Should creators get a share of the revenue whenever their work earns money, whatever the format?
John argued in 2007 that writers should get a percentage in every format, and in 2024 noted that profit-share deals tempt him to praise a bad film. Hank said in 2024 he is being ripped off, since big companies are paid for their data in AI models and he is not.
Axis: yes, a percentage in every format ... no, payment can end with the first sale or flat fee
Positions by date: 5 records in 5 videos. The position was refined (2024), never reversed, in these records.
John
| date | how | position | video |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2007-11-13 | first on record | John argues that writers, like authors, should be paid a percentage for their work in every format, including ad-supported internet streams, since content that earns money is not promotional. | November 13: You Can't Scare Me. I'm Stickin' to the Union. 00:02:07 |
| 2013-01-29 | restate | John: a designer paid a flat fee loses out however successful the product; she should keep owning it, which is why their shop now pays Nerdfighter designers royalties. | Across Three Continents: A Tale of Tumblr, Copyright, and Excellent Posters 00:00:29 |
| 2024-04-16 | refine | John's problem with profit-share deals: if the movie is bad, even one furthering stereotypes he wrote against, he is still incentivized to like it or pretend to. | I Already Got Paid 00:00:29 |
| 2024-08-27 | restate | John says this is obviously bad for people who create intellectual value, whether making YouTube videos or writing comments. | How The Internet Is Rigged 00:05:30 |
Hank
| date | how | position | video |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-08-23 | first on record | Hank says he is definitely getting ripped off: big companies signed licensing deals and are paid for their data being in AI models, and he is not. | Is Google Training AI on YouTube Videos? 00:03:53 |