[I]n this case, the execs, the nemesis of the Internet, seem to be taking the side of the Internet. They can’t promise the writers a share of the money they make on the Internet because they don’t see how they’re going to make money on the Internet. How can you share something that doesn’t exist??

I have a sneaking suspicion that Dave was trying to see how many absurdly ignorant statements he could cram into two sentences. If, in fact, the entertainment industry didn’t know how to make money off of the internet, and wasn’t making money now, they would gladly give the writers a larger share of nothing to get them back in their cubes. The execs would be getting something for nothing. What’s more likely is that the execs are making money on the internet and have a plan for how to make more, and they want to keep it for themselves.

For another thing, it’s not just the “new media” (which is a catch-all provision that tends to cover everything less common than DVD sales) contract clauses which are up for debate. So, too, is the DVD residual rate and calculation clauses… surely Dave doesn’t think that people aren’t making money on DVDs right now.

When we talk with people from the entertainment industry they explain how they can’t just release stuff on the Internet, because they have agreements with the rights holders that assume the realities of the old more restrictive distribution system. Those are the writers.

One of two things are going on here, Dave. Either a) they’re lying to you or b) you don’t really understand what they’re saying. Possibly both. While it’s theoretically possible for a writer to retain the rights to their works, that’s just not the way the contracts are laid out. Typically WGA members engage in works for hire and (as a safeguard) assign all rights in their work to the production company, which means that the only “rights” they have are the rights granted to them in their contracts. Typically, the right to royalties or other forms of payment.

It may be that Dave’s post is using the writer’s strike as something of a parable, but having any experience with entertainment law makes the premises laughably inaccurate.

The rest of the post is just bizarre. His “I’m not going on strike, even though I am a writer” line makes me wonder if Dave even understands what the Writers Guild of America is. He’s probably offended that he’s never been invited to join. He then goes on to compare, oddly, writing software to writing screenplays.

Wha?

I don’t hold on to a principle that I must be paid for what I do. I look at money as separate from my living. I live through my work. Some of it pays, and it’s unfortunately unpredictable what that is. Welcome to the net, welcome to the 21st century.

I think Dave just forgot to take his meds today. I’m sure we’ll get a post tomorrow telling us how we just didn’t get it, and what he really meant was something else entirely. Keep an eye out for “Writer’s Strike Day 2″ or something similar.