Australian screen directors have joined the Australian Writers' Guild in their protest against Screenrights new royalty policy.
The Australian Directors Guild and Australian Screen Directors Authorship Society (ASDACS) have criticised Screenrights, the multi-million dollar organisation established to collect and distribute statutory royalty payments for film and television makers, for its recent introduction of a policy that it says undermines Australian and foreign screen directors entitlements to royalty payments.
This follows a statement from the Australian Writers' Guild, which also slammed the new policy.
ADG and ASDACS chief executive, Kingston Anderson, said he was "horrified" that Screenrights would ignore the clear royalty entitlements of screen directors, "particularly those in Australia who struggle to earn an average income.”
“Screenrights say they have consulted when in fact this policy sits in direct contradiction to many of the key issues Australian directors raised,” he says. “Screenrights have not taken on board any of our objections or suggestions to make the policy fairer for directors around the world.”
On 1 September 2015, Screenrights introduced its Express Dispute Resolution Policy (EDRP) for the handling of disputes relating to royalty payments for film and television. It applies where both the director and producer are claiming royalties for the retransmission of television programs for example.
Accroding to the ADG, Screenrights makes two critical assumptions that clearly undermine directors’ entitlements to royalties.
The first is against Australian directors.
"Screenrights refuses to presume that Australian directors are entitled to retransmission royalties unless their share of entitlement is specifically set out in the contract. Meaning that many Australian directors may miss out on their fair share of royalty payments, according to an ADG statement.
The second assumption is against foreign directors.
"Screenrights refuses to recognise laws in other countries such as Europe and South America where directors have wellâ€established and clear legal entitlements to royalty payments.
"For example, if a Spanish film is aired in Australia on FOXTEL, the Spanish director’s royalties may now be paid incorrectly to the producer rather than the director.
"Kingston Anderson has criticised the way Screenrights is trying to change its rules to deny directors an avenue of fair appeal over money they are owed."
Screenrights chief executive, Simon Lake, told IF Screenrights initially proposed changes to its royalties distribution process in October 2014.
"At the time, we sought feedback from stakeholders and members to the proposal, which we believe is a common sense approach that will ensure royalties are distributed efficiently and fairly, particularly in the event of multiple claims," he said.
"Screenrights took into consideration industry feedback, including from AWGACS, before implementing the express dispute resolution on 1 September.
"There are two presumptions in the express dispute resolution policy which favour writers – specifically for series and serials produced after 1 January 2008 and mini series produced after 1 January 2010.
He said Screenrights paid the appropriate rights holders in accordance to Australian law.
"Screenrights continues to collect and pay royalties on behalf of its members," he said.
"More than $38.4 million dollars has been paid in the 2014/15 financial year”
The EDR Process will be reviewed by an independent reviewer after 12 months of operation.
The Australian Writers' Guild has been in protracted negotiations with Screenrights for years over the approach Screenrights takes to their dealings with writers.
“For decades, Screenrights has favoured producers, distributors and broadcasters, distributing to them royalties that were owed to writers,” an AWG statement said.
AWG executive director, Jacqueline Elaine, said Screenrights was entrusted with millions of dollars on behalf of audio visual creators.
“They should hold themselves accountable to the highest possible standards,” she said.
“Unfortunately this new procedure is a stark example of an inconsistent, inequitable and non-transparent approach.”
The EDR Process will operate alongside Screenrights’ existing Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedure for Multiple Claims between Screenrights’ Members.
Two drafts of the EDR Process were released for comment in October 2014 and May 2015. Screenrights also hosted roundtables in Sydney and Melbourne in June 2015.
The EDR process is a dispute resolution procedure that contains nine presumptions. It is used in cases where, based on one or more of the presumptions, a particular member is likely to be the relevant rightsholder of the royalties in conflict.
Screenrights determines whether a presumption applies to a conflict and will notify the members involved.
If a presumption favours a particular member, that member can rely on it to receive payment of royalties, unless the opposing member is able to overturn the Presumption or put the Presumption into question.