Score one for the families

Thanks to the investigative journalism of Steven Mikulan of The Wrap (www.thewrap.com), we now have concrete proof that spokespeople for the MPTF have been lying to the press, to us, and to the motion picture industry.

Score one for the families.

We have always been told that there was a definite date – a deadline of sorts where everyone was to be transitioned out of the LTC. Ken Scherer, one of the funds hapless spokesmen, has insisted that no deadline existed.

The lies that frame the closing of the LTC are now beginning to reveal themselves. The veneer of fraud and deceit are being peeled away like the skin of an onion. Both Scherer and Seth Ellis have been caught with their pants down, as you can see by reading the linked article below.

Are you reading this Jeff Katzenberg? If these people were in your employ at Dreamworks, they’d be summarily fired.

Scherer and Ellis are typical of the problem that motion picture healthcare is facing. It’s not just about the LTC – it’s about entrusting the care of our needy, sick, elderly, infirm and handicapped to these men who play fast and loose with the truth in order to forward their own selfish agendas.

Wake up people who rely on motion picture health insurance – the future of your care are in these incapable hands.

I’ll be surprised if we hear another word from Ken Scherer, unless it’s “paper or plastic?”.

Please pass this on to your friends and fellow industry workers. We will all grow old one day, hopefully. The promise of ‘taking care of our own’ should apply to all who have toiled and sweated on behalf of the motion picture industry.

THE GOOD NEWS IS THIS: WE HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN OUR EFFORTS TO STOP THE CLOSING – SO FAR. YOUR PASSION AND DRIVE IN EXPRESSING YOUR OUTRAGE AND STANDING WITH THE FAMILIES IS WORKING. OUR JOB IS FAR FROM OVER, BUT WE CAN NOW SEE A LIGHT AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL.

CONGRATULATIONS TO ALL OF US WHO ARE ACTIVELY SEEING THIS THROUGH, SIGNING PETITIONS, AND FACEBOOKING THE HELL OUT OF THIS ISSUE. THE RESIDENTS AND FAMILIES CANNOT THANK YOU ENOUGH!

YOU ARE SAVING THE LTC, YOU ARE SAVING THE LIVES OF THE RESIDENTS, AND YOU ARE SAVING THE FUTURE PROMISE OF A CONTINUUM OF CARE FOR THE MOTION PICTURE AND TELEVISION INDUSTRY.

http://www.thewrap.com/ind-column/how-mptfs-eviction-deadline-shifted-9313

Please sign our petition:
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/keepthemptfhomeopen

Best,

Richard

Insight

Watch InSight, the news show for SciFi fans. Is shown on syzygy network on the web. Hosts Dave Andrews and Scott Brody give you interviews, news, box office reports dealing with Sci-Fi related movies, shows and events. Interviews include: Joanne Kely, Dana Powers, Nichelle Nichols, and many more.

From the Big Apple to Los Angeles, this show takes sci-fi fans to the places you would never dream of. This gives a new perspective on other interview type shows and gives sci-fi fans another good place to go to for news entertainment medium. Click above and watch the show. How can you beat the price

Hosts Dave Andrews and Scott Brody really give a new perpective to what this is all about. For past episodes you can also watch them here: http://www.syzygynetwork.com/insight/

Interactive Contract Actors

Subject: To All Interactive Contract Actors

As the LA Co-chair of the SAG side of the Interactive contract negotiations, I agree with the statement below regarding the Interactive contract.

Anthony DeSantis

From and Interactive community member:

Hello, interactive voiceover industry colleagues and friends.

See below:

[October 29, 2009 3:53:06 PM PDT]

“VOTING MATERIALS FOR THE AFTRA INTERACTIVE [MEDIA TENTATIVE AGREEMENT] have been mailed to approximately 2,200 AFTRA members and should be received in the next several days. AFTRA MEMBERS who receive the materials will be able to VOTE ELECTRONICALLY – IMMEDIATELY.
Only about 30% of those who get ballots actually vote on anything (contract or otherwise) but let’s be generous and say that 1,000 are voting.”
[Source: David Sobolov, SAG/AFTRA, SAG Interactive Committee, Interactive Media Voice Actor]

David estimates about 500 votes will be required to win.

For information about the AFTRA Interactive Media Tentative Agreement, contact your local AFTRA offices. Knowledgeable AFTRA Los Angeles contacts I know of may include:

STAFF:

Mathis L. Dunn, Jr.
Assistant National Executive Director
Commercials and Non-Broadcast
Phone: 323-634-8193
Cell: 206-465-6642
E-Fax: 509-561-5556

Chris Hagstrom

INTERACTIVE MEDIA STEERING COMMITTEE:

Gabrielle Carteris
Phil LaMarr

Remember, GET THE FACTS FROM THE SOURCE BEFORE YOU VOTE! If all the information you have is hearsay, rumor, gossip, received second or third-hand, or propaganda, pick up your phone, and call AFTRA for more information.

Familiarize yourself with the deal and the negotiation process. Look at all the deal points, weigh the pros and cons, evaluate what the negotiators got and what they conceded, and make an informed, thoughtful decision.

Don’t forget to vote get the facts!

-ZH

Appeal Strikes Out

Variety

Rosenberg appeal strikes out
Three-judge panel upholds SAG moves
By DAVE MCNARY, Variety

Former Screen Actors Guild president Alan Rosenberg has struck out again in court in his long-running attempt to overturn moves by SAG’s national board to fire Doug Allen and abolish SAG’s negotiating committee.
A three-judge appeals court panel on Tuesday denied Rosenberg’s appeal of a February ruling by a state judge turning down Rosenberg’s request for a temporary restraining order. In a 21-page ruling, Judges Nora Manella, Steven Suzukawa and Thomas Willhite asserted the appeal had been rendered “moot” by subsequent actions of the SAG board and its members.

Rosenberg wasn’t available to comment. Duncan Crabtree Ireland, SAG’s deputy national exec director and general counsel, said in response, “The court’s decision speaks for itself, and Screen Actors Guild will have no further comment.”

Rosenberg and board members Anne-Marie Johnson, Diane Ladd and Kent McCord had filed the suit against SAG and the 41 board members, alleging that they had illegally used a “written assent” maneuver on Jan. 26 to oust Allen and the feature-primetime negotiating committee. Rosenberg had led a 28-hour filibuster at the SAG board meeting on Jan. 12-13 to block a vote to fire Allen, prompting the moderates to take the “written assent” route.

A few days after the suit was filed, the moderates fired Allen for a second time in a regular board meeting.

“We conclude that the appeal has been rendered moot by the decision of the majority of the board on Feb. 9 to ratify and readopt the provisions of the written assent and by the subsequent decision by SAG members to accept the contract negotiated pursuant to the board’s Feb. 9 vote,” the judges wrote.

SAG members endorsed the feature-primetime deal in June with 78% backing — a surprisingly large margin that led Rosenberg to decide against seeking another term as president.

Rosenberg also alleged that the moves should be overturned due to procedural irregularities at the February meeting but the judges said they could find no such violations. And the panel said it disagreed with Rosenberg’s contention that the issues surrounding the use of written assent are of “broad public interest,” with such disputes likely to recur within SAG.

“Nothing before us supports these contentions,” the judges said. “As the issues stem from an exceptional dispute now mooted by the board’s action (and the members vote), we discern no public interest to be served by resolving them.”

The judges also awarded SAG its costs for the appeal.

Note from Dee Baker

Hi All:

I join with Dee Baker in urging you to attend the Interactive vote meeting at SAG if you work the Interactive contract.

Dee’s lament about non affected members being allowed to vote is something that many of us have tried to address, however, the Board of Directors has been dominated by those who oppose such logic… But I digress.

Whatever your personal preference on this contract – show up if you want a voice in the matter.

From: Dee Baker
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:34:08 -0700
To: Dee Baker
Subject: Final Notice: SAG Interactive Referendum Tomorrow: Tuesday Night 7:30 at SAG

Dear Interactive Voice Over Friends,

If you have a strong opinion regarding the “atmospheric voices” provision in SAG’s proposed interactive contract, you owe it to yourself to show up to Tuesday night’s (Oct 27th) meeting at SAG, 5757 Wilshire in the Cagney Room for their referendum on the interactive contract.

It could be that any SAG member who shows up can vote, whether they work the contract or not, which I find unfortunate as it at once dilutes and politicizes the process, in my view. The invite says it’s for those who work the contract. There was some of this at last week’s AFTRA info meeting, but the turnout was fortunately mostly affected performers, so the weight of our voices ended up having a solid impact.

This will apparently be the deciding vote on the SAG side. Other cities are voting as well. Only those that show up get to vote at SAG, in contrast to AFTRA, which will apparently mail out ballots nationally to all those that work the contract.

Looks like you need to RSVP to the email below.

Thanks

Dee

Tuesday, Oct 27th,
Los Angeles: 7:30-9 p.m. PDT
James Cagney Board Room, ground floor
5757 Wilshire Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90036
RSVP to Mary Hashimoto via email at mhashimoto@sag.org
Parking will be validated.

Bring your paid up SAG card.

Note from Phil LaMar

Here is a good word from working actor Phil LaMarr

Tonight’s caucus is all important for the Interactive Voice Over community

Tuesday, Oct 27th, 7:30-9 p.m.
5757 Wilshire Blvd.
James Cagney Board Room
RSVP to Mary Hashimoto at mhashimoto@sag.org or call (323) 549-6453.
Parking will be validated.

Bring your paid up SAG card.

From Phil:

Hi, for anybody reading this who doesn’t know me, my name’s Phil LaMarr. I’m a SAG/AFTRA member who does a good amount of voice work for video games. I’ve attended the SAG Interactive meeting in Sept. and I was on the AFTRA interactive steering committee where I voted against this proposal. I’m not going to able to make the meeting Tuesday so I wanted to say why I changed my mind and decided to support this agreement.

At first, I opposed it because it was clear that the atmospheric voices provision was of great benefit to the producers and I questioned whether we were getting anything of value in return. After looking at the details and history of this, I’m convinced that we are getting more and giving less than many of us have been led to believe.

We get: contracts that end together and that only last 15 months.

Synchronized contracts that end in less than a year and a half may not be glamorous, but they are HUGE benefits to us. They keep the unions from continuing to be played against each other. Also, we can start to see the effect of this atmospheric voice category and address any problems in 15 months instead of 2 or 3 years.

Now, some people in both unions are floating the idea that we can make adjustments to the atmos. voice provision or vote it down then tweak it. Unfortunately, that is not true. SAG was negotiating alone and they hit a wall. At that point SAG, AFTRA and the producers decided to have a joint OFF-THE-RECORD discussion and the producers agreed that this was an all-or-nothing deal. If we vote “Yes” it becomes “on-the-record.” If we say “NO” this goes away – completely. SAG goes back to the terms that were on the table when they halted their talks (including an Atmos. VO proposal asking for non-union actors and unlimited word counts) and they try to bargain up from there.

As for the plan that we vote this down then start joint SAG-AFTRA negotiations – that’s a fantastic idea except the producers have to agree to negotiate these two separate contracts together. They might, but why would they? They wouldn’t agree to it BEFORE we rejected the result of 5 mos. of negotiations – why would they now? They want us staggered and imbalanced, I think the only reason they agreed to joint off-the-record talks was for the chance to get the atmos. VO provision into the AFTRA contract 6 months early.

That is all pretty complex so I’ll put it more simply – if we walk away from this we walk into separate negotiations with even WORSE terms.

Now, the other thing that made me consider ratifying this was taking a closer look at the Atmospheric Voice Proposal.

A lot of people are unaware of the protections included. There’s seems to be some confusion about the 300 word limit. People are multiplying by 20 characters and conveniently forgetting that the character has to be able to say a maximum of 300 words WITHOUT advancing the story. These are minor, incidental characters – the hooker in the car in GTA. If you’re voicing a major character they can’t tack on atmospheric ones, they have to bring you in for a separate session. And if somehow you’re able to do 20 distinct characters who have 300 words each the producers still have to fit that into ONE FOUR HOUR SESSION. And if they want “unlimited” voices? STILL ONE FOUR HOUR SESSION. I think they’re creating a category that they will be hard-pressed to maximize.

Some people have expressed reservations about vagueness and potential abuses – that’s the same thing we deal with now. When I voice a palace guard who THEN happens to go to the village inn and get drunk and THEN gets really scared when the market is attacked, who’s kidding who? Those are effectively 3 different characters – I’m being “abused.” At least now it’ll be above board.

And frankly, there’s nothing in this agreement with as much potential for lowering our collective earnings as the 1 hr/ 1 voice & 6 hr/ 6-10 voice clauses that have been in our current agreement for years. We managed those and I have faith that we can manage the difficulties in this new category too. Especially with this many of us active and engaged.

Thanks for taking the time to read this. My aim is not that people agree with my conclusions but that they have all the facts when they come to their own.
If anyone has any questions, corrections or comments please feel free to email me at phillamarr@mac.com.

Have fun storming the castle!

Phil LaMarr

Variety: SAG stats- Diversity Lags

SAG stats: Diversity lags
Minorities, seniors, females underrepresented

By DAVE MCNARYMore Articles:

Minorities, seniors and female actors have achieved few gains in recent years in the number of film and TV roles they receive, according to casting stats released by the Screen Actors Guild.

“The diverse and multicultural world we live in today is still not accurately reflected in the portrayals we see on the screen,” SAG president Ken Howard said in a statement. “We will continue to work with producers, hiring executives and industry professionals in accurately portraying the American scene by ensuring equal access to employment opportunities for all of our members.”

The latest statistics, released Friday, showed minority performers reached a high mark in 2007, with 29.3% of total roles, and then declined last year to 27.5%.

The breakdown of film and TV roles for 2008 was 72.5% Caucasian, 13.3% African-American, 6.4% Latino-Hispanic, 3.8 Asian-Pacific Islander, 0.3% Native American and 3.8% other-unknown. SAG noted in its report that U.S. Census data from 2000 showed that the nation’s population was 73.4% Caucasian, 11.5% African-American, 10.6% Latino-Hispanic, 3.7% Asian-Pacific Islander and 0.8% Native American.

Producers who are signatory to SAG contracts are required to submit hiring data in order to examine the trends of “traditionally underemployed and disenfranchised members.”

SAG also noted that people with disabilities remain “virtually invisible” in casting even though 20% of the U.S. population has a disability.

SAG, AFTRA, Actors Equity and the WGA held the inaugural Hollywood Disabilities Forum at UCLA on Saturday.

The report noted that male actors continue to fill the majority of roles, especially in the supporting category, with about two roles for every female role.

The picture did improve slightly for older thesps.

Roles have increased for males 40 and over, with film parts up from 40% in 2006 to 43% in 2008, while TV roles increased from 40% to 42% in that period; roles for females 40 and over rose in film and TV from 26% in 2006 to 28% last year.

SAG also said that Asian-Pacific thesps were the only minority group to gain from 2007 to 2008, increasing from 3.4% to 3.8%, thanks to gains in TV.

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118010361.html?categoryid=1055&cs=1

STUDIO BRIEFING: October 22, 2009

STUDIO BRIEFING: October 22, 2009

DISNEY TO UNLOCK “KEYCHEST”
Pay one price for a movie and be able to watch it on any device that has a screen — that’s the thinking behind Keychest, a new technology that the Walt Disney Co. says it plans to unveil next month. The company on Wednesday confirmed a Wall Street Journal report about the technology, which would allow consumers to watch a purchased movie via the Internet, their cable company, or their telephone-line or mobile provider on any number of devices, from iPods to videogame players. However, the fact that Disney intends to implement its “view anywhere” strategy with a proprietary system has already run into industry opposition. Sony chief technology officer Mitch Singer noted Wednesday that Disney is seeking to accomplish with its system what the members of the Digital Entertainment Content Ecosystem (DECE) have said they will bring about with an open system. In an interview with Video Business magazine, Singer, who is also the president of the DECE, said that Disney had been asked to join. He noted that, unlike Keychest, the DECE proposal would include DVD and Blu-ray discs.

THE PROPOSAL TOPS DVD SALES CHART

Walt Disney’s The Proposal, a surprise hit in theaters when it premiered last June, appears headed toward hit status on DVD as well. The movie, which grossed $163.8 million domestically and $131.8 million abroad, debuted at No. 1 on the Rentrak sales chart and at No. 3 on Home Media magazine’s rental chart. Universal’s Land of the Lost was the No. 1 rental, while Disney’s 72-year-old Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs took the top spot on the hi-def Blu-ray sales chart for the second consecutive week.

EXPANSION OF FAMED UK STUDIO ORDERED HALTED

A $350-million plan to expand Britain’s famed Pinewood Shepperton studios has been shot down by local authorities. Project Pinewood, as it was called, would have featured numerous permanent outdoor sets, expanded studios and post-production facilities, offices, a film school, affordable homes and temporary residences for filmmakers. However, residents complained that the project would have resulted in what a South Buckinghampshire district councilwoman described as a “significant degradation to the local environment and quality of life of local residents.” A spokesman for Pinewood Shepperton said the studio intends to appeal the decision. “This project is of national significance and of great benefit not only to our community and region but also to the UK and its creative industries,” Andrew Smith, group director of corporate affairs, said.

UNIONS HAIL PASSAGE OF LAW AIMED AT TALENT SCAMS

The two principal Hollywood talent unions — the Screen Actors Guild (SAG) and the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (AFTRA) — have hailed passage of legislation in California aimed at agencies that charge advance fees for representing children looking for jobs in films and TV. In a statement, AFTRA National Executive Director Kim Roberts Hedgpeth said, “Performers — and young performers, in particular — are especially vulnerable to scam artists and predatory business practices that fraudulently exploit their aspirations and talents. This new law will help regulate the advance-fee talent services that often cause both monetary loss and severe emotional distress to their victims and their families.” And at a news conference, SAGE President Ken Howard stated, “The promise of acting jobs is no longer for sale.” The legislation bars companies from charging in advance for the promise of securing jobs for child actors and models. It also requires them to post a $50,000 bond with the state. Nevertheless, it was unclear what constitutes an upfront fee. Several talent services are notorious for holding “free” auditions that attract hundreds of children and their parents — at which they are told that they will need “professional head shots” of their children and then charged excessive fees for the photos, which are taken on the spot.

TECHNICOLOR TO CONVERT 3D DIGITAL MOVIES TO FILM

Technicolor hopes to address the shortage of theaters capable of showing 3D digital movies by converting the movies to film. Film projectors can be converted to 3D quickly and cheaply, and some studios see the Technicolor scheme as a bridge between today’s film presentation — the overwhelming number of theaters are equipped with film projectors only — and 3D digital theaters of the future. However, although major studios, including DreamWorks Animation/Paramount, Lionsgate, Universal and Warner Bros., have welcomed Technicolor’s announcement, two other major studios, Disney and 20th Century Fox, have not. Fox, which will be releasing James Cameron’s highly anticipated 3D thriller Avatar in December, has not commented on its decision not to support the Technicolor initiative, but Disney did. Daily Variety quoted a Disney spokesperson as saying, “We’re fully committed to the digital 3D solution. … We think it provides the highest quality to the moviegoing experience.”

AFTRA and SAG Approve Extension of Contracts Covering Non-Broadcast, Industrial and Educational Agreements

AFTRA and SAG Approve Extension of Contracts Covering Non-Broadcast, Industrial and Educational Agreements
Posted October 15, 2009

LOS ANGELES (Oct. 15, 2009) – The American Federation of Television and Radio Artists and Screen Actors Guild announced today that the AFTRA Administrative Committee and Screen Actors Guild National Board of Directors have approved an 18-month extension to the AFTRA Code of Fair Practice for Non Broadcast/Industrial/Educational Recorded Material and the SAG Industrial and Educational Contract. The contracts, which were set to expire on Oct. 31, 2009, will now be effective Nov. 1, 2009, to April 30, 2011.

In addition to the extended term, the agreement includes a 0.5% increase in employer contributions to the AFTRA Health and Retirement Funds and the Screen Actors Guild-Producers Pension and Health Plans, effective Nov. 1, 2009, and an important clarification that work produced under the contracts is not and never has been intended for the production of commercials.

Roberta Reardon, AFTRA National President praised the extension saying: “Work under the Non-Broadcast/Industrial Code rarely grabs headlines or elevates performers to celebrity status. It does something far more important: it provides steady employment for thousands of union members in small and large markets across the nation. This extension will keep our members working, increase their opportunities to qualify for health and retirement benefits and will permit our unions the opportunity to organize more work for more members under this contract.”

Screen Actors Guild National President Ken Howard said, “These contracts are critical to our members across the country and extending them gives us the opportunity to strategize ways to increase covered work under the agreements. The successful extension of the Industrial and Educational Contract directly reflects the continued importance of joint bargaining and allows our members to continue to work under a fair contract for the next year and a half, and with a bump to their pension and health.”

“The increase in employer contributions to our health and retirement plans, along with the confirmation by the industry that the Non-Broadcast Code cannot be used for commercial production are important achievements in this extension agreement,” said Mathis L. Dunn, Jr., Chief Negotiator for AFTRA.

“We’re glad to have achieved this extension jointly with AFTRA and look forward to joint negotiations again on the Industrial and Educational Contract in 2011,” said Ray Rodriguez, the Screen Actors Guild deputy national executive director who oversees contracts.

The extension agreement was negotiated by both unions under the terms of the AFL-CIO facilitated Joint Commercials Contracts Negotiating Agreement, which governs the bargaining and administration of the 2009-2012 Commercials contracts, and was expanded earlier this summer to cover the 2009 negotiation of the AFTRA Non-Broadcast/Industrial Contract and the SAG Industrial and Educational Contract. The Chief Negotiator for the Industry Lee W. Gluckman Jr., who represented the employers in the negotiations said, “This extended agreement will quite beneficial to producers and their clients in growing production. The ‘no commercials here’ clarification is also an important addition to the contract.”

The SAG and AFTRA contracts cover performers rendering on-camera and voiceover services in sales programs, educational and training videos, informational and promotional messages seen in stores and video included in certain consumer products, and other projects that are exhibited outside of the traditional broadcast arena (with AFTRA’s contract also covering audio-only content, such as telephone messages and sound included in consumer products).

DML Book Review

Book review: “Moral Panics and the Copyright Wars” by William Patry

Posted: 24 Oct 2009 01:28 PM PDT

The content and technology businesses are at war, as is well-known and as I discuss in a recent article. It’s a struggle that focuses on unauthorized file sharing and new business models—in other words, a copyright war. Undeniably, the entertainment industry often battles demand rather than trying to satisfy it, and copyright laws have taken a corporate turn. Who better to write about this conflict, one would think—and point the way to solutions, one would hope—than an author with 27 years experience in copyright law as a professor, practitioner and government attorney?

That author is William Patry, who is now Google’s senior copyright counsel (though he emphasizes that he’s writing to express his own views, not Google’s). He says he’s in favor of “effective” copyright statutes, and I opened his book hoping to learn what those might look like, since the divergence of public behavior and existing copyright laws makes it clear that something has to change. It’s an area of great interest to me, not just personally, but also professionally, as my law practice at TroyGould focuses in large part on new media and, more generally, the intersection of entertainment and technology. I was writing a review for the Los Angeles Times, and I hoped I’d be able to write a positive one.

Alas, not. What I found was a book riddled with invective, unoriginal observations, and numerous typographical errors—about 200 typos at my count, including twice referring to Martin Luther King’s most famous oratory as the “I Had a Dream” speech (as though King had simply given up) and inadvertently transmuting federal judge Richard Posner into “Judge Richard,” perhaps positioning him for a gig on syndicated television.

The text is heavily footnoted, yet still marred by unsupported claims. Thus, Patry says that imposing public-access easements on beachfront houses doesn’t reduce their value. That’s doubtful, and he offers no evidence. We’re told “orphan works” is a metaphor used to unjustifiably protect certain kinds of works, but actually those using the term want to loosen protection (a position I agree with, as does Patry). Patry claims that declining CD sales are not related to unauthorized file sharing, but offers neither discussion nor footnotes. Moreover, the book is larded with unnecessary block quotes, among them a half-page endnote analyzing the phrase “Tastes Like Chicken.” Whatever the entrée, a sharper carving knife would have helped.

In short, I was hoping for a significant contribution that would build on previous work in this oft-discussed field. Instead, I found a deeply flawed narrative that didn’t even acknowledge the existence of landmark books in the area by such authors as Lawrence Lessig, Neil Netanel, William W. Fisher III, Jessica Litman, Siva Vaidhyanathan, Tarleton Gillespie, and James Boyle. As I discuss in the LA Times piece, the book is not without some virtues, but I was largely disappointed and surprised. You can read the full review here, then come back and leave comments if you wish.

———————

Subscribe to my blog (jhandel.com) for more about entertainment law and digital media law. Go to the blog itself to subscribe via RSS or email. Or, follow me on Twitter, friend me on Facebook, or subscribe to my Huffington Post articles. If you work in tech, check out my book How to Write LOIs and Term Sheets.