Amazon Studios -- read the contract!

D

David W. Richardson

Chapelgrove Films
I got excited about the prospect of submitting a script to Amazon Studios for their consideration.

Then I read the contract -- which can only be found, as far as I can tell, on the very last step of the submission process. Two things jumped out at me:

"5.2.2. Our Rights to Distribute Your Public Submission. You grant us a worldwide, royalty-free, non-terminable, sub-licensable, transferable right to copy, transfer, stream, make available for download, add captions and make other distribution-related modifications to your Public Submission as we desire to facilitate such distribution."

"9. Compensation. You will have no right to compensation in connection with the exploitation of rights you grant under this Agreement."

Hmmm.........maybe not.
 
Just goes to show that ideas are worthless in the market place. Same is true of ideas for inventions.
Product rules.
 
Let's get realistic. Do the Amazon terms sound predatory? Sure. But it's all about supply and demand. If what they offer is not appealing to you, you won't get into business with them - as some here indicate they won't. Others may reason that overall, it still makes sense to do it - for them.

Let's imagine that you have written "Cool Show" - and no way, no how, are you going to submit it to Amazon due to those predatory terms. Now comes the realistic part - what are you going to do with the "Cool Show"? Your chances of selling it to network TV, or major cable like HBO, is pretty much... zero. Barriers to entry there are pretty high. Are you showrunner? Respected writer? No? They prefer to work with known entities. Obviously, you're not. Assuming that you have enough pull to even get seriously considered, what are the odds of pickup - slim to none, because many shows from people in much better position than you get pitched and few get picked up... so what do you think your odds are?

Are you going to shoot a spec pilot and hope to shop it? Good luck. The industry has moved away from that particular model - way fewer spec pilots are shot these days, because that's not how product gets in the door anymore. And btw., don't hanker for the "good old days", because tons of spec pilots were shot and extremely few got anywhere... not surprising if you think about it - a lot has to go right to have the pilot work, and if you can get that much done right (primarily actors, actors, actors - hoo boy!), you would long since have been working and successful.

Let's face it - you're not shooting a pilot of "Cool Show" and you're not getting "Cool Show" considered by the usual suspects. You could say, well, if I can't shoot it, and can't sell it, and can't get anywhere with it, I'll just sit on it, put it in a drawer, and let "Cool Show" gather dust. You'll grow old and grey and your "Cool Show" will end up being trash that gets cleaned out after grandpa (you!) dies.

Or.

You could go with Amazon. If they pick it up, you get nothing - which leaves you no way worse off than if you didn't approach them, because, let's face it, you're getting nothing on your own anyway. But, that's not quite true - you do get something, and that is if they pick up your show, you get credit - which can be huge, and if you have some talent, you may be able to spin it into a paying gig somewhere else. Even better, if the show actually gets even slightly successful, you're on your way to a career - and even Amazon may pay your for season 2... but the key is that now you are someone with a successful show - that's worth a lot... A LOT!

So, you can sit there with your pile of paper, or you can exchange that pile for an actual lottery ticket. You tell me, if it's worth it - and let's keep it real: if you have such a hot property that you can turn Amazon down, how come that hot property is not already paying off for you with a major deal with HBO or network TV? Exactly.

The choice is yours - up to you, do it or not with Amazon. I say - you're lucky the Amazon option even exists.
 
Followup - to make it short: you are considering Amazon, because you have no chance elsewhere... if you did have a chance elsewhere, you'd already be doing it. Since you have no chance elsewhere, why do the Amazon terms matter at all? You're peeved, because "someone else" will be making bank, while it is your product... reminds me of the neighbor who has an old rusty wreck on his front yard - one day a kid comes along and asks if he'd allow for him to haul it away for free, and work on it and keep it - the neighbor turns him down, because "I get nothing, only you benefit" - end result is that neither benefits. Except, like I said, it's not even true, because if your Amazon show does get picked up you have excellent odds of starting a career. As is, we may call your show:

The Dog In The Manger
 
OldCorpse said:
Are you going to shoot a spec pilot and hope to shop it? Good luck. The industry has moved away from that particular model - way fewer spec pilots are shot these days, because that's not how product gets in the door anymore.
Click to expand...

Not exactly. It may not about spec pilots, but there is a healthy pipeline in place for independent webseries to be picked up. I shot one such for TVLand earlier this year, called "Teachers", which was based on the webseries of the same name created by six improv actors out of Chicago, with no previous industry connections. "Workaholics" had similar beginnings. Just saw a friend's webseries concept that was originally shot for under $150 ordered to network pilot.

Obviously, the odds are just as slim as they ever were, it's not like they are handing out deals left and right, but without a doubt there is still a place for proof-of-concept in the industry. I produced a pilot for a webseries and it was shopped along with the next dozen scripts, and a note that came up a few times was "make a few more episodes and let us see them".
 
Well, web series, yes, obviously this has changed the industry somewhat. You can definitely have success even just strictly on the web - and this has been going on for awhile already; transitioning from the web to broadcast or cable is far trickier, as is getting into the bigger streaming like Netflix and Amazon. It's easier to do something that stays on the web, harder to take that and pitch on a different platform, though not impossible. But the bottom line is: what is the best approach here? The challenge with doing an actual pilot or even webisodes is much, much greater than a spec script and the corresponding investment too. It is one thing to risk a few months of your life on writing a pilot, all you lose is time - which is not nothing, but the least you can, and must do. It is quite another to not only write but also actually produce it in addition - now your investment is monumentally greater and therefore if it doesn't work, the loss is correspondingly greater too, both in time and in other ways (financial, favor trading etc.). The usual argument for shooting a pilot is that demonstrating a concept is easier to sell than just a written script; the implicit argument being "sure it's a greater investment, but it's also a greater chance of making a sale". But I question that argument - is it really the case? Because producing a successful anything (pilot, webisode, reel, scene etc.) is very hard, and the odds of the end result actually being an asset to your case for selling are very, very low. In other words, you might go to a lot of effort and the end result will actually do a disservice to the concept, and you'd be better off leaving it as just written material instead of the end product underselling or discouraging. Furthermore, don't underestimate the time factor - producing content, is a significant multiple of just writing, and therefore from a strictly odds point of view has to be carefully considered: if in the time it takes you to write and produce a pilot, I can write 3-4-5 pilots (all at no financial or other costs!), then at the end of the day you have one lottery ticket while I have 3-4-5 chances. That is the value proposition of the Amazon deal: we'll give you a shot, and you don't have to invest a lot. Your choice.
 
Mark Cubans didn't charge his first client for his software or whatever service he was providing, second one was another story. Had a writer tell me his story a long time ago. He'd been brought in to a top TV show in the 70s by a leading actor. He wrote on the series and in his spare time developed a pilot with two other writers. He was called in to the producer of the shows office and told that it wasn't his time for credit on the pilot. He was offered head writer job for the next season. He filed with wga, the two other writers disputed his role and he lost the case and his job on the series. When the pilot aired it had the created by credit as the name of the producer who'd offered him the head writers job and had nothing to do with creating the pilot. I've known a few people that had miniscule roles in well known directors films and made their own disastrous features but because of those films were able to work as producers on well known films down the road. Being proactive in your career is much better than sitting idle. If you can get in the room and become part of the creative process whether compensated properly or not almost always leads to bigger and better opportunities if you have talent and it wasn't a fluke. Is it nice getting screwed early in your career? Hell no, but it might be the cost of paying your dues. We all get screwed early on but no one needs to know how much or how little you made, just the credit. I don't know if amazon is worth submitting to or if developing a pilot is the right move. I do know that the most successful people I know in the industry always favor the people who actually create.
 
I just SERIOUSLY object to the way the "We own ALL of it forever" clause is buried at the end - that's PREDATORY. In some states there are laws against this manner of contract presentation - although most of them pertain to banking. The point is the same.

Put that clause up front and make it clear to the lay-person and THEN I have no problem whatsoever with it.
 
DPStewart said:
I just SERIOUSLY object to the way the "We own ALL of it forever" clause is buried at the end - that's PREDATORY. In some states there are laws against this manner of contract presentation - although most of them pertain to banking. The point is the same.

Put that clause up front and make it clear to the lay-person and THEN I have no problem whatsoever with it.
Click to expand...

Well, I would hope that anyone aspiring to be a professional writer or showrunner or having any role in show business - or indeed any business - carefully reads the contract they're signing at the very least, or has a lawyer go over it.

And yes, the terms can be seen as predatory, no question. However, the other poster is quite correct: this is what happens to almost anyone who just starts out in any business, including show business. When you are an unknown, you are given terms that are more favorable to the producers or money folks. Before you say "well, that's a rip-off", or taking advantage of the less powerful, consider this: the money person or producer is taking a chance on you -is taking a risk with you, precisely because you are not a known quantity... quite naturally, they have to protect themselves, and it is a universal law of economics that high risk demands high return - that is exactly why low risk is given low returns; if you invest in guaranteed bonds, you will be given a small return - meanwhile if you are taking a wild flyer, you will demand a high price! If the producer hires Spielberg, the producer pays Spielberg a lot more, because Spielberg is a safer bet. That's why established writers and showrunners can ask for better terms - because the producer is taking a smaller risk, and so has only the right to ask for less. But you, an unknown - as most of those submitting to Amazon would be - an untried talent, a risk, a gamble, represent a big danger - so of course the producer is going to ask more to protect themselves... it's not reasonable to say to the producer: "guess what, you're taking a huge risk on my unknown a$$, but hey, you'll have to pay out huge in case the gamble pays off, but if it doesn't... well, you're sh|t out of luck, and it sucks to be you!".

So it's not just about paying your dues. It's about the value proposition that you are. You are low value - at present, because you're an unknown quantity... and so you deserve correspondingly low renumeration. If you're Spielberg, you're high value and deserve corresponding pay. After all, nobody expects you to pay an unknown actor or first timer the same amount as an A-list actor - A-listers earn that money precisely because their participation ups the odds of a good return and protects more from the downside.

Bottom line: you earn what the marketplace is willing to put as your value. Amazon says: "this much". Take it or leave it. This is not "unfair", it's actually very fair according to how things work in the real world.

I have no stake in this one way or another, I just spoke up, because I think it's a bit unfair to single out Amazon as doing something reprehensible, when they're not. The terms are there - it's up to you to decide if you agree to them or not, nobody is forcing anyone to do anything.
 
OldCorpse, I usually agree with your contrarian views. I've defended you in other threads.

But c'mon dude. Nobody is arguing that capitalism isn't valid and that Amazon isn't justified in trying to profit. Most of us here understand supply and demand.

But everybody else in this thread is just looking out for each other by saying, "Look out! There's a clause you need to be aware of!"

Nobody's saying anything else.
 
In threads for virtually every other profession in this business -- acting, directing, camera, sound, lighting, editing -- the refrain is often heard that people should value their work and not be expected to work for free.

Does that not also apply to writers?

It seems the assumption is being made here that anyone who is submitting to Amazon Studios has absolutely no other alternative -- that no one else wants their scripts, and they should be happy that someone is willing to produce them, even though they may not receive a dime in compensation for their hard work. I would submit that such is not always the case, and I find it a bit insulting (OldCorpse) to have it implied. I've sold scripts. I've been contracted (and paid) to write feature scripts. I was investigating Amazon Studios as a possibility for an additional outlet, not as someone desperate to find ANY outlet that would accept my work.

If Amazon wants to contract only on those terms, that's their right. But to hide that fact until someone has reached the absolute final step in the submission process shows questionable professionalism, in my opinion.

If a writer is fully aware of the terms and wants to submit anyway, more power to them. I can certainly see that they might consider it worth the sacrifice for the chance to make a name for themselves. I wish them all the success in the world.

All I want is for people to be aware of the terms of the contract in advance so they won't waste their time going through the submission process if Amazon's terms are ultimately not going to be acceptable for them.
 
I've reread all the posts and revised my thoughts. I don't see a way for amazon to do this any other way without opening them up to constant litigation. I've always thought that at times it is helpful and worthwhile for your career to work for free at times. Many writers, actors and directors gleefully slave away in small theaters everywhere improving their craft (most don't cry about it, its just the way it is). If your in the creative circle and you have a good chance of being proud of the final product or you get to work with people you've only dreamed of, why not. I won't be advising anyone to submit to amazon . Now a year from now amazon may make someone an overnight sensation by making their series from a non solicited submission I might have to revise my thoughts again.
 
For someone who is already established, or who has other offers or options for his/her material, then indeed it makes perfect sense to decline Amazon's contract - because they can do better. One caveat: sometimes you go to someone like Amazon, even though you are established, because Amazon may produce a dream project of yours that you simply cannot set up anywhere else, but Amazon is willing... it may be controversial, or transgressive, or deemed uncommercial by conventional producers etc. - whatever the reason... in which case even if you are established, you may spring for a non-profit deal like Amazon's simply because you want to see that material produced and out there.

Still, yes, if you have better options, indeed, you won't take the Amazon deal. That's economics 101 - you pick the deal that's best for you.

As to "don't work for free", that's valid - for established professionals, including writers. It's not good advice for those just starting out - you need someone to take a chance on you, and if they have to pay, well, why would they ever pick you, if for the same amount of money they can get a real pro and not have to take a chance on you. That's a universal economic principle. If you have to pay the same amount of money - would you rather pick a first time plumber, surgeon, mechanic, whatever, or an established pro? It's very basic. It can be a sliding scale of reward, or indeed work for free - and you as the first timer have to decide if it's worth it to you in turn... maybe you won't make money, but you'll get credit and a start on your career, or maybe you'll just get experience... that's up to every individual to decide for themselves.

Apparently, the OP simply gave a heads up about these clauses in the Amazon contract, and I have no quarrel with that.
 
Wholelifemice said:
I just look at it as another way for writers to break in. It's amazon. They know how to handle business.
Click to expand...

That's fine, as long as you understand that if your script is a hit and somebody makes a mint from the movie, you won't see a dime of it. They should at least be up-front about it, instead of burying it on the very last page of the submission process.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top