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?
waterhouse · 1h ago
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.
JustExAWS · 1h ago
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
more_corn · 1h ago
What the fuck kind of writing is that? Ge to the damned point.
blkhawk · 1h ago
TLDR:
“A cut of revenue not derived specifically from broadcast on the cable channel” went from “meaningless” to “huge significance” to “boner-inducing” arguably the greatest clause ever in TV contract history…at a minimum, it’s one of the most improbable all things considered.
hsbauauvhabzb · 37m ago
@dang can we change the title on this one, it’s clickbait mixed with an ai generated ramble.
scarface_74 · 21m ago
Can you think of another case where the creators got as rich from a TV production deal?
kolla · 14m ago
Seinfeld
Imustaskforhelp · 2h ago
South park is one of my favourite shows. I think that matt and trey aren't the usual billionaires but it would still be cool if they actually donate some of that money since they feel like the guys who don't need a billion dollars and feel humble imo.
skybrian · 44m ago
I think it’s pretty cool that they bought Casa Bonita.
rswail · 38m ago
The article quoted that they take $10m salaries each and the business invests in more production (eg movies, Book of Mormon musical etc).
So whether they donate or not personally, their billionaire status is based on owning their company (ie that is their total worth, not liquid assets).
do_not_redeem · 1h ago
One of the downsides of people knowing you have money is everyone on earth will judge you for what you do with it. I say let them enjoy it. If you must pressure someone to donate, pressure one of the "usual billionaires" who's funding their torment nexus with it.
shazbotter · 1h ago
There is no human alive who can ethically enjoy a billion dollars. Give them each a hundred million and say, you've hit your cap, everything else goes towards the public good.
A hundred million dollars buys you a life of comfort and luxury. Anyone with a billion has too much influence, imo.
graeme · 1h ago
The South Park owners don't have a billion dollars in liquid wealth each. They have ownership of south park, which is worth billions.
If you make them cut their assets down to $100 million each then they don't own South Park. And someone else gets to tell them what to write. Or they retire.
saulpw · 33m ago
The capital gains tax could be 90%+ on any gains over $10m (and 99% over $100m), so they can still sell out, but it would cap liquid wealth at $100m dollars. However, they would still have a billion dollars of ownership, and the societal power that comes with being a billionaire, as they can leverage those assets to great effect without selling them. (As Elon Musk didn't actually pay $44b for Twitter.)
So I wonder if the government could levy a stock tax, in which every public stock was diluted by 1% per year, with non-voting stock going into a sovereign wealth fund. This would make for a gradual transition of companies from capitalist-owned to public-owned.
nurumaik · 1h ago
I can live a life of comfort and luxury with $10k. Can you please donate everything above $10k of your networth right now?
k1t · 1h ago
One hundred million dollars? My yacht cost more than that...
2muchcoffeeman · 45m ago
Sure you can. I have no problem with billionaires as long as they are enjoying their money without hurting people in the process. Having the money doesn’t mean you actively abuse your influence.
But once you have that kind of fuck off money and insist on abusing your power, or kowtowing to other people to get more power, and other BS, then you are an evil asshole. There’s a good reason why Bezos, Zuckerberg, Musk etc rub people the wrong way. It’s not their wealth.
dmazin · 58m ago
As much I loved this show growing up, an interesting thing about South Park is that they essentially defined the alt right (in the sense of a disenfranchised young man, often lashing out at marginalized groups and political correctness etc). Am I wrong or did there use to be an article called “South Park conservative” that basically described what eventually became “alt-right”?
A comedy show is just a comedy show. We're all responsible for who we become. If some purposefully terrible animated pixels inspire me to be a disgusting person, that's on me. If I play a shooting game and end up hurting someone, that's on me too (or my parents, if I'm young!). And if I spend too much time on HN, thinking AI is garbage, and then lose my job because I fell behind, that's also on me! (As well as starting to write my own comedy here on HN, knowing exactly what I'm getting into!)
01HNNWZ0MV43FF · 41m ago
If something in the water makes a million people into disgusting mass shooters, we should look into it
patates · 22m ago
> If something in the water makes a million people into disgusting mass shooters, we should look into it
You're using a completely made-up extreme example to make your point, but we're surrounded by real-world examples of free speech being heavily impacted. We don't need to invent scenarios.
righthand · 52m ago
You aren’t wrong that there is/was a group of people that consider themselves South Park Conservative but the creators reject the notion that South Park is specifically liberal or conservative, because their intent is to parody any people they can. The creators dislike political correctness but they also dislike the forceful nature of conservatives applying their beliefs on other people. Read the South Park wikipedia page, it explains it pretty well.
Insinuating that South Park conservatives evolved into the alt-right is doing a lot of heavy lifting. Trey and Matt didn’t invent disliking political correctness.
elefanten · 48m ago
I concur with this take. Like many facets of culture, some people/groups will project what they want onto a given cultural entity (South Park, in this case), but that doesn’t mean one should assume they speak for it.
For example, the “men’s rights activists” group appropriated the idea of “the red pill” from The Matrix. They certainly differ wildly in worldview from the Wachowski siblings.
ChocolateGod · 43m ago
Disliking political correctness isn't even limited to the right on the political scale. Bill Maher has spoken out against it for example.
JustExAWS · 6m ago
I consider myself liberal on most issues - strong social safety, universal healthcare , pro vax, strong separation between church and state, and hate the demonization of other.
I as a Black guy was also put off by the forced indoctrination that BigTech did post 2020 (when I worked there) with all of the “ally ship”, “DEI” crap I had to endure. I just wanted to do my job, get my money, get my RSUs and bounce after 4 years.
JustExAWS · 41m ago
They had an episode mocking Al Gore about climate change and then did an episode years later where they basically admitted they were wrong.
The “alt-right” have always been part of America or have you never heard of Jim Crow and segregation today, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever”?
bigstrat2003 · 5m ago
> They had an episode mocking Al Gore about climate change and then did an episode years later where they basically admitted they were wrong.
Eh, I wouldn't say that. Nor would I say they were really taking a stand on climate change in the first place. They just thought it would be funny to have Al Gore tilting at windmills (and indeed it was), and then thought it would be funny to have him proven right (and indeed it was). One of the things I appreciate about Trey and Matt is that they do what they think is funny first and foremost, rather than try to make the show a mouthpiece for their beliefs as many creators do.
JustExAWS · 1m ago
They were definitely as it’s climate change skeptics and changed their minds. They admitted as much.
> [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.
“A cut of revenue not derived specifically from broadcast on the cable channel” went from “meaningless” to “huge significance” to “boner-inducing” arguably the greatest clause ever in TV contract history…at a minimum, it’s one of the most improbable all things considered.
So whether they donate or not personally, their billionaire status is based on owning their company (ie that is their total worth, not liquid assets).
A hundred million dollars buys you a life of comfort and luxury. Anyone with a billion has too much influence, imo.
If you make them cut their assets down to $100 million each then they don't own South Park. And someone else gets to tell them what to write. Or they retire.
So I wonder if the government could levy a stock tax, in which every public stock was diluted by 1% per year, with non-voting stock going into a sovereign wealth fund. This would make for a gradual transition of companies from capitalist-owned to public-owned.
But once you have that kind of fuck off money and insist on abusing your power, or kowtowing to other people to get more power, and other BS, then you are an evil asshole. There’s a good reason why Bezos, Zuckerberg, Musk etc rub people the wrong way. It’s not their wealth.
Edit: found it at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Park_Republican
You're using a completely made-up extreme example to make your point, but we're surrounded by real-world examples of free speech being heavily impacted. We don't need to invent scenarios.
Insinuating that South Park conservatives evolved into the alt-right is doing a lot of heavy lifting. Trey and Matt didn’t invent disliking political correctness.
For example, the “men’s rights activists” group appropriated the idea of “the red pill” from The Matrix. They certainly differ wildly in worldview from the Wachowski siblings.
But this is political correctness gone crazy.
https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/08/25/politics/democrats-gender...
I as a Black guy was also put off by the forced indoctrination that BigTech did post 2020 (when I worked there) with all of the “ally ship”, “DEI” crap I had to endure. I just wanted to do my job, get my money, get my RSUs and bounce after 4 years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ManBearPig
More to the point, you haven’t heard about their current season’s Trump episode?
The alt right aren’t exactly deep thinkers. It’s just like the police glorifying the Punisher.
https://www.newsweek.com/punisher-police-blue-lives-matter-s...
Or MAGA conservatives playing “Born in the USA” without listening to the lyrics.
South Park mocks everyone.
https://www.salon.com/2017/09/15/why-south-park-is-better-ar...
The “alt-right” have always been part of America or have you never heard of Jim Crow and segregation today, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever”?
Eh, I wouldn't say that. Nor would I say they were really taking a stand on climate change in the first place. They just thought it would be funny to have Al Gore tilting at windmills (and indeed it was), and then thought it would be funny to have him proven right (and indeed it was). One of the things I appreciate about Trey and Matt is that they do what they think is funny first and foremost, rather than try to make the show a mouthpiece for their beliefs as many creators do.