|
|
|
|
Author
|
Topic: MPAA, you suck!
|
Martin Brooks
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 900
From: Forest Hills, NY, USA
Registered: May 2002
|
posted 09-22-2003 03:36 PM
I pretty much agree with everything Brad wrote. I do have one comment about the anti-piracy trailer. This doesn't bother me as much as it seems to bother you. The purpose of this trailer is not to stop pirates -- as you've said, obviously they're going to continue to steal and copy films.
The purpose of the trailer is to make the public understand that free digital downloading of movies, which hasn't happened much yet because the technology isn't there, is illegal and has ramifications. They're trying to brainwash the public into this understanding so they don't face the same problems that the record industry is now facing. Will it work? Probably not. Is it offensive? I really don't believe it is...it's not threatening, it's low key and it focuses on people behind the scenes who work in the industry. I have not detected a negative reaction to it by patrons in a theater.
Meanwhile, I never thought that Academy voters should be permitted to vote on a film unless they saw it in a theater. How can one compare watching a film on television, frequently in mono, with experiencing it in a theater, especially if it's distributed on VHS. If they're too lazy or too elitist to see it in a theater, they should lose their voting credentials.
And I don 't understand how the CRAP code is going to stop camcorder recording of films. So let's say you know it's print 142 and it was playing at the Main Street theater. How does that affect the person on the street who is selling these illegal copies? It's easy enough to tell that these are pirated copies..what difference does it make which theater it came from? I still maintain that such a cruddy version of a film doesn't negatively affect theater revenues anyway.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Phil Hill
I love my cootie bug

Posts: 7595
From: Hollywood, CA USA
Registered: Mar 2000
|
posted 09-25-2003 01:43 AM
I especially like the last line. Nah, I'm sure none of them thar members would EVER give out tapes/DVDs to others that might make a copy of it. That would just NEVER happen! The bootlegs are all coming from Joe Blow and his camcorder in the theatres! That guy just doesn't know what he's talkin'!
>>> Phil
From Variety: --------------------------------------------------------------- Posted: Wed., Sep. 24, 2003, 8:54pm PT quote: Bye bye screeners
Piracy pressures may endanger Oscar DVDs By TIMOTHY M. GRAY
Pirates may be forcing screening tapes to walk the plank. As with every decision affecting awards contenders, this one is stirring up a lot of emotions: Some in the film business are embracing the proposal, others are blasting it as an example of major-studio bullying, and many are expressing total panic.
The Motion Picture Assn. of America late Tuesday sent major-studio CEOs a draft of a proposal under which the studios would agree to send out no screening cassettes or DVDs during awards season. Org has been huddling with studio honchos in recent days on the subject (Daily Variety, Sept. 24).
One question is who would sign up for the plan. Certainly the document is targeted at the major studios and their arthouse divisions (i.e., not only Fox but Fox Searchlight, Disney as well as Miramax, etc.). And nonsignatory majors such as DreamWorks are also said to be onboard.
Another question is whether this effort will extend to the true indies, such as Lions Gate, Newmarket, Magnolia and ThinkFilm, which are not MPAA signatories.
But the biggest question is whether this cassette cease-fire will ever occur. Studio execs and awards strategists were split Wednesday on the outcome.
Some feel the proposal falls into the same category as "why don't we all dump our nuclear weapons in the ocean?" -- in other words, it's a nice idea, but don't hold your breath.
"We would all love (the mailing of screeners) to go away. It doesn't serve the film, but you can't reverse history," one pessimist sighed.
Others are convinced the plan will definitely go into effect and a 15-year habit will be erased.
"It's going to happen," one marketing exec said, and the sentiment was echoed by several others.
Even at this early date, the awards season has seen some major changes (the Oscars' shift in dates, the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts & Sciences' get-tough attitude on campaigning). This latest plot twist was inspired by the piracy that has ballooned in recent years, particularly tied to studios' DVD screeners.
The majors have weighed alternative plans, including disposable DVDs (which are unviewable after a limited amount of time) or "fingerprinted" copies (which include initials or a number on the screener, making the source easier to trace). But, for various reasons, those have been rejected.
The panic in town comes from procedural concerns. For example, studios would have to arrange for more frequent screenings; at this point, available screening rooms are hard to come by.
And last year, a lot of exhibitors balked at the long-standing practice of admitting members of guilds, the Academy and other organizations -- the "your card will admit you and a guest" syndrome -- into commercial runs. If there are no tapes or DVDs, there will presumably be more demand for such admittance.
The tapes and DVDs are often called "Academy screeners" because AMPAS voters were the first recipients. But since the late 1980s, thousands more have been added to the lists, including members of the directors, writers and actors guilds and organizations such as BAFTA, the Hollywood Foreign Press Assn. and the Broadcast Film Critics Assn.
Longtime ambivalence
Studio execs have always been ambivalent about the mailing of screeners. On one hand, they want their films to be seen by the maximum number of voters. On the other hand, they want the pic to be seen on the bigscreen. "It's an insult to the cinematographer, for example, to watch his work on TV," one exec said.
That's true with small films, but even more so with entries like Columbia's "Big Fish," Disney's "The Alamo," Fox's "Master & Commander," Miramax's "Cold Mountain," New Line's "The Lord of the Rings," Revolution's "The Missing" and Warners' "The Last Samurai."
However, those films are the most likely to benefit from the proposal. An awards voter with limited time will often go see the biggies, relying on screeners for "smaller" pics. A few folk on Wednesday voiced concern that this is all an elaborate plan to squeeze out the little films. They raised questions about whether films like "Gosford Park," "Far From Heaven" or "Pollock" would've fared as well if it weren't for tapes.
Another question mark centers on Universal's "Seabiscuit." The studio has high hopes for the film, which will be released on DVD in December. Since this is a piracy issue, it's not clear whether the studio will be asked not to send out copies of the film, since they will be available in stores.
More useful than ever
This year, the screeners might have been even more useful than in the past. With a shortened awards season -- Oscar nomination ballots will be mailed Jan. 2 -- voters may find that, due to work schedules, the holidays and family time, they would tend to rely more than usual upon tapes and DVDs.
The Academy had no comment Wednesday. Org is not part of the planning and has always kept mum about screeners. When studios mail screeners to Oscar voters, those lists are not supplied by the Acad. The official AMPAS policy has always been that voters should see all the contenders before they vote, and they should see them on the bigscreen.
Aside from the headaches for awards strategists and the practical considerations of voters (too busy to attend a screening, don't like to drive at night, etc.), there is the matter of bruised egos. One campaigner predicted voter anger: There are a lot of people who want tapes. "Everyone's so used to the convenience, the perk. It's a badge of honor to own a current film -- or they want to send out a screener as a Christmas gift."
© Copyright 2003, Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. © 2003 Variety, Inc. -----------------------------------------------------------
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
John Hawkinson
Film God

Posts: 2273
From: Cambridge, MA, USA
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 09-25-2003 04:01 AM
Joe, I think you read me wrong there; I concur it seems unlikely that they can distinguish one screener from another, but do you honestly doubt they cannot tell if the source was any screener at all?
(This is relevent since a point which we're repeatedly revolving around is the extent to which screeners are the major source of the problem.)
Of course, I'm always curious if anyone has hard data they can share, which is why I asked you the question, even though I thought I knew the answer.
By the way, I'm pleased the way facts have been injected into this thread. It makes it much more valuable.
I have a research question, too, for people who see more prints than I do. Can someone confirm whether these Deluxe orange CAP dots come from both Deluxe Toronto and Deluxe Hollywood, or just one?
--jhawk
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adam Martin
I'm not even gonna point out the irony.

Posts: 3686
From: Dallas, TX
Registered: Nov 2000
|
posted 09-25-2003 10:16 AM
From the Washington Post (stupid survey required):
quote: Reston Firm Sees Future in Fighting Movie Piracy
By Ellen McCarthy Thursday, September 25, 2003; Page E01
Cinea Inc. is only three years old and some of its ideas about video and film piracy protection are years away from commercial use. But the film industry's growing alarm over piracy put Cinea squarely in the sights of acquirers.
This week, Dolby Laboratories Inc., a firm that created the digital standard for film sound and is eager to exploit the revenue possibilities of digital film, bought Reston-based Cinea. The deal between the private companies (neither would disclose the terms) was as good an endorsement as Robert Schumann, co-founder and chief executive of Cinea, could have hoped for.
"From our perspective, [Dolby is] the best way to move this business forward," Schumann said. "They bring expertise, financial resources, but mostly they bring great relationships in Hollywood and in the consumer domain around the world."
Internet piracy is a far less pressing problem in the movie industry than it is for music companies, but that may not hold true for long. Theater executives fear that as high-speed Internet connections become more prevalent, the exchange of pilfered movies could skyrocket.
"It's something that studios not only are taking seriously, but it's got to be one of the main initiatives. We're all doing everything we can to avoid the fate of the music industry," said Ronald C. Wheeler, senior vice president of content protection for Fox Entertainment Group. "We're definitely afraid it's going to come to that, and more quickly than people realize, unless we take action now."
Dolby's purchase gives Cinea the money to develop and market its products, Schumann said, and something potentially more valuable: Dolby's Rolodex of contacts in a worried movie industry.
Schumann is a veteran of Digital Video Express, a Richmond subsidiary of Circuit City that tried to sell encrypted DVDs. The special discs could be viewed for a certain period of time and then shut off, allowing viewers to pay a lower fee to watch a movie without having to return it to a rental store. The technology never took off and Digital Video closed in 1999, but the industry's struggles with piracy continued to interest Schumann.
Rather than continue to focus on protecting consumer copies of movies, Schumann decided his new firm would offer products that shield specially screened versions of films for large audiences. Cinea's first product encrypts videos shown on airplanes and in hotels so that they can be played only on equipment sold by the company. If, for example, an airline employee tried to make a copy of a movie, the copy would not play on a normal DVD machine.
The company, funded by a $2 million investment from Monumental Venture Partners LLC of McLean, also developed a "lock-and-key" technology so that movies transmitted to theaters digitally can play only on approved machines at predetermined times. The system protects movies from being hijacked during satellite transmission, or downloaded from theater computers.
Cinea's latest product, which it expects to test this fall, puts individual tags on DVDs sent early to screeners or reviewers, so that if copies are made and put on the black market, they can be traced to their sources. Schumann said several major studios are already using its technology.
The product that could put Cinea on the map is several years from completion. But if it works as Schumann hopes, camcorders in movie theaters -- a low-tech but nettlesome form of piracy -- will become a thing of the past.
Last year Cinea won a $2 million grant from the National Institute of Standards and Technology to create a system that distorts the images recorded by camcorders. The company is working on a special projector, called CamJam, that takes advantages of the differences between images visible to the human eye and those captured by the recorders. Many movie theaters still play reels of film, but the industry increasingly is moving toward digital technology. Cinea's projector, designed to work with digital movies, would emit rays of light and other images that are invisible to viewers but make stolen copies worthless.
"Your video would have a bunch of disturbance, flickers, motions. We're trying to disrupt the value of that image," Schumann said. "No venture capitalist would pay for the research that needs to be done, but if we can get this research done -- and we believe we can -- then the technology will have tremendous value for American industry, particularly Hollywood."
The industry is clearly eager for a solution, claiming that piracy deprives it of aftermarket revenue that can make the difference between a film being profitable or unprofitable.
"It's a problem for all major studios, the directors, writers -- but most of all the people who work in the business in post production and at Blockbuster stores. People who are not high-wage people -- their livelihoods are put to hazard if we can't find a way to deal with this thievery that is going on," said Jack Valenti, president and chief executive of the Motion Picture Association of America.
For Dolby, the acquisition is a departure from its traditional lines of business. The San Francisco-based company mainly holds patents on audio technologies, especially noise-reduction equipment. Its Dolby Digital sound system is used on almost every major studio film.
"We see content security as just becoming ever more important in the areas that we do business," said Tim Partridge, vice president of Dolby's professional division. "Our studio customers keep telling us that piracy is their biggest issue of the day. . . . We want to continue to be a major player and we believe that in order to do that, you need to be familiar with security.
"The more we became involved with [Cinea], the more we realized that they had some real expertise, as well as some interesting technologies," Partridge said.
Cinea will become a wholly owned subsidiary of Dolby and remain in Reston. Schumann will be president of the 15-employee subsidiary. Executives Laurence Roth and Jeffrey Segal will also stay.

Robert Schumann, chief executive of Cinea, demonstrates the company's technology for discouraging people from using camcorders to make copies of movies in theaters. (Gerald Martineau -- The Washington Post)
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 19 pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 17 18 19
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|