Studios increase MPAA funding to $66.8M


#1

[Permalink]


#2

How can you justify paying anyone £3,300,000 per year?


#3

Because they are so awesome doing their job that… that… oh fuck it, no one can justify that.


#4

Well those automated and often fraudulent DMCA takedown notices don’t write themselves.

Oh, wait, they do!

I guess that covers the cull. Now to work out why they need more money for doing it…


#5

As near as I can figure CEO pay seems to be bases on the idea that firing people is stressful and so the people who do it need to be well renumerated…


#6

Mendacity above and beyond the call of duty!


#7

Jack Valenti would be smiling down from heaven if they’d just fold the MPAA into the NSA.


#8

Simple. Raise the minimum wage about ten-thousand-fold of what it currently is. Of course that’ll create crazy inflation and would make those of us who still pay some transactions in cash look like we’ve stepped out of Weimar Germany.


#9

How weird…I’ve been re-reading “The Andy Warhol Diaries”, and today I read the entry that says Bianca Jagger is having an affair with Chris Dodd while he was still married to - and I’m guessing here - to his first wife. The entry is dated July 23, 1982. And his Wikipedia entry does say he dated her - but AFTER the divorce was final. Just a strange coincidence that I should read about him twice in the same day.


#10

Because he made a lot more than that for the industry while he was in Congress. You don’t want to get a reputation of not paying up after the senators deliver the goods for you.


#11

I just want the MPAA to stop spoiling movies with their big “This movies contains…” screen.

Worse is their giant green screen that informs the audience that a preview is approved by the MPAA. Seriously, MPAA, NO ONE CARES. Maybe publish that fun fact on a blog somewhere.


#12

Isn’t it basically a retro-active bribe? Industry lets elected representatives know - wink wink - that there’s going to be a job waiting for them when they leave office, and it’s going to pay really, really well, to motivate them to vote in their interests while they’re still in office. And it’s all perfectly legal because the the money being given that is ridiculously disproportionate to the job being done is handed over after they’ve left office.


#13

Yes. What are you going to do about it? The people in charge here are the ones on the gravy train, they have no incentive to change it.


#14

Are you quite sure he’d be looking down instead of up?


#15

This i the same Chris Dodd who promised as he left office that he would definitely NOT be taking a lobbying job. And yet…http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110221/14490613193/chris-dodd-breaking-promise-not-to-become-lobbyist-just-weeks-after-leaving-senate-joining-mpaa-as-top-lobbyist.shtml


#16

The MPAA’s anti-piracy efforts helped reduce studio losses by an estimated $42.3 Quadrillion last year alone. [Source: MPAA]


#17

Maybe he should ask for a 1% commission on projected savings?


#18

I know. I know.

I’m just not sure if he’s still holding “executive powers”, so I’m watching what I say lest I get a bad rating. smirk


#19

…or that is their liability. perspective is always important… especially in a *court of *law. :heart:


#20

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.