Comment by not_your_vase
8 hours ago
It's very long, and seems to be stuffed with a copy of wikipedia, I ain't reading all that. What's that clause? Like Lucas had with Star Wars, they kept the monetization rights for some (at the time) dumb looking stuff, and they struck gold with it?
Looks to be (1269 words into the article according to wc):
> [Parker and Stone]’s lawyer, Kevin Morris, insisted that any South Park revenue not derived specifically from broadcast on the cable channel would go into the pot for calculating the men’s share of back-end profits.
Though that might be a precursor to enabling this (400 words later):
> With negotiating leverage, Parker and Stone agreed to a 4-year $75 million deal and, separately, a 50/50 cut of advertising revenue for any digital property…in perpetuity.
And that second quote is taken from the cited New York Times article which is the real source
https://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/27/business/media/27south.ht...
They would get profit sharing for any income that didn’t come from airing on Comedy Central. This was in 1997 before online streaming was really a thing
It was directly in the era of home video though, and the show got picked up in the first place from people sharing tapes.
This is what enabled them to stream it online themselves from a dedicated website for years though.
it is disappointing and almost surprising that this is not the default. not doing this is how creators are get taken advantage of.
more futuristic, i think any profit that is not reinvested into the business, that is, any profit that the owners decide to keep for themselves should be shared in some form with all employees, like a tax.