Too many pre-Academy award screener DVDs are turning up on the Net. So The Not-So-Magnificent-Seven movie companies, owners of the MPAA (Motion Picture Associaiton of America), together with DreamWorks and New Line, won't be sending out any at all this season.

Companies which hope to snag an Oscar mail the screeners to Hollywood Golden People, critics, media reps, and so on but, says MPAA boss Jack Valenti, No More.

According to the Hollywood Reporter here, "He defended the ban Tuesday as part of 'a determined commitment to combat digital piracy and to save movie jobs in the future'."

The report says proponents of screeners argue they allow members of awards groups such as the Academy to sample a wider group of films, thereby putting smaller specialty releases on a more equal footing with wide-release studio films.

Nice one Jack.

So now the Academy Awards are going to be voted on by people who haven't seen the movie? Hell Jack, just lock them all away, stop showing them on tv, in theaters or releasing them on DVD and VHS. Make the movie lock it up and there is no piracy....and no movie industry..

So... it isn't "evil internet pirates" providing this stuff, it's the Hollywood Insiders who provide screeners to the REAL bootlegging pirates to later sell copies on the street.

When will these nitwits at the MPAA & RIAA learn, the folks filesharing movies and music are the fans, the ones likely to spend the money on legit products. The real piracy problem are the providers of all those bootleg DVDs & CDs you find selling on the street or at swap meets. But of course, the RIAA/MPAA "axis of evil" can't easily intimidate those folks into settlements as they do to 12 year old public assistance receipients, poor college students, or the elderly.

I can't wait for the court cases to begin

my screeners nooooooo ::cries::

oh phooey! now how will we know that new movie coming out is crap 2 months before release?

Why not? I sometimes wonder if they've watched the movie anyway The should just pick the winners from a 100 billion dollar hat...

Hopefully next the start releasing DVD's closer to the theater release. Instead of sitting on them for 6 months...

Hey these folks are serious...

If they are that tight for money, it might not hurt them to do a little budget trimming.

Won't this be a great Oscar session? The judges can do like the rest of us now and listen to all the hype that preceeds a movie and maybe we will see actors recognised for how well the movie studio did on the trailer. Without watching it ahead of time, there will be little use for the Oscars.

Now myself, I never much cared for them, seemed like a lot of foo-fa-raa to me.
Women trying to dress with as little as possible and still call it clothes for some of them. Well, whatever blows their skirt (as the saying goes.)

Don't worry Jack I never have downloaded a Movie and now I've stopped buying our once a month DVD because of your whole industry since it's a let's sue the world campaign.. thank the Record Industry!

There was a recent article in Cindy Adams' New York Post column today pertaining to this. Apparently, by her reading of it, the real motive of this ban is to ensure that no "indie" film ever gets considered for nomination by the Academy. In other words, only the "big" boys' works would be eligible for Oscar consideration. Or, as I've said a zillion times before, "piracy" is just an excuse / cop-out.

someone correct me if i'm wrong, but weren't these screeners usually sent out in that big blank space of time between the end of significant theater showings and the release of a dvd/vhs to the general public? you know, that long span of sometimes 6 months when you can't find anyone from the industry willing to take your money to show you the movie?

the people who are getting copies of the screeners are the same people who are going to be at the store with cash on the day when there's finally a dvd with bonus features and nice artwork and so on.

piracy my ass. if that's what this was really about, they'd just watermark the screeners the same way they've sort of done with 35mm to find theaters that help the tapers. find out which of your voters is sharing the love and bust them, if it bothers you so much.

but then, that would require a small bit of common sense. i keep forgetting how rare and expensive that is, go look at the prices for common sense on ebay. it's shocking!

I believe that this is more about eliminating independent studios from winning Oscars than it is about piracy. You will notice that this mentions nothing about the millions of screeners sent out to video stores and rental outlets. These are the screeners that truly end up copied and downloaded. What would Oscar voters really have to gain from pirating movies? These are real industry insiders. They could care less about who else sees the movies. But the kids working at the rental store don't have the same thoughts about it. These are the people ripping the DVD's and putting them on the web. Until these screeners are eliminated the movies will still end up on the web. The only thing being done is the movie industry is putting the squeeze on independent movie studios.

Good deal. I couldn't watch it because TechTV goes in and out around here because of my local cable company. Kudos to the TechTV team and those who requested it.

I've stated before that I'm SICK & TIRED of the DMCA!!

Copyright law NEEDS to be changed!!

And IMHO, the "Big 5" record labels MUST be broken up, ALONG with their "mouthpiece" Clear Channel Communications!!

These companies are getting TOO BIG!! They need to be CUT DOWN TO SIZE!!

DeanSB2000

When I was very young, I wanted to set up some recording equipment in an old station wagon, drive around from town to town, and record bands. They would get the tapes, I would get some cash, and we would all be happy. As I got a little older, I realized this was a childhood fantasy.
The studio as a privately owned, for-hire facility is a great idea.
All a group needs is a good master recording, which they can have duplicated by any number of independent operators (one of our computer customers, who is also a band member, told me there is someone about 40 miles away who makes retail quality CD copies from master tapes for 99 cents each).
The band can set up a web site to sell their CD's and sell them at live performances. No more middlemen.
After reading Ms. Sullivan's story, I say, once again, that it is time for this abusive, unneeded monopoly to be boycotted out of existence, once and for all. They used to have the consumer by the throat, but that time is over, and will never come again.
The same is true for the big studios v. independent movie makers. With the proper equipment and teamwork, a movie can be made for a fraction of the cost of most Hollywood blockbusters. Some special effects flicks still require the big boys, but story and substance are more important than eye candy, anyway.

The Kid

Fair Use, well, lets see, the home audio recording act says I can record stuff for my personal use, like a CD if I own the CD. I can tape TV or Cable. TV and Cable are already paid for in major network 1st run by advertisers, and on smaller stations and in reruns (syndication) be networks, stations, and commercial advertising. This really is different than I buy a CD, rip it and redistribute it via file sharing to 60 million of my close personal friends. Be mad if you want, its true.

Lets look at two example, 1st Sting and Sarah have new albums. If I buy them and post them, people who are fans and would have purchased the CD may not since they are available for free. The artists loose money (what little they do get) the local record shop be it ma&pa or WalMart miss out, and of course the RIAA misses their 90% take. I don't feel bad about them, but I do for the others.

2nd (this is the one that really pisses me off) Old artists where they will not make the back catalog available. If they will not make it available legally through online distribution, or hard copy CDs I'll sit through the long unreliable download times and crappy quality encodings if I really want the song that bad. There is just no other option. Kinda like the 80s video games, the copyright owners will not license the game roms even though people have ask for them, and are willing to pay for them. Stupid stupid suits, people are begging to give you money, but you won't take it.

Hey stevebugge, awesome digital studio idea. It would be what $5-10000 to equip and get going? rent out to artists, give them the option of ditributing online with you for some small hosting fee like 20-25 a month? You could put together a great business. Since the artists aren't under contract to the RIAA they could do about NOTHING to stop you. Go for it!!

Valenti is such a moron. Remember his whine in Tuesday's hearings that "only 4 out of 10 movies ever make money", which he blamed on illegal copies floating around the web? Hey Jack, did ya ever stop to think that it might be because the other 6 movies were garbage? Do you seriously believe that people prefer to watch a good movie as a download rather than in a theater? Oh sure, why go to see Lord of the Rings in widescreen surround sound when I can sit in front of my PC and watch a mediocre quality mpeg? Personally, I think people sharing movie downloads are doing us a public service... instead of shelling out $8 for "The Hulk" I can watch enough of it at home to confirm that it's a steaming pile of crap and a complete waste of my time.