This past Tuesday, I had the pleasure of attending an evening organised by the Irish International Business Network and Animation Ireland at the Irish consulate in New York City. It was an enjoyable evening and an excellent opportunity to meet many of those from the Irish industry who were in town for the annual Kidscreen summit.
Among the many highlights of the evening was seeing the reel with which Ireland is being pitched as the ‘Animation Nation’. Given the proliferation of studios over the last 15 years, it is not surprising that the animation industry is now an employer of note in a country of only 4 million people:
The focus of the event was much more on the business side of things than the creative one and it was clear that the studios present are well aware of the changes currently taking shape in the media landscape and the many challenges that will come with them.
That said, it was great to see that they all have a deep passion and commitment to animation that will hopefully bring them many successes in the coming years.
Due to school, other commitments and a general lack of time, this week was light on regular posts, but that did not preclude some interesting articles being published elsewhere.
I’m a Black Female Cosplayer And Some People Hate It
Chaka Cumberbatch is an anime fan and cosplayer who happens to be black. Unfortunately, she discovered that racism pervades even the nicest fandoms. In this post over on XOJane, she outlines some of the crap she’s had to put up with while outlining why those who argue that only those of the same race as the character are ‘allowed’ to cosplay as them are, quite rightly, idiots.
The Many Motivations Of Movie Piracy (Notably Absent: ‘I Want Everything For Free’)
Techdirt has a great article that includes the chart above. Notice something that’s missing? Yes, people demanding stuff for free. Such data is proof that even though we are moving towards new business models. there is little reason to assume that people will stop paying creators for content.
The Epilogue By Don Rosa
Don Rosa is the very popular and respected comic artist of many Uncle Scrooge comics. In recent times, a substantial collection of his work has been released for collectors. The final volume of which was meant to contain a letter explaining Rosa’s many reasons for stepping down from the job.
The letter is actually a fascinating read and is extremely honest in tone, but one can’t help but feel incredibly saddened when they read stuff like this:
I couldn’t help but realize that I had provided these people with 20 years’ worth of work that they would reprint and rerereprint for the next century without ever offering me a cent in royalties. It was an insidious worm that worked its way into my soul. It killed my enthusiasm. And my enthusiasm for the fans who loved these Barks characters as much as I did was all that had kept me going.
Jonathan Coulton Vs. FOX
You may or may not be aware of a recent situation where artist Jonathon Coulton got upset that inexplicably popular FOX show Glee used a version of Sir Mix-A-Lot’s ‘Baby Got Back’ that was seemingly a copy of one that he had created. There was a lot of back and forth about it, but Simpsons music editor Chris Ledesma cuts through the nonsense with his simple and neutral explanation of things.
Music and the rights that go along with it often play an important role in animation. They’re the reason the Daria boxset was delayed as long as it was, and even then the original music was substituted. All very good to keep in mind.
I’m a Brony, and… I’m Sorry
In this essay, brony ‘Headless Horse’ professes an uncomfortableness with how My Little Pony as a show has been overridden by the fandom surrounding it and how the resultant media attention has diminished the focus on the show an its characters. A worthy, if long, read on the topic of genderisation and fandom.
Awards season is well and truly in swing (with the Annie Awards being the most relevant to this post) with plenty of back-slapping, schmoozing and thankfulness going on. However, a recent post by Ariel Seidman got me thinking; why is so much emphasis placed on awards? Shouldn’t rewards be the more important thing to desire?
Award shows are deeply confusing to me. We reward the creators of movies, music, and now technology with a metal object. That’s not the reward. The reward is when people use the products we create. That’s it. There is no better high than seeing people enjoy the thing you created.
Codecademy founders get this. They won a Crunchie and had a customer accept the award and tell a story about how she is using Codecademy to advance her career by developing new skills. Beautiful.
I hope we all start doing this.
Why Ariel Is Right About Awards
While Ariel isn’t an animator, he’s got the right idea. As creators, it is much more desirable from a number of standpoints to see what you create being used as it was designed. Sure it’s nice to be appreciated by your peers, but at the end of the day, they will not be ones supporting you (financially or otherwise). Does it make sense to pander to them?
Imagine if you will, my film winning the Annie Award for best feature. Now I could get up there and thank a whole bunch of people, but how would that benefit my audience; my fans? It wouldn’t really, would it? Awards like that do a good job of stroking the egos of everyone involved, but they do not make better films nor do they endear audiences to the films.
The Future
What I’m getting at here is the fact that the rapid splintering of the entertainment business is rendering awards ceremonies kind of moot. That’s not to say they won’t exist, plenty of web awards are out there, but there is a huge difference between receiving an award for your hard work, and receiving praise/gratitude from fans.
I was buried in one of those sketches (a Catwoman I believe) when I looked up to see–and I apologize if I should have known or remembered who this was but my mind had become the consistency of tapioca pudding by that day–a fairly large man standing at my table holding a Cleo book wanting to buy it. Not for himself, which I immediately found out, but for his daughter too shy (or scared) to purchase it from me herself and who was currently hiding behind this fairly large man’s frame. She was maybe five? Six? Seven years old? I’m terrible at identifying age. She was young for certain. At any rate, this man asked if I would sign the Cleo book which of course I did and he handed me a five and I handed him back the book and then he handed the book to the little person standing behind him who MADE THE LOUDEST MOST EXCITING SCREAM OF GLEE revealing herself from behind her body guard clutching at what you would think was the greatest ice cream cone in the history of ice cream cones (sorry, when my mind goes to something really great all I can think of is ice cream). With a giant grin plastered to her face, staring at the cover, she ran down the aisle with another girl who magically appeared out of nowhere or who I simply didn’t notice (most likely the former). Then the fairly large man quickly thanked me and made his way down the aisle in the direction his daughter had ran off to.
So as a creator, would you rather have a lump of metal on your bookshelf or the knowledge that your creation is proving enjoyment not only to one person, but to millions all around the world? I know which one I would rather have.
Conclusion
Awards serve a purpose, but they are in no way a way a means to an end. They are instead a dead end. They acknowledge achievements and creativity, but they do not encourage it; they don’t imbue creators with the sense that their creations are being appreciated by the people for whom they were meant for. Feedback and gratitude from fans and casual viewers alike are rewards that all creators should aspire to.
Do you agree or would you still rather have an Oscar to keep under your pillow? Let us know with a comment!
It’s Finally Over: 8 Years Of Mattel vs. Bratz And No One’s Getting Paid But The Lawyers
Techdirt has the details on this final chapter in a showdown over who created what. This is a case that is well worth reading up about because it deals with ideas and concepts and who is legally entitled to own them. All very important concepts in the animation industry.
Inside DreamWorks: how animated movies are rendered
Techradar has this look at the technological side of DreamWorks Animation. It comes off as a bit of a pitch piece for Hewlett-Packard, but it’s still very informative.
Clever Merchandising Tie-Ins In Sailor Moon
The Sailor Failures tumblelog takes a look at how the series (specifically Sailor Moon R) featured crafty references to the merchandise in every episode. Hint: there was a reason the outer senshi were given specific shots of their lisptick being applied:
Amazon Studios is the retailer’s original content division that has been covered before here on the blog because it appears to have some merit to it even if it’s far from perfect. Announced just recently is the news that they have officially sanctioned five new animated shows to move forward with the production of pilot episodes. The notable thing about them is that they are all aimed at pre-schoolers; none will appeal to a kid who can appreciate the summer holidays. So what kind of pitfalls can the Amazon Studios animated series’ present for the would-be hit maker? Let’s take a look.
Only One Episode Of Each Is Being Made: The Pilot
It’s tempting to think that Amazon Studios has announced five different series, but they’ve actually only announced five different pilots. That’s a big difference and one that’s clearly aimed at keeping costs down. The downside is that they’re only producing one episode that may not be very good at all. Pilot’s are test beds, proofs of concept and a chance for executives to see how a show might play out for real. Pilots serve a valuable purpose, but here, it’s hard to see why they are treated so heroically.
No details are given as to whether these pilots will even see the light of day as far as the public is concerned. One would hope that they will be given trial runs with mainstream audiences to see how well they resonate with them, but you can never be sure. Plenty of pilots have been buried never to see the light of day. while conversely, they can also be jaw-droppingly awesome and yet still fail to get picked up.
They Picked the Toughest Market Segment
Yup, pre-school is the hottest market segment as far as animated shows go. Everyone is in on the act from monstrous conglomerates like Disney and Viacom to independent studios run by husbands and wives. Of all the ages of people to create for, why did Amazon choose this one to focus on?
Would it not be easier to aim for older kids or teenagers instead? One would think so, and yet the company has so far only announced one pilot for that audience. Were there really fewer ideas submitted? Hardly.
It’s Not Quite As Lucrative As You Would Expect
That’s not to say that Amazon Studios won’t make a lot of money through pre-school shows (it will), the problem is that pre-school shows have pre-school audiences. Once they reach a certain age, they leave and never return. Related merchandise sales also stop, and it becomes necessary to constantly market to new entrants.
This can become problematic when you realise that pre-school shows themselves have a terrifyingly short lifespan. Sure Sesame Street and Dora the Explorer have been around for ages, but the vast majority of pre-school animated shows don’t tend to bridge generations very well. Part of the reason is that child psychology and parent’s demands are continuously changing. For example, in my day, there was much more of an emphasis on entertainment whereas today, it’s seriously difficult to get a pre-school show made and out there if it does not contain a significant amount of educational content.
So with such a limited audience, won’t that limit Amazon’s potential to make money from the series? The answer is yes, because unlike Disney, Viacom et al, Amazon does not also have animate shows aimed at older kids. The result is that once they “graduate” from their pre-school shows, there is nothing for them to transition to. Now bear in mind that at this point, such circumstances are circumstantial; Amazon can afford to wait before it announces shows for older kids, yet the fact remains that it is foregoing those audiences now.
Netflix is Still The One Amazon Studios Has To Beat
Although Amazon is focusing on creating original content, pseudo-competitor Netflix already has a large headstart. Sure they lack the original programming, but they have a massive library to draw upon. More so than that, they have become synonymous with the words “online streaming” and have a commanding lead over Amazon in the public’s mind. Netflix is also available on more platforms, already has a dedicated kid-friendly service (so Mummy and Daddy don’t have to play the progamming for the child) and has all the programming for the young audience once they get older.
Conclusion
I’ve lauded Amazon’s initiatives before and they’re logic remains solid for the most part. (I won’t go into the differences between their ‘pilot’ strategy and Netflix’s ‘all-in’ approach.) Their decision to aim for pre-school audiences remains a mysterious one. No doubt they will be drawing upon their vast amount of data on sales of toys to help them finesse their approach.
Would you rather see Amazon make an animated series for older viewers? Let us know with a comment!
I’ll admit it, I enjoy the commentators on the A.V. Club simply because they exhibit a decent sense of humour as well as an above-average level of intellect for an internet community. When news broke yesterday of the new Powerpuff Girls CGI special was being made, things were made all the more interesting with the simultaneous realisation that superhero shows Young Justice and Green Lantern: The Animated Series were not announced as returning. Such news is not the purpose of this post however, instead, here is a selection of though-provoking comments from the article.
Not that bronies actually caused this, but the conspiracy that Cartoon Network is aiming to ape the success of My Little Pony with a show from 10 years ago is surprisingly strong.
See, I liked Powerpuff girls when they were on. It was a good show despite seeming like it was only for girls.
But I didn’t start a goddamn movement.
Which begs the question, if the Powerpuff Girls were launched today, would they garner a similar cross-demographic audience as MLP does? Would the fact that the internet is far more developed today than in 1998 be the key difference? My vote says yes.
Powerpuff Girls used to be the show 10 year old boys used to watch in secret out of fear of alienation from their peers.
..and brings up that whole topic of discussion. Boys loved the show yet were totally afraid to admit to watching it. Craig J. Clarks experience rates slightly better:
I had a couple friends that I watched it with (one of whom had to overcome his initial reluctance), but I didn’t exactly go around broadcasting my love for the show.
I was a boy in middle school, you damn well better not let on that you like anything the least bit girlly
So the question here isn’t so much that Sailor Moon appeals more to girls, but that genderisation deems it as the exclusive preserve of girls. What the hell is right with that situation? Who cares if a boy likes to watch Sailor Moon? The bigger question though, is why did middle school kids feel the need to “teach him a lesson” so to speak for liking the show he likes? Your comments are welcome.
I was working daycare, with four-year-olds, when PPG was still on the air. One day, I heard three of the little boys playing Powerpuff Girls. They weren’t playing any of the male characters, they were each one of the girls. They had no problem identifying themselves as Bubbles, Buttercup, or Blossom.
I try not to interfere with what my son likes because the rest of the world will try to do that for him. He likes My Little Pony and Spirited Away in equal measure and it makes me glad.
Goodness knows kids today are subject to enough external pressures, telling them what to like and what not to like.
Seriously? Why is there no Adventure Time Swatch watch out there? Why can’t I buy them? Why can’t anyone buy them? Why hasn’t anyone thought of doing it yet?
Well, here’s a few reasons for someone to get on it.
Swatch Is Cool
Alright, yes, that statement is coming from a child of the 80s when Swatch was the watch to have. Cheap, cheerful and created solely as a tool to ward off the crushing Japanese digital threat that almost sunk the entire Swiss watchmaking industry, Swatch watches become the epitome of hautecouture for those wishing keep up with fashionable 80s taste.
Fast forward to 2013, and Swatch watches are nowhere near as ubiquitous as they used to be, but, they’re still being made in just about every colour/pattern imaginable and they still exhibit they same classic design that made them a worldwide icon.
Adventure Time Is Cool
This is already a given, right? The show has done wonders for Cartoon Network and continually manages to outdo itself. Besides that, we’ve noted here on this blog that the show has not only been superb at embracing its fans, but also embracing novel merchandising ideas such as T-shirt competitions and limited edition wallets.
On top of that, the show has a near-perfect cast of characters. This eclectic bunch appeals to a wide range of fans in all sorts of demographics and ages. Merchandise released so far has done well to either include most of the cast, or utilise them individually to great effect.
Why Bring Adventure Time and Swatch Together Though?
Ah, the real question. Why bring a style icon of the past together with a cultural icon of today? The answer is pretty simple actually; both things complement each other. Don’t believe me?
They’re Fun
Adventure Time is known as a fun show with fun characters engaging in all sorts of fun adventures in the Land of Ooo. Swatch staked their brand on being the fun watch, the watch that was cheap and cheerful, the watch that stood out amongst a sea of boring digital timepieces. What’s wrong with bringing two fun things together?
They Suit Each Other
Swatch watches are famous for being brightly coloured, simple watches. Sure there are more sophisticated models, but your basic Swatch watch is about as plain as they come:
This plain style is just crying out to be adorned with Pen Ward’s creations. Tragically, I cannot create the mockups necessary to visually explain what’s in my head (please, any Photoshop wizzes out there who’d like to help out, be my guest), but imagine an orange swatch watch with an elongated Jake along the entire length of the band. His bellybutton could be the centre of the dial!
Also being of benefit is that fact that Swatch watches are practically indestructible thanks to their simplicity and are inexpensive enough to be suitable for kids to have. Not that we’re focusing solely on kids, but being inexpensive means that people are likely to buy more than one.
They’re Desirable
Yes, they would be desirable. Don’t pay attention to those old bitter folks who claim that Swatch watches were a fad. Ignore the notion that nobody wears watches any more because they can just look at their phones. Gloss over the fact that a Beemo Swatch watch may not be entirely accurate.
Watches have long been surpassed as the primary method by which people tell the time. Yeah we have phones, computers, clocks and so on, but such a mindset completely ignores the reason people still wear watches: their fashionable. Yes, that’s right, I said fashionable. They’re objects of fashion for men and women, young and old. Watches are a mainstay of the fashion accessory industries and that situation is highly unlikely to change any time soon.
If anything, an Adventure Time Swatch watch may help younger kids become interested in watches. After all, they’re cool looking and have their favourite characters on them, right? Even among older fans, ones who do remember Swatch’s earlier heyday, they would be a nostalgic item.
They would also play into the current trend of personalisation. IPhone covers, clothing, jewellery and plenty of other pieces of merchandise play on the idea of making a personal statement. Swatch has been advocating that marketing line for years; a range of Adventure Time watches would only be the latest incarnation of their corporate mission.
Just Make Them Already!
Cartoon Network is missing out on an opportunity to create a range of merchandise that it truly memorable, appeals to fans, and promotes the proliferation of Adventure Time even further into the public realm beyond its fans. Why they haven’t considered this already is beyond me. But hey, if they decide to take it up, and Ice Queen one is all I ask for.
What do you think? Would you wear an Adventure Time Swatch Watch?
David OReilly is infamous for the unique style of animation in his personal films and the particular brand of comedy that inhabits them. As an independent animator, David is a master at understanding how they become a brand onto themselves and he uses it to his benefit. Such a move is often the result of necessity but rarely is it pulled off with the pastiche that OReilly manages. With his latest venture, David illustrates yet again, how independent animators can engage with fans and earn a living at the same time.
The Fans
OReilly has acquired an audience (or devoted mass if you prefer) through his short films and commercial works. These include the films Please Say Something, The External World and his initial foray, Octocat. Videos for the likes of U2 have heightened his public profile among non-animation fans too.
These fans not only provide an audience for every new thing that he creates, they also function as his makeshift publicity department. The advantage to this is that word of mouth is by far the most reliable and effective form of advertising even if it may take a while to reach large numbers of people.
Acquiring fans is one thing, but OReilly also manages to keep them, chiefly through continually honing, improving and experimenting with his craft. His reasons for not repeating himself bear remembering in this regard and his ever increasing profile within the animation industry is proof of that. They will culminate later this year when his episode of Adventure Time hits the airwaves.
The Content
Although fans are important to any independent animator, it is necessary to interact with them and continually present them with new and exciting material. The risk is that if you do not, they will move on to somebody else who does.
OReilly is only one Irishman however, and animation being the slow process that it is, it would be impossible for him to create new animated films constantly and within short time frames. Instead, he opts to create new animation when it is possible, and in between, keeps his fans happy and engaged through other, non-animated creations.
OReilly’s twitter and instagram feeds exemplify his unique sense of humour and provide the primary channels of engagement. They are a practically free way of maintaining his profile without any additional cost to himself.
David is also the master at engaging his fans in conversation through them. A clear example was his recent pondering of why critically acclaimed content garners tiny viewership on YouTube and yet videos of cats can garner millions. His response was as much genius as it was entertaining: he posted a video of puppies and then decried it as a despicable act for which he was truly sorry.
The result?Nearly 12,000 views but a ton of interactivity with fans as they eagerly entertained the notion that the video was ‘disgusting’ even though it clearly was not (click to enlarge):
The latest idea (and the one that prompted this post) was the recent announcement that David had designed 40 T-shirts. “OK, so what” I hear you say, “that’s not a big deal”. Well, no, it probably isn’t, but since he has decided to also sell them, it sort of is.
Why? Well quite simply, these T-shirts bring fans and content together in a way that allows OReilly to make money. Firstly, the T-shirts are a way of proving that he values his fans and secondly, they adhere to David’s unique style without the need to create new animation. The result is that you have happy fans, with a David OReilly creation and all without the need to create expensive, time-consuming animation!
Of course the true genius of these T-shirts is that they exhibit not only OReilly’s unique sense of humour (and his desire to lead a Comic Sans revival), but also his interest in animation too. Observe:
Needless to say, the use of these copyrighted characters would fall under the parody rule of fair use.
The Payoff
(no pun intended)
What is there to be gleaned from all of this? Well, a few things:
OReilly creates animation that garners fans of his work
He engages with his fans on a constant basis
He creates non-animated content as a way to satisfy fans until new animation can be created
The content he creates is exciting and of equal quality to his animation.
The result is that David OReilly succeeds at things where plenty of others fail. Yes, anybody can create a T-shirt and sell it online without much overhead, but simply offering T-shirts is not enough. Neither can you rely upon merchandise sales alone to bring in money or keep your fans engaged. Again, simply offeringit is not enough. David demonstrates that you must keep fans ‘primed’ for new content and when you deliver, it must be exciting enough for them to want to purchase it.
In addition, the T-shirts themselves are broad enough in appeal so that non-fans and people who may have never heard of him before will get to know him; i.e. they will grow his fanbase. Imagine that, growing the potential audience for your animated properties without creating any new animation. Genius!
Although by no means a model that can translate to any and all independent animators, what David OReilly conducts is a high-wire act that constantly entertains his fans, keeps them engaged and interested in what he’s doing. the result is that he can create merchandise that not only sells, but increases his profile further. He is a model for others to follow.
Here’s some of the articles I read this week that you should too!
Independent Producer Nathan Erasmus explains how to get your project off the ground
The always informative FLIP bloginterviews Nathan Erasmus about independent films and the not only the struggles and effort behind one, but also the rewards.
Den of Geek on the Disney Renaissance
David Crow over at Den of Geek has a comprehensive review of the films of the Disney renaissance focusing on what made the early films successful and the later films, not so much. I covered a similar topic last week, but David takes a look at the series as a whole rather than just one film.
The Dead Homer Society always makes for thought-provoking analyses of the Simpsons and this post is no exception. Twins Sherri and Terri were the, dare I say, devious, twins that had no problem humiliating other characters from fellow kids like Bart to enterprising restauranteur Moe. This post looks at the characters and their many conniving actions during the show’s earlier series.
Lei Adeline over at Smart When Shouting has written an excellent post concerning the lack of female characters in Disney’s forthcoming ‘Disney Infinity’ video game/action figure play sets. The depressing reality that Lei breaks down is that the majority of characters available (at least at launch) are aimed primarily at boys:
While girls are certainly welcome to play, with elements from films like The Little Mermaid, Cinderella, and Alice in Wonderland available in token form, they are certainly not being encouraged to. The lack of properties aimed at them certainly serves as evidence of that, with the Princesses oddly absent, Tinkerbell and her gang nowhere in sight, and even Disney’s “cooler” or more “kick-ass” heroines like Rapunzel and Mulan seemed to have missed the cut.
she has a purple streak in her hair – WONT CONFORM !
She listens to bands with the guitar in it thats not acoustic – SO METAL
All her friends are guys – SNEAKERS NOT HIGH HEELS U GUYZ
dont mind me just poking fun at this weird trend in animated shows where theres this girl with dark hair and a purple streak whos suppose to appeal to the ’ edgy ’ teens lol.
I’m a sucker for character analyses and I think Megan Ferguson nails it with this tongue-in-cheek look at one from her tumblelog.
Ah, the fine print. Almost nobody actually reads it, but when they do, surprises abound. Today, we’re taking a look at the recently announced Nickelodeon Animated Shorts Program; basically Nick’s effort to find new animated programming because whatever system they’ve used since giving Random! Cartoons the boot clearly isn’t working. However, we’re not interested in what kind of content they’re looking for, or even the reason why they’re doing it at all. Nope, we’re interested in the fine print, because the devil really is in the details.
What it Does Say
You acknowledge that there does not now exist, nor has there ever existed, nor will there exist, a fiduciary relationship between you and VMN. You requested this opportunity to submit your Material to VMN and you make this submission voluntarily and on an unsolicited basis. You and VMN have not yet reached an agreement concerning the use of the Material and you realize that no obligation of any kind is assumed by, or may be implied against, VMN unless and until a formal written contract has been entered into between you and VMN (if ever), and then the obligation shall be only as is expressed in the formal written contract.
Basically, we don’t have to pay you a cent until we sign a proper contract. A fair enough arrangement and pretty standard for this kind of thing.
You warrant that you are the sole and exclusive creator, author and owner of the Material, and that to your knowledge no one else has any right to the Material. You further warrant that no rights in the Material have previously been granted to anyone nor has the Material otherwise been exploited in any way. You believe your Material and its features to be unique and novel.
In other words, you are the only person who created what you submit, and you didn’t include material belonging to someone else. Again, that’s a standard thing. There’s a TON of fanfiction out there that networks won’t touch with a 10 foot pole simply because there are too many licensing issues to deal with.
The biggie (any emphasis mine):
However, you cannot and will not assume or infer from the fact that VMN will accept your offer to submit your Material to VMN, that VMN regards your Material, or any part thereof, as novel, valuable or usable. You recognize that other persons including VMN employees may have submitted to VMN or to others or made public, or may hereafter originate and submit or make public, similar or identical material which VMN shall have the right to use, and you understand that you will not be entitled to any compensation because of VMN’s use of such other similar or identical material. Subject to the foregoing provisions, VMN will not make any use of any legally protectable portion of your Material unless you and VMN have agreed in a writing signed by both parties concerning your compensation for such use, which compensation shall in no event be greater than the compensation normally paid by VMN for similar Material from comparable sources.
With this, Viacom are essentially attempting to preclude themselves from any compensation claims that arise from using an idea that is very similar to a submission. This is common for studios who might well get 50 submissions about a cat chasing a mouse. The kicker is the use of the term “legally protectable”. That is something that has to be hashed out in a court with a judge (usually) and doing that is certainly not a cheap thing to undertake. Although they mention compensation, do note that studios love to bend the rules about as far as they will go with creations and you can be sure that if you have a great idea, they will alter it just enough so that they don’t have to pay anything.
The really important clause:
You are executing this Release voluntarily, without coercion or undue influence from any source, and do so with complete understanding of all of its terms and effects, and every portion thereof. By signing this Release, you acknowledge that you have either consulted an attorney or have waived your right to do so.
Read that again because you may have missed it the first time around.
You are executing this Release voluntarily, without coercion or undue influence from any source, and do so with complete understanding of all of its terms and effects, and every portion thereof. By signing this Release, you acknowledge that you have either consulted an attorney or have waived your right to do so.
Did you get that? They’re basically telling you that if you haven’t consulted an attorney about this then you cannot do so further down the road. What that means is that if you find something about the release that you find objectionable, then Viacom (Nickelodeon) can say that you should have known better, leaving you up the creek without a paddle.
What it Does NOT Say
What the release does not say, and what is particularly troubling, is that they do not have any kind of time limit set out. In other words, nothing in the release precludes them from holding onto your idea indefinitely. They can use your idea ten years from now and it’s contained within the release that if they do “inadvertently” use your material, you have only 6 months to make a case.
That is troubling enough, but the release also fails to disclose how you can handle your creation outside of the program. Can you pitch it to anyone else in the meantime? What do you suppose happens if another studio decides to pick it up while Nick is still considering it? These are all questions you should be asking yourself before deciding to commit.
Conclusion
At the end of the day, these kinds of solicitations smack of a mix of ineptitude and desperation. Nickelodeon has easy access to many fine creators whom they can solicit from any time. Why the need to go to the general public for new ideas? I can’t help bu smell the reek of sleaziness that comes with filling people’s eyes full of stars (or dollar signs). If Nickelodeon were serious about soliciting ideas, they would be weeding the garden before looking to plant any flowers.
Unfortunately the Disney Vault is not the kind of security this post is about.
It’s not really something we tend to think about until a story pops up in the news, but IT security is a big issue nowadays with every kind of company exposed to differing levels of risk. Animation studios are no different; they are businesses after all. So what will happen when someone decides to hack into an animation studio and what exactly will they decide to steal? Here’s an idea.
The Reasons for Stealing
First off, it’s necessary to accurately describe what is being discussed. Contemporary hacking varies quite a lot depending on the nature of it as well as what the target is. The kind of large-scale, mass break-ins popularised by Hollywood and The Matrix are few and far between. Variants of the “smash and grab” as well as defacing attacks are more common but relatively harmless in the grand scheme of things.
So what am I talking about? Well it’s the kind of sophisticated hacking that contributed to the collapse of Nortel; that is, the kind that no-one even notices until it is too late.
The reasons why are simple:
Software is expensive
modern animation itself is expensive
everyone (and hence their data) uses the internet
the vast majority of animation is really just files on a computer
time is becoming an ever important factor in production schedules
The Motivation To Steal
It’s easy to speculate on why people steal but it’s often quite difficult to get down to the reasons why they are motivated to steal. Traditionally, animation studios were subject to [serious] theft of only two things: ideas and people. The former was perhaps most clearly evident when both Pixar and DreamWorksreleased films whose characters were ants (A Big’s Life and Antz). The latter came to light when Pixar and Lucasfilm agreed not to poach each other’s employees (resulting in an anti-trust lawsuit.)
With the growing complexity of animation (and hence, the growing cost) there will be those with a looser moral compass out there who will gladly exploit weaknesses in a competitor’s security. Again, I don’t mean that they will make such exploits known. The truly nefarious will gain access to a studio’s network, and gladly remain there out of site, quietly siphoning off whatever they feel they can get away with. Such activity offers the potential to steal far more than just animation files and data, but also information.
Information can, in fact, be far more valuable than any animation. Look at how it worked for DreamWorks with Antz; essentially giving them a leg-up with their CGI ventures. Imagine how valuable details on multiple films would be to a rival studio? Priceless is my guess.
What Will Be Stolen
So what will be stolen? Theoretically, any computer file stored or transmitted over a network is a target. In reality though, it will depend on who is doing the stealing. A small studio is more likely to go after files (rigs, backgrounds, etc.) A larger studio will be far more interested in ideas, concepts, etc. Studios fancying themselves as rivals to Disney would be thrilled to get a really close look at how Frozen is going.
Imagine if they could get as good a view as Disney employees get? Imagine they got a good look and managed to knock out a similar picture before Disney? All those knock-offs we see these days seem to be making money for somebody, just think how much they could make if they get there’s out first?
Basically, if it is on or transmitted over a computer network (or the internet), it IS a target. This isn’t fear-mongering, it’s a fact, and the more sober you are about it, the safer you will be.
Who It Will Be Stolen From
I mention Disney and DreamWorks as simple examples. The reality is that they already have well developed IT departments. More likely targets are smaller studios and independent animators. They simply do not have the budget to maintain a full IT department let alone one with a dedicated security division. They are ripe for targeting as many do work on projects for the big boys, and as such, can be just as valuable to the dedicated criminal.
Conclusion
Long gone are the days when if you wanted to steal something of value from an animated studio, you had to physically break into the place. Nowadays, you don’t even need to be in the same country to do it. Security is something that most people only play lip-service to until it is too late. Don’t let that be you.
