Tweet/Facebook Updates - Bachelorette 8 - Discussion

I don't get the big deal, why does MF care sooo much. WHO CARES if the season is spoiled. If I didn't have spoilers I probably wouldn't watch until after the episodes were all posted online to skip all the stupid parts and find the love story (or lack there of in some cases).

RichLP wrote:

BlondieGal wrote:

Bloven wrote:

Is your friend familiar with the exact settlement between them or is he just speaking generally?

Thanks BlondieGal!!!

Just generally speaking, Bloven.

I still say he would have a hard time proving actual damages...

A settlement agreement can stipulate liquidated penalties, without need to prove direct or indirect damage. The agreement could also recite mandatory procedural steps as well, i.e., whether disputes are resolved confidentially via arbitration or mediation, whether there are pre-filing alternative dispute resolution steps such as demand letters. So, this is all 100% conjecture as Steve as leaked only the barest hints of the substance of the agreement.

It has to be an ego thing. And the fact that someone else is making money off his show, especially when it's someone he despises on a personal level.

I agree, all this stuff about it hurting the show or the viewers is total BS.

CarrieA wrote:I don't get the big deal, why does MF care sooo much. WHO CARES if the season is spoiled. If I didn't have spoilers I probably wouldn't watch until after the episodes were all posted online to skip all the stupid parts and find the love story (or lack there of in some cases).

Me either - or, I'd start watching, get bored and stop - this board and the sleuthing/spoiling/discussing makes the show a whole lot more interesting.

just logic wrote:

CarrieA wrote:I don't get the big deal, why does MF care sooo much. WHO CARES if the season is spoiled. If I didn't have spoilers I probably wouldn't watch until after the episodes were all posted online to skip all the stupid parts and find the love story (or lack there of in some cases).

Me either - or, I'd start watching, get bored and stop - this board and the sleuthing/spoiling/discussing makes the show a whole lot more interesting.

ITA I wouldn't watch if I didn't have the sleuthing and spoilers.

Keili wrote:It has to be an ego thing. And the fact that someone else is making money off his show, especially when it's someone he despises on a personal level.

I agree, all this stuff about it hurting the show or the viewers is total BS.

Bingo.

just logic wrote:

CarrieA wrote:I don't get the big deal, why does MF care sooo much. WHO CARES if the season is spoiled. If I didn't have spoilers I probably wouldn't watch until after the episodes were all posted online to skip all the stupid parts and find the love story (or lack there of in some cases).

Me either - or, I'd start watching, get bored and stop - this board and the sleuthing/spoiling/discussing makes the show a whole lot more interesting.

It's hard to enforce any of the 100 or more confidentiality agreements involved with the production/airing of a single season if Steve is allowed to sit out there and profit from what could only be internal leaks. No one ever seems to get/care about this aspect of the business of this show, but Fleiss' company is contractually obligated to deliver an unspoiled show to the network. Steve messes with that big time if he incentivizes breaking of those agreements, and interposes a layer of anonmymity to the contract-breakers.

jlccaz wrote:

RichLP wrote:

BlondieGal wrote:

Bloven wrote:

Is your friend familiar with the exact settlement between them or is he just speaking generally?

Thanks BlondieGal!!!

Just generally speaking, Bloven.

I still say he would have a hard time proving actual damages...

A settlement agreement can stipulate liquidated penalties, without need to prove direct or indirect damage. The agreement could also recite mandatory procedural steps as well, i.e., whether disputes are resolved confidentially via arbitration or mediation, whether there are pre-filing alternative dispute resolution steps such as demand letters. So, this is all 100% conjecture as Steve as leaked only the barest hints of the substance of the agreement.

Thanks jlc...

I was actually referring back to the original action, but with that in mind, and what you just said, I would think/hope that RS's attorney would have taken this into account before agreeing to the terms of the settlement agreement, whatever they were. You don't agree to a $1 million dollar penalty, if you feel your exposure is far less than that...

RichLP wrote:

jlccaz wrote:

RichLP wrote:

BlondieGal wrote:

Bloven wrote:

Is your friend familiar with the exact settlement between them or is he just speaking generally?

Thanks BlondieGal!!!

Just generally speaking, Bloven.

I still say he would have a hard time proving actual damages...

A settlement agreement can stipulate liquidated penalties, without need to prove direct or indirect damage. The agreement could also recite mandatory procedural steps as well, i.e., whether disputes are resolved confidentially via arbitration or mediation, whether there are pre-filing alternative dispute resolution steps such as demand letters. So, this is all 100% conjecture as Steve as leaked only the barest hints of the substance of the agreement.

Thanks jlc...

I was actually referring back to the original action, but with that in mind, and what you just said, I would think/hope that RS's attorney would have taken this into account before agreeing to the terms of the settlement agreement, whatever they were. You don't agree to a $1 million dollar penalty, if you feel your exposure is far less than that...

It's always been about equitable, not monetary relief, I agree with that, i.e., a court order prohibiting publication of information obtained from cast/crew.

But on the monetary relief point, the ratings are not the issue. It's about the production company's need to fulfill a contractual promise to the network to produce the show in secret such that viewers (the millions, not the boardies/addicts) tune in to watch an unspoiled show week to week.

NCGalBecca wrote:Haha

Robert Mills ‏@Millsy11374

Anyone in #Bachelornation want to say anything batshit crazy? Now is the time. @fleissmeister is laying cover fire for all of us.

This is the second time that Millsy has told Fleiss to shut his mouth/twitter tirade. :knock:

jlccaz wrote:

just logic wrote:

CarrieA wrote:I don't get the big deal, why does MF care sooo much. WHO CARES if the season is spoiled. If I didn't have spoilers I probably wouldn't watch until after the episodes were all posted online to skip all the stupid parts and find the love story (or lack there of in some cases).

Me either - or, I'd start watching, get bored and stop - this board and the sleuthing/spoiling/discussing makes the show a whole lot more interesting.

It's hard to enforce any of the 100 or more confidentiality agreements involved with the production/airing of a single season if Steve is allowed to sit out there and profit from what could only be internal leaks. No one ever seems to get/care about this aspect of the business of this show, but Fleiss' company is contractually obligated to deliver an unspoiled show to the network. Steve messes with that big time if he incentivizes breaking of those agreements, and interposes a layer of anonmymity to the contract-breakers.

I understand what you're saying but I have to wonder about how much he could possibly pay the leakers? It almost seems like the ones spilling are people with an axe to grind or with other motivations than cash.

If he was quoting Emily maybe he saw e epi early? Who is he friends with that gets the epi's early?? I'm not saying this happened, just wondering why Fliess is bugging out over this issue and not the fact that the season was spoiled 2 months ago and RS spoiled it last week. Has anyone twitted him if he is confirming the spoilers b/ c that's how it appears!