Battlestar Wiki talk:Think Tank/WGA Strike

Wikistrike?

When I first saw this, I was concerned that it was proposing that WE strike. Which, while that might sound noble, I doubt would have any impact on the thinking on TPTB that make the real decisions. Stopping work (or, more extreme, shutting down the site) would hurt the fans without directly impacting the studios. (I'd like to think that our work does indirectly help them... but we're still here because they suffer us, so I don't want to get too big of a head.)

As for this proposal, I'd be in favor of it. Regardless of the position that we took, just having a visible position at all will help bring attention to the situation to those who weren't aware of it. As almost all contributions to this site involve writing, and are about the stories that the writers(and writer/producers) bring to the table, it's pretty reasonable to expect our community to align more on the side of the writers than otherwise. I'd certainly be welcome to hearing opposing views on the issue... I'd just be surprised if there were too many weighing in on the side of the studios. --Steelviper 08:47, 11 November 2007 (CST)

I have two polarized views on this, both important. (1) It is in Battlestar Wiki's interests as fans of the show to support the writers, since they are the content generators that actually make the show, and form it into something worth watching, worth reading, worth documenting. Without the writers, Battlestar Wiki would not exist. But, (2) Battlestar Wiki does not own Battlestar Galactica in any form. We are allowed to document the various Battlestar Galactica episodes and other media under the legally-specious "fair use" doctrines. In the end, the show is owned by NBC Universal, which, if we took sides in an issue that we do not own, can tick off people in the know and (in the worst case) order a cease-and-desist and shut Battlestar Wiki down in a heartbeat, and petition the transfer of the wiki's content to their wiki.

Because of this, I recommend that Battlestar Wiki stay Neutral on the Writer's Strike. I know that Joe (as well as myself and others as individuals) obviously support the writer's efforts for fair compensation for their efforts, but we must also respect the content owner's right not to have third-parties that haven't any legal involvement with the dispute from generating a protest action on behalf of fans. I think this is the "dark side" of being a free wiki on copyrighted works. As individuals we can support anything and anyone we want. As the organized body of Battlestar Wiki, we can be targeted for politicizing, which is not our purpose. I wouldn't want to tick off the network executives any more than the writers. I don't think we should use Battlestar Wiki as a soapbox in this issue. --Spencerian 12:34, 11 November 2007 (CST)

That's something to think about, definitely. We've pretty much enjoyed NBC-Universal's benevolence in our existence and that's something that we may, ultimately, not want to frak with. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate - Sanctuary Wiki — New} 12:48, 11 November 2007 (CST)

Has anyone with a decent amount of legal knowledge actually researched how legal we are? Do we know (or have a fair idea of) what will happen if NBC/Universal should turn against us? Or have we simply been praying they'll just leave us alone (which Joe seems to suggest with his "benevolence" statement)?

Since we're a major fan site (*brag*), our official support (and that of all other FrakMedia sites) to the writers would kind of formalize fandom's support to them. It would be a shame if we can't send this big signal to NBC/Universal because we fear they might take us down for revenge.

That's why I think we should stay neutral until we have some more clarity on what NBC/Universal can do to us legally if we make them hate us, after which we can support the strike if it turns out it's legally safe to do so. --Catrope^{(Talk to me or e-mail me)} 14:51, 11 November 2007 (CST)

Well said. It is a lot to think about. -- Joe Beaudoin ^{So say we all - Donate - Sanctuary Wiki — New} 15:02, 11 November 2007 (CST)

I wouldn't call fair use doctrine "specious". It's pretty well established, if limited. However, no matter how in the right we are on copyright grounds, we're still basically counting on the goodwill of NBC-Uni not to sue the pants off us anyway, as right or wrong they've got the resources to easily do so. There's no doubt they're the hand that feeds us. I just question whether we're even at the level to show up on their radar should we bite. I'd LIKE to think so... but the official position has definitely been one of ignoring us. While it could be some sort of conspiratorial "nudge, nudge, wink, wink, saynomore" type of ignoring, it seems like the "Battlestar Wiki who?" explanation is the simpler of the two. While I obviously have personal feelings on the issue, I agree that a neutral strategy for the site is safer. I still would be surprised to see any pro-NBC-Universal arguments. --17:20, 11 November 2007 (CST)

Hey everyone, I know I'm still kind of new to all this so bear with me. I was just wondering how our Razor spoilers affect our status with the company, and how they would affect this decision. Now I know that for any wiki, when something like that happens (something gets leaked), it's nearly impossible to contain, and it's better to just embrace it rather than fight it, but I still can't help wondering if it really falls below their dradis so to speak. I think, at least politically, that it might have some bearing on your decision. Although, on the other hand, I should also point out that supporting the writers, while a huge risk, might have rewards. It would probably ingratiate us with the writers and producers, and at the same time go a long way towards ensuring that some of the mistakes the network makes, some of which I've felt are unnacceptable, would never happen again. On a related note, is that why we have no contact at all with anybody from the show? Because of our dubious legal status? --OrionFour 15:33, 11 November 2007 (CST)

We do have contact with Bradley Thompson sometimes, but he's nearly always too busy to stop by and answer our questions. Supporting the writers officially might draw more of them to us, considering they probably aren't very busy writing right now. You're right about the Razor screener stuff, we should also investigate how safe that is legally. Waiting two weeks for the Razor airing is also an option, albeit not a very attractive one. --Catrope^{(Talk to me or e-mail me)} 15:39, 11 November 2007 (CST)

*brain wave* The first advance screenings are tomorrow (November 12) after which pretty much every one of us who lives in the US has an excuse to know "Razor" plot details. I'm pretty sure that putting plot details and all that stuff is legal as any US member could have visited an advance screening. Screenshots and audio fragments will still be illegal, of course, until November 25. --Catrope^{(Talk to me or e-mail me)} 15:42, 11 November 2007 (CST)

For screenshots we should wait for the DVD release anyways (unless someone has HD rip to work from). Otherwise we have twice the work. The DVD will be out December 4th, so that's not much later. I think we can do without screenshots until then. --Serenity 17:46, 11 November 2007 (CST)