      *sigh*

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    5. Re:Youtube, baby. Go watch them now. by Picass0 · · Score: 1

      CrackedButter wanted to see the webisodes. He's outside the US so SciFi is blocking him. I told him where to go see them. I solved his problem and you choose to flame me. That says more about you than it says about me.

      I guess you're telling me you never watch anything on Youtube. That would make you a very minority opinion.

      Your laptop overheats. Windows sucks. Sorry. Try Linux.

    6. Re:Youtube, baby. Go watch them now. by dgatwood · · Score: 1

      I'm not flaming anyone except YouTube and Sci-Fi Channel.... Sorry if you thought that was an attack on you....

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

  31. This isn't new by Dock · · Score: 1

    Other networks are in the same fight. I wrote about this two months ago when Variety hit on it and again just now on Newsvine. NBC, ABC, and CBS are all in it with the Guild right now and it's going to come to a head when the contract is up next year.

    --
    http://about.me/paultenny
  32. WGA is ahead of the curve this time by graymocker · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The WGA recognizes that web delivery is the future of the content creation industry. No one is sure yet how increasing broadband access and a generation of entertainment consumers weaned on BitTorrent is going to affect the commercial arts, but you can bet that web delivery, either for-pay, sponsored, or free, is going to be a huge part of the new business model. WGA screwed up once a already by failing to forsee how the home video/DVD market was going to become the major revenue source for movie studios. (Aside: Some clueless pundits - usually conservatives railing against liberal Hollywood - have pointed to falling box office receipts as signs that the studios are somehow dying, but the studios are doing better than ever. They've simply changed their business model.) It's absolutely in their interests to come on strong on the the subject of webisodes.

    1. Re:WGA is ahead of the curve this time by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      What the heck does Windows Genuine Advantage have to do with Battlstar Galactica?

  33. Re:Problems across NBC Universal and ineptitude by kalidasa · · Score: 1

    If CBS had any brains, they'd offer Moore complete creative control over the Star Trek franchise to leave BSG when his contract with NBC is up. DS9 is the only Star Trek series that really holds up well after all these years, and Moore was an assistant producer on that (and the writer of some of its greatest episodes); and there he was constrained by the Berman junta.

  34. Re:I like BSG as much as the next guy by agent+dero · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What a shallow argument, what if the suits decide that really, the season premiere episode is really just promotional content for the entire season? What if they offer up that episode as a free download on the iTunes Store (as a good bit of pilots, and season premieres seem to be these days).

    Shouldn't the writers get their residuals for those too?

    Bottom line, if you want promotional content, hiring an advertising firm, if you're creating something regardless of length or what you decide to do with it, you should still be paying those creative folks their proper dues.

    --
    Error 407 - No creative sig found
  35. Re:I like BSG as much as the next guy by Swtzrs · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You're very much correct about these being very easily classified as promotional materials. Strictly speaking - they are. The problem is that is exactly what will prevent this sort of new style of content from being created by anyone who isn't trying to sell you something. BSG tries something different with their show and they get screwed by it. They get a clear message from the network bosses - "Go ahead and come up with these new ways to produce content - just don't expect to get paid for it" (okay, they got paid, just not as much as they were expecting) This war over one's fair share of the pile of cash on the table is pretty much inevitable, and we should be surprised that its holding back development of new forms of content. If NBC wanted to REALLY tweak the BSG folks, they should string all the 'webisodes' together, air them on TV along with commercials. Call it a 'commer-sode' and refuse to pay residuals.

  36. Conflict Brewing? by x-vere · · Score: 1

    Battlestar Galactica 'Webisodes' Conflict Brewing
    I think the conflict is already at hand. However, I'm not sure I agree with the actions of the staff of the webisodes. The Internet is a completely different medium and playing selfish little baby on this hurts the show the and may shorten the length of your employment.
    If I were NBC, I'd commission a new crew to make a new series of webisodes and tell the other folks where to stick it. That's just me.

    --
    One day the toilets of the world will rise up... And I'm going to nuke them.
  37. I'm still pissed you can't watch them outside US by ip_freely_2000 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Talk about disrespect to the rest of the world.

  38. Caprica-6, Will You Marry Me? by Muad'Dib129 · · Score: 0

    I love this show. It pains me to see that Corporate America is once again trying to ruin something good. Ron Moore & team have a good thing going right now with the new Battlestar, and if they were replaced with Cylon imposter writers by NBC I think it would negatively impact viewing and I think that new writers would skew the current story. If all they are asking for is credit and compensation, what's the big deal? Its not as if NBC is not profiting. I'm no communist or socialist, but shit...share the wealth, NBC! Pay the people for their work!

  39. Re:Problems across NBC Universal and ineptitude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
    These corporations are run by corporate suits with MBA's and degrees in marketing and have no soul and no imagination.

    Funny, that's how I feel about geeks with technical degrees.

  40. Re:I like BSG as much as the next guy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    For example, should the writers get paid for each time a BSG commercial airs? No, its just promotion for the show for which they do get paid.

    But it's not the same. Commercials are excerpts from the larger episodes, so they did get paid for making the episodes. As I understand it, webisodes are not excerpts from the episodes, but are filler around them and produced in addition to the episodes.

    As it stands, they were done for free...no renumeration. Shouldn't the people involved in the making of the webisodes get paid for making them in the first place?

    The only thing that might be a hitch is if this material was taped as part of the episodes, but later cut out for whatever reason (episode length, etc). This is similar to the "deleted scenes" stuff that appears as bonus material on DVDs. If so, the people involved may have already been compensated for them. From my reading of the article, that isn't the case, but we're not seeing both sides of the argument either.

  41. But Honestly... by Bourdain · · Score: 1

    Guys, I've seen all the episodes of the show including the miniseries and listened to almost all of the podcasts (I intentioanlly keep a few episodes behind on those to avoid being spoiled) and I gotta say that the production quality of the (not to mention the visual quality) of the websisodes was very poor and they did little to further the show except for giving "Duck" a little substance behind his motivation to be a suicide bomber

    just my one penny

    1. Re:But Honestly... by james_orr · · Score: 1

      Well, they couldn't make the webisodes an essential part of the story-line, because not everybody will see them. But, they can and did use them to give a bit more depth to the characters, particularly Duck who had only been in about 3 previous episiodes as a background Viper pilot.

      The webisodes aren't and can't be about essential plot points, they are and should be about character development. In my opinion they accomplished that task well.

      As for the visual quality, well it wasn't that great, but I'm sure they'll put these on the DVD and I expect better quality there. I didn't see any problems with the production quality, obviously there's no budget for SFX in them and they are shot between takes of the real episodes, but the acting is good as always and the sets are the same sets ...

    2. Re:But Honestly... by Bourdain · · Score: 1

      You're completely right, I was a bit harsh in my description of the webisodes, but it's more that I found it kind of odd that there is such a big deal over something honestly pretty minimal that clearly did not have a lot money put into it or included any of the leads of the show for any length of time

    3. Re:But Honestly... by eclectro · · Score: 1

      I didn't see you as too harsh, you made the exact post that I wanted to make. The production values weren't high, and were created on what seems a shoestring budget with only a couple of cast members. I think that for the writers it most likely is the "principle" of the thing rather than the probably minimal residuals from what is nothing more than scraps of storyline. And from NBC's perspective they were most likely hoping to stuff the DVDs with the webisodes to help sell them, in which case "promotional material" wouldn't be far from the truth.

      So in a sense, both sides make a valid point. It would be better if they could reach a negotiated settlement rather than creating bad air in their business relationship.

      --
      Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
    4. Re:But Honestly... by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1
      I think that for the writers it most likely is the "principle" of the thing rather than the probably minimal residuals from what is nothing more than scraps of storyline.
      From what I can tell, it's the principle, and the precedent. If they don't get the (minimal) residuals now, they might not get the (much higher) residuals later for other things.
      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
  42. Re:Battlestar Iraqtica (I wish I had coined that) by andy9701 · · Score: 1

    I don't think that they are trying to provide commentary on the current situation in Iraq. From what I can recall of the podcasts from the first two episodes, Ron Moore stated that they weren't trying to make to compare the US in Iraq to the Cylons on New Caprica - not conciously, anyway.

    Granted, the Iraq situation is in the news here in the US a lot, so it is quite possible that the writers did so without realizing it.

  43. Re:I like BSG as much as the next guy by careykohl · · Score: 1

    I don't think it's nearly as simple as that. No one is arguing that the writers should be paid every time a commercial shows a scene from an episode they've already been paid for. The situation here is someone created something original and gave it away for free in one context. Now NBC wants to come along and say that gives them the right to use it for free any way they see fit and in any context they can think of.

    Isn't that the same thing NBC claims is illegal when I download one of they're freely broadcast television shows off the Internet and watch it on my portable video player instead?

  44. Re:I like BSG as much as the next guy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sheesh

    They DID get paid for the normal commercials (it was content taken from the show for which they were paid under union rules).

    You didn't pay to see the webisodes? (BTW -the person who thought up that name should be shot immediately)

    I paid to view them... most people that viewed them did. You paid via the time they took from you to show you the ads on the website and the ones shown BEFORE the webisode.

  45. Re:I'm still pissed you can't watch them outside U by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah, but who outside the US would want to watch them? Nobody in France speaks English anyway, and Iraq doesn't have internet anymore. Are there any other people outside the US?

    Now that's disrespectful to the rest of the world.

  46. Strike brewing... by AceCaseOR · · Score: 1

    I'd say that there's another WGA strike brewing. The question is what will the fallout of the strike be? Most likely, for the duration of the strike, the Big Four will switch primarily to reality shows (including in the place of dramas that will be off the air). If this is the case, will the Big Four decide to make the switch perminant because it really drops their bottom line; or will there finally be sweet, sweet, sweet oversaturation and this damnedable Reality TV show fad dissapear to, say, 4-5 shows total on all the broadcast networks (Survivor, Cops, Amazing Race, Rock Star, and Last Comic Standing, for example).

    --
    Zagreus sits inside your head, Zagreus lives among the dead, Zagreus sees you in your bed and eats you in your sleep.
    1. Re:Strike brewing... by AceCaseOR · · Score: 1

      Um.. that shouldn't have been "disappear to", it should have been "cut back to".

      *pulls out mini-tape recorder*
      Note to self: Next time, use preview button.
      *puts tape recorder away*

      --
      Zagreus sits inside your head, Zagreus lives among the dead, Zagreus sees you in your bed and eats you in your sleep.
  47. Re:Problems across NBC Universal and ineptitude by glenmark · · Score: 2, Informative

    You make many valid points, but the original BSG did not suffer due to lack of resources. At the time it was made, it was the most expensive TV series ever made, costing ~$1M per episode. It went downhill after the first handfull of episodes due to poor writing.

    --
    *** Quantum Mechanics: The Dreams of Which Stuff is Made ***
  48. Heresy? by UpnAtom · · Score: 1

    So why wasn't Series 2 anything like as well-written as Series 1? Series 2 relies on plot-twists whereas Series one has much better storytelling build up, character interaction, charm etc.

    I'm assuming a change of writers but would like to know for sure.

    1. Re:Heresy? by elrous0 · · Score: 1
      Season 1 is definitely better than 2. Season 2 only had maybe 3 truly great episodes, whereas season 1 (despite being shorter) had 5 or 6.

      -Eric

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  49. Also important that this is NBC by elrous0 · · Score: 1
    NBC has already announced significant budget cuts and a renewed emphasis on reality shows. This puts them on a direct collision course with the WGA, SAG, and other unions. I suspect this is just the first sign of that.

    The sad thing is, this could ultimately mean the cancellation of BSG.

    -Eric

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  50. Re:I'm still pissed you can't watch them outside U by Bender0x7D1 · · Score: 1

    I don't get the Sci-Fi channel so I buy them off iTunes a day or two later.

    --
    Reading code is like reading the dictionary - you have to read half of it before you can go back and understand it.
  51. Plot gets old by Tony · · Score: 1

    One of the major problems of the original BG was the strict adherence to the "running in space" plot. They had to get more and more outrageous to keep the plot fresh. Not that they succeeded, but they were hampered by poor dialog, bad acting, and the inability to move away from the core plot.

    I don't think they intend the occupation of New Caprica to be like Iraq, with the Cylons as the US. If you see that parallel, perhaps it is more in you than in the show.

    Not everything on TV is commentary on US policy.

    --
    Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
    1. Re:Plot gets old by WilliamSChips · · Score: 1
      I don't think they intend the occupation of New Caprica to be like Iraq, with the Cylons as the US. If you see that parallel, perhaps it is more in you than in the show.
      The human resistance is called the insurgency and one of Tigh's tactics is the most famous tactic used by the terrorists. The parallels aren't exact but there is a clear resemblance.
      --
      Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
  52. Easier by Tony · · Score: 1

    Because it's easier to dismiss it, rather than engage your brain and enjoy it?

    It's the same way people dismiss any idea that is different from their own. Slap a handy label on it, place it in the same box as everything else with that label, and ignore it.

    --
    Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
  53. Re:I like BSG as much as the next guy by Tony · · Score: 1

    Well, technically, all shows on NBC, CBS, etc, are free promotional materials to get people to watch the real paying content, the commercials. So should no-one get paid anything, except those who produce commercials?

    The whole situation is brain-bending.

    --
    Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
  54. Promotional Materials... by Kaenneth · · Score: 1

    Almost all content is promotional, Most TV shows exist, from the TV Networks point of view, to get people to watch commercials, which is their 'real' product (the one they get paid for).

    Minus much of PBS, NPR, paid downloads, DVD sales, and Pay Per View; where money is solicited directly from the consumers.

  55. Re:I'm still pissed you can't watch them outside U by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

    Don't be ridiculous. Everyone else in the world can see them here.

  56. Re:Problems across NBC Universal and ineptitude by deblau · · Score: 2, Informative
    TV doesn't "get" science fiction. These corporations are run by corporate suits with MBA's and degrees in marketing and have no soul and no imagination.
    Eleanor Roosevelt once said "Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people."

    Sci-fi discusses ideas. The evening news discusses events. Reality shows discuss people.

    Perhaps the TV execs just understand reality shows better than sci-fi. Chalk up another one to the soulless minions of (television) orthodoxy.

    --
    This post expresses my opinion, not that of my employer. And yes, IAAL.
  57. Re:Battlestar Iraqtica (I wish I had coined that) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I am sure there are excellent writers on the show as I have thoroughly enjoyed it for 2 years, but whomever they are allowing to inject politics into season 3 should be fired.

    Have you been watching BSG at all?

    The show is full of politics -- stealing elections, the issue of abortion, torturing enemy detainees, religion & religious extremism, "terrorism" and everything associated with it (armed resistance, suicide bombings, etc.)

    Seriously, this show has been full of political commentary (allegories, whatever you want to call it) from the start.

    It's part of what makes the show so compelling.

    Whether or not you agree with the message.... it's part of what makes the show great. Bringing issues like these to the forefront and forcing people to face them, when most people would rather cover their eyes and ears and pretend its not there.

  58. More importantly... by IgLou · · Score: 1

    If there was a celebrity deathmatch between 6 and 7 of 9 who would win? Or would there be a 69?? Whoa, freudian slip I think...

    --

    Oops, how did this get here?
    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
  59. Never thought by Snaller · · Score: 1

    I'd hear the word "fun" about BSG, the most dreary depressing bleak stuff on tv at the moment.

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    1. Re:Never thought by binarysins · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Dude, Galactica falling from the sky, launching Vipers through the fire of atmospheric reentry is what I would call "fun". Maybe I'm just a nihilist...