#but hope this was of interest nevertheless and sorry for any legal errors | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

nealcassatiel · 3 years

Text

Supernatural and Russia and the mess of Television Legal Contracts

One of the most important aspects of a television series’ life cycle is its distribution. It is in the stage of distribution when the production companies/studio recoup the largest amount of costs.

By looking at who distributes the show, as well as which companies stand to gain the most from distribution profits, we can gain greater understanding of the various complex agreements and finances at play.

Viewing Statistics in the USA, Russia, and other International Territories

Let’s take a look at where Supernatural is distributed, and it’s popularity in the countries in which it airs.

After the US, in the past 30 days, Supernatural’s next biggest market is in Russia. The next is in Brazil.

This got long - more under the cut (I’ll be talking about cuts shortly)

In Russia, Supernatural has been in the top 0.2% watched shows in Russia (link) . This is also the case in Brazil.

In 2019, a modest survey was done on urban and rural Russians asking them what foreign television they watch. Supernatural was the 6th most mentioned foreign television show (link).

In 2017, Supernatural was three times more popular in Russia than it was in the US (link - this article has just a whole other host of information about it being popular amongst urban and rural US residents, as well as popular amongst both Republics and Democrats, however i haven’t looked further into that data so not going to discuss it much here)

So selling Supernatural to Russia and airing it in Russia is going to bring in a lot of revenue for The C*W and the production companies. That is a lucrative distribution territory and of a huge amount of importance to the network. Russia will air both new episodes, and reruns. Of course, if Supernatural made a queer love story a central premise, then execs are going to get scared that not only will the finale may not be aired in one of their biggest, if not their biggest market: Russia, but that the broadcasters who distribute the show in Russia might also pull the rest of the show and stop broadcasting reruns too. That’s a shit tonne fo distribution profits gone for The C*W, and who knows, maybe their relationship with Russian broadcasters who air their other shows will be on the rocks. After all, trying to sell gay tv to Russians right now is, sadly, never going to happen. This is not an indictment on the Russian viewers, but me saying that the show won’t be sellable to Russian broadcasters if it is too queer.

A huge huge majority of US Supernatural fans are progressive and wanted the more queer focused and found family ending. But the C*W and Warner believes that there are still enough US fans who don’t want something that progressive to be shown. They also know that one of their biggest markets is Russia, and Dean being shown to be bi will not go down well there. I’m just speculating, but The C*W may have looked at those chunks of audience who give them money and decide that they only care about those profits.

The frustrating thing however, is that no matter the power of Russian Supernatural audiences, looking at the other progressive countries and the popularity of Supernatural there - these numbers as a collective outshine those of Russia. So maybe Russia isn’t that important. Or maybe all The C*W needed to think was ‘we don’t want to stop profits from our biggest international viewership’ and so they never even went further and thought about the collective viewership of the audiences from progressive countries. As I said at the start, distribution is where the companies who invested into making a show recoup the most costs. All the money that comes from distribution is incredibly important.

DISTRIBUTION AND CO-PRODUCTION AGREEMENTS

The writers, the crew, the actors, don’t really get the distribution profits. They may get small cuts of things or bonuses here and there, but they’re all essentially employed by the production company. It is the production company and studio who has sunken money into making the show who will get a cut of the distribution profits. So the production companies and co-production companies, the creator (maybe still if they had a good agent when they first sold the pitch), the network are all going to be the ones to care about how much a finale will matter to profits from showing reruns in less progressive countries. Dabb is an employee - he personally will be paid a fixed sum which is given to him by the production company. He does not care if SPN can’t be aired in Russia - that has no personal affect on him. He was paid to showrun the series and he’ll get nothing more even if it becomes the most watched anti-gay homophobic celebrated show in Moscow. He has no financial reason to cater to anyone. He’s just an employee.

But if information like this, the knowledge that for multiple years TPTB have wanted Supernatural to cater to a non-progressive international and national audience for the sake of distribution profits, then the show should have never have taken the narrative to a place whose ending could not be green-lit.

If for the sake of these pofits and other secondary rights, for the sake of appeasing rural/southern USA viewers, and trying to keep an audience for Walker, The C*W derailed the final two episodes, then I still don’t fully understand why the ending was heading towards destiel when all of this distribution finance information has been known for many many years.

It makes sense why such a terrible finale would happen, but it doesn’t make sense why up until episode 18, the entire narrative of the show was leading somewhere completely different? Why were the writers of SPN heading straight towards one thing, if they knew they always knew that they’d have to have a completely different ending?

The Right of Final Cut / Final Cut Privilege

The answer may lie in the fact that The C*W wasn’t really paying that much attention to SPN, they couldn’t really see all the subtext, but suddenly the subtext all was going to become text and they were all twiddling their thumbs and looking for something to do during COVID when the industry shut down, so they suddenly got way more involved.

Let’s quickly clear up who The C*W is and how they relate to SPN as a company. Supernatural lists The C*W as one of it’s distributers, but lists Warner Bros Television as a production company. When SPN started it was made by The WB (which is now The C*W). It’s all under Warner Media anyway, but we can basically say that Warner Bros Television (listed as a co-producer of SPN) is the sam as The C*W who is listed as a distributer of SPN. They’re essentially the same so The C*W is both producing and distributing SPN, as well as owning the format rights to the show - sorry that’s all complicated anyway The C*W are the big dogs who own Supernatural and have done from the beginning back when they were called The WB)

Essentially, The C*W have a co-production and distribution agreement for SPN. The power they have from that first agreement when they bought the show off Kripke is almost certainly still MASSIVE today. They are not only the ultimate distributers, but the ultimate producers with all the agreements and all the rights.

Anyway, back to that first agreement: This was Kripke’s first big deal, and he almost certainly gave Warner Bros/The C*W a whole host of creative control in exchange for them sinking a shit tonne of money into making the show. Which makes me wonder if The C*W has something in entertainment law called “the right of final cut/final cut privilege”. If a studio or distributer has sunken a heck tonne of costs into making the series and are the ones who most need to recoup the distribution costs, then in their contract they may try to give themselves the ‘final cut privilege’ - essentially, this is the final edit. There’s the Director’s Cut, but then after that there is the Final Cut. The Final Cut is what is broadcast. Nowadays, most series and films don’t allow the directors to have final cut privilege anyway - it’s fairly rare from my understanding (one of my hats is a television legal contracts assistant, and all of these contracts still confuse me even though it’s an element of my job - I’m not trained in this outside of work so i apologise if this isn’t clear). The studio or distributer doesn’t even need to clear their final cut with the writer/director/producer. They can just do it. Cut it up and broadcast it, because they’re allowed to in their contract.

So with the finale episode being so short, a mess of montages, Carry on My Wayward Son versions back to back, a narrative mess, the pacing completely off, some scenes way too short and others way too long - this really could insinuate that the stupid clause of ‘the right of final cut’ was utilised by The C*W and without the need to get the permission or allowance of Dabb or even the other production companies, they edited everything they didn’t like out of the finale, citing their contract and the fact that they’re the ones who need to recoup distribution costs, and they don’t want to piss off large swathes of their national and international audience.

In Conclusion

So positives? Well, now that SPN is done and dusted, if there is a spin-off then this shouldn't affect distribution deals in Russia or Brazil. If whoever buys the format rights for Supernatural, allows The C*W to still sell the old series distribution rights, then market the new season of SPN not as a new season but a spin-off, then this will give them more freedom to not cater to the conservative international and national audiences SPN was beholden to due to distribution profits. What I’m saying is - a spin-off could free itself from catering to anyone who isn’t progressive. The old audiences can carry on showing reruns of SPN and completely ignore the new ‘fake’ gay spin-off. They can say that it’s a different production company, a different network - and therefore not the legitimate show. Great. Free SPN.

A new format agreement could also mean that the new producers could ensure that not the distributer, but the director, or the new trusted production company themselves gets the Right of Final Cut. If another agreement is made, please please please take that right away from The C*W/Warner.

The difficulty in getting the SPN rights would be caused by the mess of a Format Agreement to even get those rights... Supernatural is co-produced by Kripke Enterprises, Warner Bros. Television, Supernatural Films, and Wonderland Sound and Vision. I’m assuming Kripke Enterprises and Supernatural Films may be under Warner Media (as Warner Bros and The C*W itself is). If Jensen wanted to produce the new spin-off then his new production company is under WB/Warner Media too... so. Disentangling meddling and shitty Warner Media execs from a spin-off would be difficult because they own everyone.

All in all, it’s easy to see now with that mess of a finale that this was caused with whoever has “The Right Of Final Cut/Final Cut Privilege’. And I HIGHLY doubt Singer or Dabb or any mere employee on the show has it. It’s more and more obvious to me that this power lies in the hands of The C*W/Warner and they didn’t even try to loop Dabb or the main cast in when making the final edits. I’m sure the C*W started to get involved at episode 19 and in the development stage of episode 20, but i’m certain they had a hand in the disastrous final cut.

I hope we’re able to pry our beloved show out of the hands of those who don’t care about its narratives, but have more power than anyone to change the show’s narratives. Thanks for coming with me on this essay/me working out this complicated mess. It’s 00:50 and I'm super tired so I hope all this makes sense. Television contracts confuse me and I work with them so i dunno how clear any of this is.

Anyway - I hope it was totally boring.

#spn #supernatural #spn statistics #spn analysis #fuck the cw #fuck the finale #viewer statistics #i dont know if i find contracts interesting or dull #i haven't worked with contracts since covid happened #so i may be kinda rusty on my knowledge #but hope this was of interest nevertheless and sorry for any legal errors #supernatural finale #spn finale #tv industry #industry stuff #final cut privilege

482 notes · View notes

ninetytwotechnology-blog · 7 years

Text

ESTIMATES IN SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT. NEW FRONTIERS.

There’s more and more buzz around estimates and #noestimates in software program development. People like to write bold statements and pass severe about things in blogs. Generally, private dialogues are an awful lot greater balanced. A few hate estimates and consider it’s a useless interest. Some shield it with arguments of controversial fact.

I need to dig into intrinsic estimates headaches, what humans imply through “estimate” and what future directions we may additionally assault.

ESTIMATE IS A DISTRIBUTION

It’s impossible to provide a hundred% precise estimate to nearly some thing. Using is a totally, very commonplace interest without innovative (i am hoping) decisions. Appears like we can estimate how long it'll take to get from factor a to factor z with a superb accuracy.

I used to pick up my buddy recently each day. I called him before the pressure to reconcile the advent time and choose him up without delays. The distance and the route are exactly the equal and certainly i discovered to estimate timing nearly perfectly — thirteen mins. Still someday it became 12 mins and someday it was 15 mins. Once it took simply 10 minutes (sorry, i drove too rapid and all lights had been inexperienced).

The factor is trivial, you can’t give specific estimate to simplest responsibilities. Estimate is a distribution. Perhaps ordinary, maybe slender, however nevertheless it’s not a single wide variety.

If we communicate about software program development, you don't have any luxurious to have a slender distribution. Hell no. You've got a wide positively skewed distribution with pretty full-size chance to be 50% off the expected estimate. Why is that?

SOFTWARE PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT IS COMPLICATED

You've got a function to estimate. There are numerous situations from there. You may have treated a similar characteristic previously, and you’re quite confident now. Or, perhaps, you don’t have a clue how to assault this selection in any respect. In any case, you don’t know a hundred% of information about this feature. It's miles almost impossible.

Permit’s take a completely simple feature like “as a user i need to login into the gadget”. Most of you already remember some photos inner your brain with login and password fields, check in button and recollect me checkbox. That is pleasant. Now we’re ready to check some info. What we want to provide the precise estimate? We need to recognize the scope. Here is the checklist:

FINALIZED GRAPHICAL LAYOUT

· Fields specification (max period, allowed characters, and many others).

· Error coping with (with all feasible mistakes copyrighted)

· Listing of supported web browsers (opera cell perhaps?)

· List of supported locales (jap?)

· Password electricity requirements

· Keep in mind me spec (for how long should we hold this info?)

· Transitions (what takes place once i click check in?)

· Protection protections (brute pressure, various injections)

This list is related to practical specification best. Sadly, different matters affect scope as properly:

· Need to we write purposeful automated assessments?

· Have to us replace consumer manual or another documentation?

· Must we test different features that can be affected?

Are there extra questions to ask? Oh, yes! Forestall there. It’s a very exciting moment. We described the scope and we ought to estimate scope. Very, very often humans do precisely that. However, there are many, many things (sorry for repetitions) that have an effect on length. Funny sufficient, managers ask for “scope estimate”, but then update them with “length estimate” of their heads in some way. I don’t know what type of mind trick is that, but it’s so commonplace.

If you hear that an assignment will take four hours to finish and developer begins running on it right now, you count on it'll be completed in five-6 hours (you are clever enough to assume interruptions and got used to developers’ optimism). But, you may be pretty amazed if it’ll take 2 days to get the mission executed. You (and that i) unconsciously deliver this marvel feeling via all lifestyles. But need to we? Perhaps 2 days is a traditional duration for tasks predicted with four hours. You have to accumulate the records to differentiate standard and uncommon activities, to recognize the duration distribution as nicely.

PROPERLY, WHAT AFFECTS DURATION?

· Who will implement this selection?

· Will developer work on his productive or unproductive hours?

· Are there any refactoring’s developer makes a decision to do before the challenge simply starts?

· What's a chance that dressmaker will exchange his mind and ask for giant re-work?

· How many funny pictures developer’s friends will put up on Fb these days?

You can preserve the list. Anyway, there’re many factors that make duration predictions not possible difficult.

SOFTWARE IMPROVEMENT IS A DISCOVERY

With each characteristic we analyze. We learn how to code, how to design, how to test. We make bigger the gadget and find out new opportunities, new improvements and new usage styles.

What if we start implementation and suppose that login thru twitter might be tremendous? What if you acquire additional statistics and discover that your target audience definitely doesn’t use twitter, however nearly absolutely everyone has google account? Nicely, this could sound like a brand new consumer tale and it's miles new certainly. However remember how commonly did you perform a little little tweaks right here and there? Re-wrote error message right here, brought some extra assessments right here, changed design of that area, and so on. There are many small adjustments you can’t expect from the beginning.

YOU FIND OUT IMPROVEMENTS ON THE PASS.

These discoveries change scope. We’re very awful at predicting scope adjustments. We are particularly horrific at predicting accumulation of many small modifications. Ironically, those changes are right! Believe you usually observe the original layout and authentic choices. It may enhance estimates and forecasts, but it's going to kill creativity and race to perfection. Every body will stick to spec all of the time, and in maximum contexts this will result in mediocre solutions at nice.

You ought to encourage re-paintings to make matters higher, however it’s quite hard to discover a accurate balance between re-paintings inside the context of present day user story and creation of a brand new person story that will be implemented later.

There's a threat you'll find out new dimensions for the product. Perhaps, human beings begin using it in a completely unexpected way. This opens even extra possibilities. Good enough, that is another story.

A WAY TO STAY WITH THAT?

One option is to stop estimating. Assume carefully. How are you going to use those estimates? To impose sprint dedication? To speak about group’s velocity versions on the subsequent retrospective? To degree development? To reduce scope creep? Those are fake dreams.

Estimate is just one extra metric that enables us make choices, forecast and version the destiny.

You can collect this metric and use it wisely (each things aren’t smooth even though).

One idea i've is that we are able to look for similar patterns in functions and responsibilities. We can also gather numerous attributes like generation, builders and their skills, area information, teams, development practices, method practices, and many others. To set a context.

It could take place that we can apply statistic and gadget studying to locate those styles. Or we are able to go difficult way and invent a respectable model that describes a majority of these styles. Consequently we’ll be able to examine a brand new function with a library of current patterns and have the estimate distribution for this new, estimated characteristic. Humans suck at estimating, perhaps machines will no longer ultimately.

Together with estimate distribution, we can have “some other thrilling statistics” like anticipated bugs, predicted period, anticipated liquidity (something david anderson is digging into), predicted re-paintings, etc. This may assist us to offer aggregated probabilistic forecasts for entire groups and initiatives.

Yes, it sounds complex, however i suppose it’s practicable in the long run. Maximum possibly this will be relevant inside the context of strong teams running on similar tasks, however who is aware of, perhaps we’ll locate a few general legal guidelines and models.

We can accumulate data approximately many initiatives in various industries and contexts (hot subject matter, large records, ). This initiative is large, but useful to all. I know noam chomsky doesn’t like this approach, but nonetheless probabilistic statistical models can offer sensible effects. And our younger industry wishes as a minimum a few practical matters to depend on.

The most complex factor is a way to define those patterns to compare functions. It seems it will be required to split paintings into quite small chunks (responsibilities with less than an afternoon anticipated estimate), offer numerous statistics about those tasks and use hierarchical systems to find similarities. I’m curious to listen any recommendations.

Every other trivial concept is to narrow down the estimate distribution. This idea looks tempting. We can try and lessen or control all viable factors that affect estimate distribution, for that reason increasing estimates accuracy.

Permit’s suppose how we are able to acquire that. We need to have 100% specific specifications up-the front, ban re-work, lessen context variant (change improvement technique hardly ever)… forestall. Wtf? This rings a bell in my memory of a terrific vintage waterfall! I hope this concept isn’t attractive to you now.

I assume we should embody estimate distribution and invent new approaches to version and use it. We shouldn’t combat it. This will be a conflict against our allies. This will be a struggle towards creativity, perfectionism, mastering and team spirit. I’d higher surrender.

0 notes