Thursday, July 10, 2008

Un. Be. Liev. A. Ble.


HE DOESN'T KNOW it, and it may not even happen. But by rights, an ABC Studios Exec named Howard Davine quite possibly changed the Canadian Television Industry today.

Of course, Nikki Finke, who broke the story, helped.

Finke obtained and posted excerpts from an internal ABC memo which... well, by rights, she got the scoop -- let's let the lady tell you herself:

the memo blesses anyone who brings foreign formats to ABC first so that the studio can steal the idea without paying the fat licensing fees that would accompany an up-and-up deal. Obviously, ABC doesn't want to repeat what happened with a show like Ugly Betty, which is the American version of the Latin telenovela. This now proves they would rather just rip it off.
Let's sit back and think about the implications for a moment here.

You have Canadian networks and Producers who now are laying their whole idea of how they're going to get stuff made off selling to the USA, or maybe exporting that great format idea.

It goes without saying that when you enter business arrangements with the American nets, it's not going to be an equal relationship -- but the implications of something like this? Well, if I was the person staking my business model on chasing that U.S. dream, I'd be, you know, doing a big, "Ulp" right about now.

And check out this very telling paragraph:

e) Deals regularly get bogged down or sometimes break down entirely on issues relating to our ability to sell the US series without restriction internationally and issues relating to the desire of the foreign rightsholder to sell episodes of their underlying series in the US market. Here, it is not a symetrical two-way street. Whereas the economics of producing a foreign series are not dependent on a vibrant US marketplace for the product, the economics of US network production do indeed depend on our ability to sell our series internationally without restriction.

(emphasis is mine)

I would encourage any Canadian creatives or producers who read this blog to write in and tell me of the number of conversations you've had lately that support this view - that in fact, acknowledge that "the economics of producing a foreign series are not dependent on a vibrant US marketplace for the product."

Clearly Howard hasn't been in many meetings with Canadian producers or development executives or networks. Because there's a whole lot of people who seem to be saying exactly the opposite every time I blink.

And therein lies the rub: we are foolhardy, we who chase and chase and chase this "American sale" chimera like it is the thing that will get our series made, or get it noticed above the pack. We matter so very little, and are of such little consequence to these guys -- that someone seems to be suggesting that ripping off anything we do bring to them might be better, or more profitable.

THAT is your creative future if you go down this road. Not a partnership -- an at-best unequal and dependent union -- maybe even funded by Canadian taxpayer money. Ugh.

Canadian creatives need to engage with our own audience, and an international market that might look for offbeat product that isn't American. We need to come up with our own bold concepts. Clearly the future of doing slightly retooled, generic, American seeming series is dubious at best. There is no magic sale at the end of the rainbow.

A POV or a Brand that isn't a pale photocopy of XFiles or CSI or one of a hundred other Yankee shows isn't just the future -- it's the future of how not to get ripped off.

So ...who's got the guts to greenlight something that the Americans wouldn't touch? And then reap the benefits? Warning: it requires thinking outside the box and taking a creative risk.

Anyone?

Yoo hooooo?

EDIT: It's also interesting a day later to drop back in on the comment thread on Nikki's post -- to see that America-first viewpoint. The last comment there talks about foreign producers having to give up their "huge back end" etc, etc...which also belies the reality that whether it's a format sale or a sale of the original show - the great thing that most people in Canada don't talk about is how these "big U.S. sales," -- most of 'em are for, like, milk money.

10 comments:

Dwight Williams said...

Amazing. Just amazing.

I leave it to others to go into detail here.

Geoffrey Firmin said...

Whether or not the Canadian Industry, the broadcasters, the audience, everybody, chooses courage, thinks outside the box, makes its own way depends on whether or not they want to accept colonial status or that of self determination.

You can't fault the Americans for trying to make the best deals they can. It's for us to decide whether or not we deserve to exist, as something distinct, at all. Let's just make the best shows for ourselves here. If someone wants a piece of that later then fine.

Mark Dowling said...

Ironically, Howard Davine is himself a foreign import
http://www.canadianbusiness.com/ceos/article.jsp?content=20050328_66564_66564

DMc said...

Typical.

deborah Nathan said...

Not like this hasn't happened before - only no one would think of committing it to paper. Very funny.

To give CTV their due - they are making Flashpoint and The Listener for Canada - the two shows just happened to be sold to the US nets after they were fully financed and greenlit.

Other networks want American validation before they will commit and then they go all Canwesticular.

Anonymous said...

And you are surprised the Americans want to steal ideas?

Why, the CBC has been doing this for years:
http://www.cbc.ca/independentproducers/SubmissionReleaseForm.pdf

Point #5: if you submit something to the CBC they and I quote "CBC has the unrestricted right to use these identical/similar materials, and you will have no right or recourse against CBC""


How can the material be IDENTICAL???

Anonymous said...

for some reason the url got cut off, the last bit should be:
/SubmissionReleaseForm.pdf

DMc said...

Yup. Contracts are usually awful. Most contracts here have a clause where I as the writer agree to "sign away any and all moral rights to the material."

Somebody explained moral rights to me once, but the more important stance was that the WGC contract has a clause saying, "where a contract of a signatory has terms that violate the IPA, the IPA will prevail" or something like that.

And in the IPA, you can't sign away moral rights.

The difference between the CBC which is a public co, without endless lawyer resources and a lightning rod for any criticism at all, and the lawyers of the vast Disney conglomerate is the difference between the bully down the street trying to take your ball and the bully who calls in F-16's to strafe your entire fucking neighbourhood.

Letter of it? You're right, that's silly. Spirit? Way, way, way different.

Anonymous said...

"the CBC which is a public co, without endless lawyer resources"

I beg to differ. The CBC in Toronto has more lawyers than writers on their payroll. You should check for yourself.

In any case, stealing people's show concepts and ideas is still theft in my book, regardless if the culprits are canadians or americans.

DMc said...

From the spirit of and letter of file.

That's fine Peter. I accept your contention that there is no difference whatsoever between the phalanx of lawyers and the notorious litigious strategy of the ABC/Disney conglomerate and the big bad old CBC.

The almost comical concern for never, ever, ever being sued and how that affects creatives and what they're asked to annotate has absolutely no bearing on the matter.

The two are absolutely the same.

Thanks for playing.