RE: [Videolib] another fair use question 2

Griest, Bryan (BGriest@ci.glendale.ca.us)
Wed, 21 Sep 2005 10:36:13 -0700

This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C5BED2.F61EDA67
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"

Bryan-- I know where the content providers stand--they want as much money
as they can get.

Dennis--
Dear Brian,

I'm sorry, but this is what I might call casually offensive by association
-- especially as referring to Jessica's point of view. Nobody at most of the
distributors you purchase from including Kino, Milestone, New Yorker,
Zeitgeist, Bullfrog, Filmmakers Coop, Cinema Guild, et cetera, went into the
film business to make a lot of money, and very few have. Consider that 50%
of all rental fees from these distributors, as an industry rule, goes to the
filmmaker -- that is FAR better than authors or composers get. So this
continually reoccurring concept of "corporate" greed on this listserv
(unless you can get employees of TimeWarner or General Electric to join us)
as well as the general public in regard to copyright laws -- could be
considered just a tad ill-considered at times.

Bryan--Fair enough. I've been raked over the coals by advocating for looser
copyright standards before, though, on this listserv. And what exactly is
offensive about stating that content providers want money? They aren't
donating their time/money or acting as non-profit orgs, so money does play
into their decision-making processes at some point, I presume. Is that a bad
assumption?


Dennis-- Do we complain about librarians' salaries? Believe it or not, you
guys get get paid better than working at almost any independent film
distributor and with the number of bankrupcies of film distributors (see --
or don't see -- October, USA, Shooting Gallery, Cowboy, and so on)
throughout the history of cinema, job security isn't so reliable as well.

Bryan-- Librarians don't have all that much job security either; school
libraries, for example, have been almost entirely stripped of librarians,
and many (all?) public libraries are struggling with huge budget cuts.
Hiring freezes and job eliminations are rampant in our profession, and the
hiring of non-professionals in place of librarians is on the increase as
well. We might get paid better than you do, but that's only if we can find a
job. Nobody is putting guns to either of our respective heads to choose our
professions anyway, right?
Bryan Griest
Glendale Public Library

------_=_NextPart_001_01C5BED2.F61EDA67
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">

 Bryan-- I know where the content providers stand--they want as much money as they can get.

 Dennis--
 Dear Brian,

I'm sorry, but this is what I might call casually offensive by association -- especially as referring to Jessica's point of view. Nobody at most of the distributors you purchase from including Kino, Milestone, New Yorker, Zeitgeist, Bullfrog, Filmmakers Coop, Cinema Guild, et cetera, went into the film business to make a lot of money, and very few have. Consider that 50% of all rental fees from these distributors, as an industry rule, goes to the filmmaker -- that is FAR better than authors or composers get. So this continually reoccurring concept of "corporate" greed on this listserv (unless you can get employees of TimeWarner or General Electric to join us) as well as the general public in regard to copyright laws -- could be considered just a tad ill-considered at times. 
 
Bryan--Fair enough. I've been raked over the coals by advocating for looser copyright standards before, though, on this listserv. And what exactly is offensive about stating that content providers want money? They aren't donating their time/money or acting as non-profit orgs, so money does play into their decision-making processes at some point, I presume. Is that a bad assumption?
 
 
 Dennis-- Do we complain about librarians' salaries? Believe it or not, you guys get get paid better than working at almost any independent film distributor and with the number of bankrupcies of film distributors
(see -- or don't see -- October, USA, Shooting Gallery, Cowboy, and so on)
throughout the history of cinema, job security isn't so reliable as well. 
 
 Bryan-- Librarians don't have all that much job security either; school libraries, for example, have been almost entirely stripped of librarians, and many (all?) public libraries are struggling with huge budget cuts. Hiring freezes and job eliminations are rampant in our profession, and the hiring of non-professionals in place of librarians is on the increase as well. We might get paid better than you do, but that's only if we can find a job. Nobody is putting guns to either of our respective heads to choose our professions anyway, right?
Bryan Griest
Glendale Public Library
------_=_NextPart_001_01C5BED2.F61EDA67--