- Tweets 1,045
- Following 277
- Followers 2,937
- Likes 1,764
ALT Marin M. Miller #016 LA Local Board #076 National Board #125 Convention Delegate "I have fought for better transparency and wages with the grassroots performers advocacy group I co-founded. Our efforts have resulted in the founding of the dubbing steering committee at SAG-AFTRA and thousands of Union jobs. Voice actors struggle to have their voices represented in SAG-AFTRA because we have no elected representatives. Help us change that!" Vote by September 12!! Check your mail and follow the instructions on the packet. SAG-AFTRA
ALT Linsay Rousseau #028 LA Local Board #150 Convention Delegate "I know firsthand that one size doesn't fit all. I've served on the interactive negotiating committee and LA Local Committees, always putting members first. The video game negotiations proved what's possible when we stand strong together. I don't represent one category- I represent all of us. I'm running because OUR Union deserves leadership that listens, shows up, and never quits." Vote by September 12!! Check your mail and follow the instructions on the packet. SAG-AFTRA
ALT Scott Lambright #008 LA Local Board #107 Convention Delegate "Listening to concerns from members helps shape my views. I've held the line through the recently settled IMA strike and the TV and Theatrical strike. On the picket line, I learned so much from colleagues, friends, and supporters who I'm lucky to call allies in these trying times. I've served on an organizing committee and fought the good fight, so let me bring your voice to leadership!" Vote by September 12!! Check your mail and follow the instructions on the packet. SAG-AFTRA
ALT Tim Friedlander. #244 convention delegate "Through my work on the new tech and GAPP committees as well as my advocacy through NAVA, I'm at the forefront of the video industry for over a decade and one of the leading voices in the fight to protect all creatives in the age of AI. The artistic world is at a crossroads and we need strong, honest, and compassionate advocates to help guide the way." Vote by September 12!! Check your mail and follow the instructions on the ballot. SAG-AFTRA
ALT Assaf Cohen #222 convention delegate "I served for 7 years on the SAG-AFTRA (and legacy SAG) national and La local boards. I also served on multiple tv/theatrical negotiating committees, executive committees, the Merger Task Force. I work extensively on-camera and lately more and more in animation, interactive video games, dubbing, and audiobook narration." Vote by September 12!! Check your mail and follow the instructions on the packet. SAG-AFTRA
ALT James Croak 059 LA Local Board 098 National Board 273 Convention Delegate "I am a father and stunt performer with a passion to serve the union. I've submitted proposals with a focus on education, communication, and protection. I also have a 20 Page reimagining of our app and ways for improving the union for our members and staff. We have a tremendous opportunity to audit and improve the relationship between the union and its members. I appreciate your support." Vote by September 12!! SAG-AFTRA
ALT The Latest “LBFO” IMA offer We know there are a lot of images and questions circulating regarding the “LBFO” Let’s discuss some discrepancies we’ve seen & concerns we still have based on what members of Neg Comm have provided (Please note: This is going to be text heavy)
ALT There is no such thing as a PCAP DR in the LBFO. Visual DRs are supposed to cover on-camera performances in video games, but the employers still reserve their interpretation of the contract that the only performance capture covered by the IMA is PCAP that has spoken dialogue. They do not consider any “movement-only PCAP” acting and don’t feel that they have to pay motion-only performers under union contracts. Obviously, the union disagrees with that interpretation of the contract, but the committee has tried to make sure that any proposals in the contract effectively retain each side’s positions on this topic to address it in future negotiations. Visual DRs only apply to visual performance (face or body) for cinematics, and only for a specific, objectively identifiable performer. Employers are free to create in-game movement or facial performance without consent, transparency or compensation.
ALT “Can Suspend Consent During A Strike” There are five instances in which you would not be able to suspend consent of something that creates new performance, even objectively identifiable as you in-character, during a strike. i. DR (if prepaid sessions’ worth) ii. ICDR iii. Scratch iv. Multi-game rights v. Prompting This could be for one or several of the following reasons: i. Explicitly carved out (ICDR, scratch) ii. Because they can prepay you and they get to “use what they’ve paid for” (DR, ICDR, scratch, multi-game rights) iii. It’s not covered by the contract at all, no consent, transparency, compensation (prompting by ANYTHING other than the actor’s name) And this could be for sideletter 6 games only (multi-game rights, DR) or even for struck games (ICDR, scratch, prompting). To be clear, if they pre-pay you for any of your sessions for a DR, then you can’t suspend that pre-paid DR work during a strike for SL6 games. That can greatly reduce the effect of a strike.
ALT So... what CAN suspend consent during a strike? Vocal and Visual DRs do require capital “C” consent This includes the ability to remove consent during a strike, but your performance has to qualify as one of those two types first. ICDRs have no strike consent provisions at all. Once you sign up for an ICDR, there is no way to revoke your consent. And if they prompt a character voice using the character’s name rather than an actor’s name (e.g. The Voice of Female Commander Shepard from Mass Effect) that digital voice doesn’t even qualify as an ICDR, much less a Vocal DR. This means they can do whatever they want with it since, as far as the contract states, it’s not covered by the IMA.
ALT Regarding ICDR (Independently Created Digital Replicas): There are many things that are not covered by an ICDR. Only the things that are specifically mentioned are covered, and must be covered in each section between semicolons, and everything else that isn’t mentioned (or a DR) has no consent, transparency or compensation at all, no coverage on the contract. For voice actors, that means something that performs as you but was prompted by the character name, or anything other than your name, is not covered. Movement and facial performance is essentially carved out entirely, for reasons throughout the paragraph, but definitely if they swap your face out for a different likeness. EX: They could replicate John Wick’s gun-fu directly from the movies, change Keanu Reeves’ face only, and it would not be covered by an ICDR. (“Likeness” refers to your features, not your performance.)
ALT ICDRs, Cont. (2/3): “Reasonable Description Required” While there is some information that is required from the employers when they want to make an ICDR of you, they only need to provide that information, “To the extent known at the time of the consent” (that’s actual contract language). The information requested includes a number of different topics, but does not include the length of the role. So, they are contractually able to ask you to sign up for an ICDR and not tell you the size of the role. Does that sound “reasonable” to you? “Covers Replication of You as a Character” The ICDR is a one-time buyout. As written, after you sign an ICDR contract, you will not get any additional payments, nor will you have any control over how that ICDR is used in the future, unless you somehow negotiated those terms into your ICDR agreement ahead of time using your own leverage as an actor.
ALT ICDRs, Cont. (3/3) (Yes, It’s THAT Big of an Issue) “Compensation Required” Compensation for an IMA ICDR is freely negotiated. This means there is no minimum scale payment, you have to negotiate the rate as an actor individually. In addition, you do not automatically get pension and health contributions for any wages earned under an ICDR, you have to negotiate those terms into your ICDR contract as well. So, compensation is required, but you only get what you can negotiate based on your individual leverage as an actor. In the Animation and TV/Film contracts, those ICDRs also do not have scale minimums, but they do have any P&H contributions based on the wages negotiated included automatically. Usually compensation, P&H, and the ability to withhold your artistry during a strike are guaranteed by a union contract and not left to individual actors to negotiate. That’s the purpose of a union, to have safe and equitable minimum standards for actors.
ALT GAI (Generative AI) “GAI Protections” Again, if employers prompt along the lines of “X character name saying X line”, even if you are the only person who has played that character and it comes out identifiable as you, it would not be covered. No consent, transparency, or compensation. California Law AB 2602 only applies if a contract has not been negotiated by a lawyer or a union. Once a new IMA contract is ratified, that will be the protections we get moving forward. There is no other law to protect us yet. There is also no law pending or passed that will cover you in-character.
ALT “Secondary Performance Payment” What Is It: A payment for when they move a visual performance (movement or face, excluding VO) over to another game as-is. It is not an AI or replica payment at all. It’s your performance, copy paste into a new game. SAG-AFTRA’s Position: This is what Integration is for, a payment obligation that already exists. Employers Position: Integration as it currently exists doesn’t apply to on-camera or movement performance unless what’s being moved over is a clip of a game, exact copy of the shot, framing, everything in view is the same. Problem: Not how Integration works for voice, and rarely how performance is experienced in a game, which has any number of player-controllable angles on performance 99% of the time (much less skins, remastered graphics and other cosmetic tweaks). This is how they argue both concepts, SPP and Integration, exist at the same time. Neg Comm argues this distinction is bogus, but they are not allowing it to hold up a deal.
ALT Let’s Talk Some Numbers “Neg Comm Went Back and Failed in Making a Deal” 81% of Membership who were at the last meeting voted to go back to the employers after receiving their previous “LBFO.” Which means that 81% of Membership, who were able to attend the last meeting, were not pleased with the current terms as written despite a “LBFO” Only 19% of Membership were interested in taking the offer as written. 59% of Members voted to go back and ask employers to fix ALL loopholes currently in the contract, including all of the language revolving around ICDRs listed here. Two other options were presented, which asked to fix only certain portions of the contract. The point of these numbers? Members of Neg Comm are not the only ones who are making these decisions. It is the majority of Membership who decided to continue fighting. We have no doubts that Neg Comm will approach Membership with options of how to proceed and allow Membership to make their next decision.
ALT We realize this is a heated time. There is a lot at stake in these negotiations. We all want to go back to work. However, sharing misleading and inaccurate info graphics and charts does nothing to help us come to a sober understanding of the issues and makes it far more difficult for members to make wise, informed decisions about what contract we want to ratify. It also shows the employers that there is a lack of solidarity in our community, which impacts the committee’s ability to negotiate the best deal possible. Have Questions? Reach out to Neg Comm members If you feel uncomfortable, reach out to Matt Scott on the organizing staff at SAG-AFTRA (matt.scott@sagaftra.org) If you are Non-U or FiCore, reach out to fellow actors who can ask your questions for you
ALT CODA Un-Safe Space. Bring your hot takes. We're listening. Hosts: Ryan Bartley & Joe Ochman. Sunday, September 22nd via Zoom. 4 to 7pm Pacific Time, 7 to 10pm Eastern Time. Sign up by emailing dubbingupdates@gamil.com
ALT CODA Un-Safe Space. Bring your hot takes. We're listening. Hosts: Ryan Bartley & Joe Ochman. Sunday, September 22nd via Zoom. 4 to 7pm Pacific Time, 7 to 10pm Eastern Time. Sign up by emailing dubbingupdates@gamil.com
ALT As auditions for video games continue to come in, you're going to see some interesting language describing them. Be on the lookout for terms like "grandfathered in" or "safe-to-work" or "safe harbor guidelines" or "non-struck." These terms refer to projects that are "Side Letter 6" jobs (or SL6 for short.) What is Side Letter 6? To be blunt, it's a serious flaw in the SAG-AFTRA video game contract that allows projects that have begun production before a strike was called to continue without disruption. Let's be clear about what a strike is: a strike is a DELIBERATE DISRUPTION OF WORK. SL6 projects contain NO PROTECTION FROM AI. They are the opposite of "safe-to-work." SL6 makes video game strikes extremely inefficient and was the leading cause of the last video game strike in '16/'17 lasting nearly 18 months. We cannot allow SL6 to drag this strike out. CODA strongly urges all actors to avoid auditioning for and working on SL6 projects, despite language that makes them sound safe.