By Steven Snyder
Many issues squeeze the world of arts on a daily basis: Increased competition, reduced public interest, disappearing donors, fewer performing spaces, censorship; But in 2003 America, few issues are as pressing or profound as that of piracy.

Universal Music Group announced a massive restructuring last week, attributing slumping sales to increased online piracy. Numerous web sites have started posting television episodes mere days after their air date, reducing the value of syndication rights and DVD releases.

These are not idle issues. They have lasting effects. Record labels, amid plummeting profits, are becoming less interested in spending the money to develop or promote unique bands, but instead are pushing only the safest financial alternatives. The result? Bland music for the masses that is safe, rather than edgy.

And now, with the most dramatic decision yet concerning the issue of online piracy, the Academy Of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has banned the use of screeners for the upcoming Academy Awards season. In doing so, the Academy is signing the death sentence of independent cinema.

It is a case worth examining – outlining the staggering ramifications that can arise from any industry’s overreaction to the threat of piracy.

Piracy and the Movies

Every awards season in Hollywood, the same routine of campaigning preoccupies the major studios. It begins with getting a movie a wide release, moves forward to lobbying Academy members for nominations and then culminates in studios vying for the win. For distributors of a film, an Oscar not only means prestige, but also an increased take at both the box office and video store.

An essential part of securing a nomination is first getting members to see the movie. Wide releases, such as last year’s “Gangs of New York,” or this year’s “Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World,” have very little problem with that task. They open in, typically, more than 3,000 theaters across the country and are seen by millions within a week.

But smaller, independent releases, like this year’s “Raising Victor Vargas,” “The Magdalene Sisters” or “Charlotte Sometimes,” open in only a few theaters across the country. Never heard of them? You’re not alone. The saving grace for these releases is the awards process, which brings attention to films like “American History X” and “Being John Malkovich-“ films that would have otherwise wallowed in obscurity.

These films cannot rely on Academy voters making their way to one of a few theaters, but must instead send out videotapes and DVDs. These are called screeners, and they expose voters to films they otherwise wouldn’t see.
The piracy issue concerns screeners that are leaked to the public (usually by industry insiders), copied, and then posted on the Internet. This results in films circulating the Internet, in some cases before their start date, and in fewer people heading out to the theater. To avoid the same fate as the music industry, Hollywood has been aggressively fighting piracy, and has banned screeners this year to avoid the online circulation of these films.

However, the unintended consequences of this decision are profound. For the sake of argument, we will use the independent film “Raising Victor Vargas.” Before this decision, copies of “Vargas” would have been mailed to voters and it would have had a fair chance of securing a nomination. This year however, with the altered rules, the only voters who will see “Vargas” are those who made it to a film festival or saw the film during its extraordinarily limited release

Basically the film doesn’t have a chance.

Suddenly the true effects of piracy become clear. Since the limited-release “Vargas” can no longer send out screeners and will not receive any high-profile nominations, it becomes an unprofitable venture. Many major studios, which have an independent feature wing (Twentieth Century Fox has Fox Searchlight, Columbia Pictures has Sony Pictures Classics, Disney has Miramax), will no longer see smaller releases as a wise business decision, and will stop making these independent features altogether.

The final result here is the same as it is in the music world. The cost of piracy has changed the financial dynamics of the industry, and smaller independent films will no longer be seen as profitable. Take away that potential for profit and most major studios will stop producing them. Sure, indie studios such as Lions Gate Films and Focus Features will continue the effort, but the market will be much smaller than it is today.

Piracy Fears Damaging The Arts

When most people think of piracy, they think of music downloads and the record industry’s inflated prices. But it is now becoming clear that the overreactions to piracy will affect far more than just the downloading of the most recent Eminem single. It is an issue affecting numerous industries and it is eliciting reactions from corporations and studios that are harming the greater arts world.

Reactions to piracy in the music world will result in fewer independent artists and more Brittany Spears. And now, with Hollywood’s crackdown on screeners, America’s most dominant art form will suffer as well. There will be far fewer edgy films like “Raising Victor Vargas” and fare more safe bets like the profitable “Mr. Deeds” and “Daddy Day Care.”

The screeners decision is a devastating blow to the world of independent cinema, cheapens the movie industry as a whole, diminishes the meaning of the Academy Awards and hurts everyone who loves to see meaningful, substantive films.

Yes, piracy matters, but at some point we all must question if our reaction to the threat isn’t more devastating than the threat itself.

Best Viewed at 800 X 600 or greater
Design by David Johnson