No More Academy Screeners... (BREAKING NEWS) (1 Viewer)

[Dan Rudolph]

Not really. The MPAA is running ads tryign to convince people not to do it, while the RIAA is prosecuting people.

 

[Glenn Overholt]

Oh Dan, I won't be suprised when I hear that the MPAA has been tracking movie down/up loaders and is ready to issue their first pile of lawsuits.

Glenn

 

[MatthewLouwrens]

OK, thanks for that. It makes a lot more sense now.

 

[Cees Alons]

Technically, the screeners could easily be supplied with a unique watermark. But then everyone may get embarrased when the source of some of the illegal upload files is revealed and the MPAA has to sue one or more members. So now they got rid of one source in the first place.


Cees

 

[John_Berger]

The MPAA is running ads tryign to convince people not to do it, while the RIAA is prosecuting people.

I meant it more from the aspect that both have adopted attitudes and actions that in no way will deter piracy, yet both organizations are acting as though they've come up with some great idea to make a dent in piracy. Both organizations, rather than work WITH the Internet, have decided to do really stupid things to FIGHT the Internet.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

You know, I'm really on the fence about
Valenti and his call to stop screeners.

Now he wants screeners for upcoming DVD product
to be banned as well?

Is this the end of advance DVD reviews for
publications and forums like ours?

Studios can't fairly win Academy awards without
those screeners. Let's face it -- most Academy
members won't have the opportunity to see every
worthy film without those screeners.

Studios need word-of-mouth and reviews from
advance DVD screeners to help promote their product.

I tell yuh, this is really going to hurt the
industry.

 

[Craig S]

Now he wants screeners for upcoming DVD product to be banned as well?

Ron, I think he's referring specifically to sending out DVDs to Academy members to screen for awards purposes, even if they've been commercially released. Yeah, it's stupid, but I don't think this is referring to product that goes to reviewers.

But of course, that's the logical next step... :frowning:

There's some interesting comments on this issues from industry folks (including Robert Towne & Roger Avary) in Link Removed today (scroll down a few pages to find it). Not a whole lot of support for Valenti.

I find this guy kind of freaky. He's 82 years old, yet look at his picture in the column. He's just unnaturally well-preserved. I wonder how many operations he's had?? Or maybe he's just a robot.

 

[Lew Crippen]

You know, I'm really on the fence about

Me to. Even conceding that a potential exists for unauthorized reproduction of the advance copies, and even conceding that the potential has become real, there must be a balance between the harm to the industry caused by distributing illegal copies early and the positive benefits of Academy members having easier access to see the requisite films.

As I think about it, the films are going to appear on DVD in the fullness of time in any case (often not long after the advance copies have gone out) and this lessens the impact of illegal reproduction due solely to the advance copies.

Having worked through that logic—let the voting members have the screeners and the critics their advance copies.

 

[Lew Crippen]

I find this guy kind of freaky. He's 82 years old, yet look at his picture in the column. He's just unnaturally well-preserved. I wonder how many operations he's had?? Or maybe he's just a robot.

Nope—he’s got a picture in the attic.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Valenti is just the spokesman for the guys at the heads of the studios, so this thinking is coming from the Chairmen offices of the industry which is why this decision is in direct conflict with the rank and file as well as some upper management people that fully understand the ramifications of such a policy.





Crawdaddy

 

[Robert Crawford]

Lew,
Some might not understand your little joke just like those that question that same character in the film "League of Extraordinary Gentlemen".






Crawdaddy

 

[Dan Rudolph]

Can't they let the individual studios decide whether to send screeners or not on a case-by-case basis? As some films are in little danger of piracy as they weren't big hits or are already available on legit DVD, this would let them take care of the problem without completely shutting out small indy flicks.

 

[DrewMcWeeny]

Kami said she thought this wouldn't go into effect this year.

It's already in effect. That's why the issue has come to a head so quickly. This is the first year with the compacted campaign period, since the Oscars will be held a month earlier than normal this year. The first wave of screeners was about to be mailed out when all of this happened.

Right around the start of October is when Oscar season kicks in for people in and around the industry in LA. The various Guilds begin to allow their membership into theaters around LA for free, and screeners go out. Only... this year... they won't.

The weirdest part is that Valenti has imposed a ban on studios sending Academy members films that are already available on commercial release. That makes no sense if this is about piracy. None at all.

 

[John_Berger]

Okay, now, look at this article from Video Business.

The study, the first to try to quantify the origins of movie files found on peer-to-peer networks, found that 77% of the files could be traced to inside sources--either leaks from the studios themselves, postproduction facilities or theater projection booths.

Only 5% of the online movie files examined could be traced to commercially released DVDs.

By tracking the files according to their identifiers, the researchers said they were able to determine the likely source of each original.

Of the 285 copies sampled in the study, 220 could be traced ultimately to inside sources.

Motion Picture Association of America officials disputed the study's conclusions and criticized its methodology, claiming it overlooked most instances of camcorder piracy, which the group says is the leading source of illegal movies online.

Note that last paragraph. The MPAA admits that camcorder piracy is the biggest cause. So, why the hell is Valenti going after screener DVDs?

For those who have VB access, here is the article:

http://www.videobusiness.com/article...D=6172&catID=1

 

[John_Berger]

Numerous high-profile directors are NOT happy with the MPAA's useless action against screeners. From iWon

NEW YORK (AP) - Nearly 150 directors, including Robert Altman, Martin Scorsese, Francis Ford Coppola and Robert Redford, are urging the Motion Picture Association to repeal its decision to stop sending out special DVDs and videos to Oscar voters.

The directors sent a letter to Jack Valenti, urging the MPAA to immediately repeal the anti-piracy plan it implemented last week.

The ban on sending screeners means the 5,600 Academy Awards voters will have to catch most movies in theaters.

"Many great films, and in particular films that take risks, rely on critical acclaim and, when the film is fortunate enough, Academy consideration to reach a broad audience," states the letter, which appears in the trade paper Variety on Friday. "The MPAA decision to ban screeners irreparably damages the chances of such films: films that already have a difficult enough time finding financing and distribution. ...

"We condemn piracy, but are unconvinced that material links exist between screeners and the illegal industry of pirating our work - and the work of our colleagues."

The list of 142 people who signed the letter includes movie veterans (Sydney Pollack, Barry Levinson, Norman Jewison); international filmmakers (Pedro Almodovar, Bernardo Bertolucci, Atom Egoyan); and a bevy of young directors, including Spike Jonze, Sofia Coppola, Paul Thomas Anderson, Robert Rodriguez and Kimberly Peirce.

The MPAA's response: "Jack Valenti has had conversations with individuals and several groups on the subject of the new screener policy. He welcomes the exchange of thoughts and ideas on the critical issue of combating piracy. That said, the screener policy remains as it was originally announced."

 

[Glenn Overholt]

It is nice to see at least some of them get together and make a stand - but that response was a shocker - whoa!

And this is in addition to the black blobs - It is like some of the members of the MPAA are pissed because they want 'in' with the movie theaters, and are just getting back at them. Ok, Just kidding on that one.

Glenn

 

[Ricardo C]

He welcomes the exchange of thoughts and ideas on the critical issue of combating piracy. That said, the screener policy remains as it was originally announced.

He'd make a fine dictator thumbsdown:

 

[Francois Caron]

Note that last paragraph. The MPAA admits that camcorder piracy is the biggest cause. So, why the hell is Valenti going after screener DVDs?

The MPAA has always been on the side of the major studios. This is just another attempt to push aside the independent studios by denying them probably the best method of exposure they could hope for in the race for the Oscars. This new rule goes well with his rating system which is heavily biased towards the major studios and unfairly rates independent movies one level higher on the ratings scale.

Jack Valenti is the equivalent of a small nation dictator. He has never been elected to public office, holds no official government position, yet can easily impose unfair, unethical and possibly illegal rules and regulations that threaten the livelihood of thousands of people. This may be a good time for all the movie studios to openly defy Valenti and mail out their screeners regardless of the new regulations.

 

[John_Berger]

Then how did he get to his position to where he wields such "power"? It does sound like it's time for a coup at the MPAA.

 

[John_Berger]

The actors are now getting involved. Looks like good ol' Jack is starting to get it from a lot of different sides now. Again, from iWon :

NEW YORK (AP) - Several prominent actors, including Sean Penn, Holly Hunter, Frances McDormand and Willem Dafoe, have joined the opposition to a recent ban on sending special DVDs and videos to Academy Award voters.

The Writers Guild of America also has added its voice to the argument.

Their protest follows a letter sent last week from 142 directors to Jack Valenti, president of the Motion Picture Association of America, urging the MPAA to immediately repeal its anti-piracy plan.

The actors, writers and directors contend that asking Oscar voters to see films only in theaters will put smaller, independent features at a disadvantage, and will do nothing to stop piracy.

"This is an acknowledgment that actors are often the triggers for financing and distribution decisions on independent movies so it's really important their voices are heard," Michelle Byrd, executive director of the Independent Feature Project/New York, told the trade paper Variety for Tuesday's editions. The IFP is helping organize opposition to the ban.

An actors' protest, to be published in the coming days, will include the names of Hilary Swank, Don Cheadle, Sissy Spacek, Ellen Burstyn, Nick Nolte, and Steve Buscemi, among others.

Screen Actors Guild president Melissa Gilbert also disagrees with the ban on screeners. "It creates a hugely inequitable and hugely unleveled playing field," she said.

The MPAA reiterated Monday that it welcomed debate on the policy, but that the ban would remain.

Victoria Riskin, president of the Writers Guild of America West, said screener DVDs and videos are crucial to helping small, well-written films find an audience.

"Oscar winners such as Bill Condon ('Gods and Monsters'), Julian Fellowes ('Gosford Park') and John Irving ('The Cider House Rules') were first brought to the attention of Academy voters via just these means," Riskin said Monday. "To place a gag order on 'screeners' is to tilt the playing field from small films to large."

Last week, directors including Robert Altman, Martin Scorsese, Francis Ford Coppola and Robert Redford sent a protest letter to Valenti, which was published in Variety.