FAO: SPARKY & MIKE
We have been credited on The 1 Second Film but as
Produced by
Producers of the 1 Second Film .... associate producer
Producers of the 1 Second Film .... executive producer
Producers of the 1 Second Film .... producer
Here is Nirvan Mullick's letter to IMDb
Hi, I just found this thread. My name is Nirvan, I'm the director of The 1 Second Film. IMDb doesn't owe us anything, they are independent from our project and were cool to start listing our producers in the first place. IMDb never made any promises to list all of our producers, and only started listing our credits because we met their guidelines... and no doubt because Stephen Colbert made a personal request. Even then, there was no contract, only an indication that IMDb had approved our credits, and the fact that IMDb started to add our producer credits on their own volition. Our project's only contact with IMDb was through this message board originally, and then at a recent run in with Jon Reeves, data master and stop-motion enthusiast. Our original exchange with IMDb is here:
http://www.imdb.com/board/bd0000042/thread/15740685
If you read the original exchange, there was always a concern over the amount of time that might be allocated to one project. You will also see that we never expected IMDb to start listing all of our producers- we know very well how much work it is, because we have been doing it by hand for years. Contrary to popular belief, this isn't an easy or lazy solution for film-financing. Nor have we ever advertised anywhere that you can buy a credit on IMDb. Our site has always stated that we can not guarantee IMDb listings. What we do is finance our non-profit film by donations, and give everyone who helps produce our film a producer credit. The 1 Second Film will continue to give this credit to everyone who helps produce our film, regardless of how famous they are or how little they can afford to give. You can call it scrappy or you can call it independent filmmaking.
IMDb was aware that being listed was of value to our project from the outset, and we never attempted to hide that fact. We had over 1,000 producers before being listed on IMDb, many of them celebrities- none of these original producers donated to get an IMDb listing, they did so because they wanted to support the concept and help make it happen.
That said, I have a few questions regarding IMDb’s decision to remove all of our producer credits:
First, why hide all of the producer credits that had already been added? This doesn’t reduce the amount of work or time for IMDb; if anything, it took more time to do, and only alienates many of IMDb’s biggest fans, who enjoyed forwarding their IMDb page to friends and family. Many of these people paid $35 or more to have their photos listed as well. I think these people have a right to feel a little let down by IMDb’s decision.
Second, as I mentioned, I ran into Jon Reeves a few weeks back and we were able to discuss many of IMDb’s issues in person, which was a treat. I thanked him for everything IMDB had done, and apologized for any headaches we have caused; the IMDb listing has clearly meant a lot to our project. I also suggested we submit producer names in bulk to reduce IMDb’s workload, but Jon said that wasn't the issue- that it was really a matter of precedent, especially because IMDb was getting requests from other projects that wanted to do something similar, and that IMDb needed to see some press to indicate that the project was moving. I explained why we had been delaying press (because we are still entering names by hand) and that we will be launching an automated site very soon. Jon understood our reasoning, but was firm that we needed publicity in three months, or our credits would be put into hiding. I agreed that was fair, and promised some press in three months; that was only two weeks ago. So it came as a surprise when all of our producer credits were recently pulled. This wasn’t any legal written contract, it was just a conversation. But Jon seemed pretty sincere, and I thought we left with a pretty good understanding of our mutual circumstances.
As for setting a bad precedent for IMDb, it seems this is avoided by holding projects to IMDb’s “general public interest” qualifications. We believe our film clearly meets these guidelines, in large part due to the celebrities and experienced filmmakers involved. It is also the first production to apply micro-collaboration to such a scale. Thousands of people in the general public have been interested enough in The 1 Second Film to support it directly. The project is overseen by a non-profit foundation with a Board of Directors that includes Stephen Nemeth, Ben Goldhirsh, Albert Maysles, and Julie Taymor, all experienced filmmakers who believe in the project and help make it happen:
http://www.the1secondfoundation.org. Our film is in active production.
For those wondering why our project is taking so long, it is because we are making a feature-length documentary that will play during our credits. This project is about a lot more than one second of film; it is about how much work and heart can go into a single second, especially a single second of animation, and how large numbers of people can collaborate in many small ways to make something that matters. It may be funny, but it’s not a joke. It has inspired thousands of people to get involved in filmmaking, and I think that is pretty cool. Many of our producers, including most of the celebrities, will be appearing in our documentary. Also, any of our producers can submit footage of themselves helping produce our film around the world. Some of this footage will also be included in our film. Whether IMDb lists Kiefer Sutherland’s on-screen appearance in The 1 Second Film, or his Executive Producer credit, is not up to us.
Perhaps the larger question is will IMDb be able to accommodate new ways of filmmaking? Times are changing, and open-source projects like ours will continue to find ways to get made outside of the traditional system. We have over 7,000 producers and counting. Our goal is to reach a tipping point before the project is completed and to then raise as much as possible for charity. We will then be making sequels to address other social issues.
Again, IMDb doesn’t owe us anything. If anything, we owe IMDb thanks for having helped our project grow. We plan to include a section about IMDb in our documentary and will be giving them a Special Thanks in our credits that we hope will remain listed on IMDb. We also hope the producer credits previously listed on IMDb will be returned, and perhaps we can think of a smarter way to handle bulk producer data in the future.
You have my contact info if you want to get in touch. I'd be happy to share the url for the beta version of our automated web-site with some of IMDb's staff, though it is not yet ready for a public release. We hope to launch our new site in about a week.
Cheers,
Nirvan Mullick
nirvan@the1secondfilm.com
And here is jreeves, an IMDb administrator
First, I have to apologize to Nirvan for not giving him advance notice that we were going to do this; obviously, something like this takes a couple of days to pull off, and I fully intended to drop him a courtesy note informing him of our plans, but got too busy (most of the work happened over the weekend). He really should not have had to learn about it the way he did.
I didn't mention the possibility that we would take this action at the time of our chance meeting because I didn't know about it. It was mentioned during our internal discussion after my meeting with Nirvan that this course of action was suggested at our December group meeting, but I either didn't hear that suggestion at the time or didn't remember it. (At least one other attendee similarly did not hear/remember this.) However, once the suggestion was made, I certainly endorsed it.
As someone else said in this thread, it would not have been fair to list some producers and not others.
I'm sorry if I left Nirvan with a misunderstanding; it's the title itself that could disappear (actually, be suspended) if nothing significant (from our viewpoint) happens within three months. That's still true.
Also, it appears I may have failed in communicating something else. While the database software can handle the quantity of names, there is a certain amount of staff overhead involved with handling each name and credit. Given the relatively unimportant status of this film (from our standpoint, at the current time and state of completion and publicity), the amount of time being consumed was completely unacceptable and was taking away from other activities that would have benefited far more people and been more important to our central missions (such as, for example, reviewing more of the new titles submitted each week, or reducing backlogs, or just helping some of our staff limit themselves to 60-hour weeks).
The current situation is not carved in stone; certainly, we're willing to revisit it upon actual release of the film (which, from my discussion with Nirvan, seems unlikely to happen before next year). At that time, there is a range of options available, including, as some have suggested, a one-shot bulk update.
Yes, we will be issuing refunds to anyone that bought a photo and who lost their only credit as a result of this. Not sure if they will need to contact the help desk or if we'll be doing it proactively. I know that, in either case, the sum involved will not be material to our financial results.
Please note that we have no control over the fees paid to gain the "producer" credit in the first place; that's between them and Nirvan. As he said, anyone who bought a credit thinking it guaranteed them an IMDb page was mistaken. And we know this has happened, both from postings on our various message boards and traffic at our help desk.
By contrast, and sheer chance, I overheard this snippet of conversation while waiting to cross a street in Burbank on Tuesday night: "... we need to get it in some festivals so I can get my name on IMDb..." -- this person has it the right way around. Nirvan understands, but not everyone does, that our job is not to help someone get their film made or seen.
We have identified some other projects using similar funding models, and will not let them get anywhere near the point T1SF was at. In fact, earlier today we created our second producer group name and that film should get updated in the next few days.
It's perhaps worth noting here that Nirvan told me his ultimate goal was 100,000 producers. The following is an actual quote from the manager of our producers list: Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
