Motion Picture Association of America
 |
| Formation |
1922 (as the Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America) |
| Type |
Ratings, anti-piracy |
| Headquarters |
Washington, DC, USA (office of the Chairman and CEO) |
| Location |
USA |
| Chairman and Chief Executive Officer |
Dan Glickman |
| Website |
www.mpaa.org |
The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), originally the Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America, is a United States non-profit business and trade association to advance the business interests of movie studios. The MPAA administers the voluntary but dominant MPAA film rating system. As part of its campaign to stop copyright infringement, the MPAA is fighting to stop the sharing of copyrighted works via peer-to-peer file-sharing networks. The MPAA's anti-piracy campaign has gained much publicity and criticism.
History
In 1922 the major American movie studios founded the Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America[1] which started regulating the Hays code film rating system from 1930. In 1945 they changed their name to Motion Picture Association of America.[2]
Structure
MPAA members include the "big six" major Hollywood studios,[3] which are:
MGM was an MPAA member until 2005, shortly after Sony Pictures Entertainment's failed attempt to buy that studio; it ended in a partly Sony-funded acquisition. Lions Gate also joined the film rating system, but was not in the big seven. Neither is The Weinstein Company.[citation needed]
From 1966 to 2004, Jack Valenti was MPAA president and was strongly associated with the association because of his long tenure and high public profile. Valenti retired on 1 September 2004. Dan Glickman, a former U.S. Secretary of Agriculture, now serves as the MPAA Chairman and chief executive officer.[4][5] On September 22, 2005, Glickman named A. Robert Pisano as Chief Operating Officer and President of MPAA.[6]
Kori Bernards is the MPAA's corporate communications vice-president and principal spokeswoman.
Ratings
The MPAA film rating system is by far the dominant motion picture rating system in the United States. This is the current list of the MPAA's ratings:
- G
- The movie contains no mild violence, sexual content, and/or language. There is no need for parental guidance.
- PG (M between 1968 and 1970 and GP between 1970 and 1971)
- The movie may contain mild violence, mild sexual innuendo, or language. Young children (ages 9 and under) should have parental guidance.
- PG-13
- The movie may contain intense violence (but no gore), some sexual content, partial nudity, drug references, and/or infrequent strong language. Children under 13 should have parental guidance; however, parental guidance is not legally enforced.
- R
- The movie may contain strong violence (including gore) and language, drug uses, sexual content, and/or full-frontal nudity. People under 17 must be with an accompanying parent or adult guardian when watching an R-rated film in a cinema.
- NC-17 (X until 1990)
- The movie may have extreme violence, explicit sexual content, hard drug use and/or very strong language. People ages 17 and under must not be admitted to an NC-17 rated film in a cinema.
Anti-piracy efforts
Publicity campaigns
You Wouldn't Steal a Car
"You Wouldn't Steal a Car" was a 2004[7] advertisement by the MPAA that is put before the actual content on many DVDs. It is sometimes made impossible to skip on most mass market DVD players, so the viewers must sit through the advert in its entirety every time the disc is viewed. It is possible to get around this by using a DVD player with software that ignores user operation prohibition.
The voiceover (and text) of the ad says "You wouldn’t steal a car. You wouldn’t steal a handbag. You wouldn’t steal a mobile phone. You wouldn’t steal a DVD. Buying pirated films is stealing…Stealing...Is Against...The Law...Piracy: It’s a crime."[8][9]
The ad has been parodied several times[10] and was known to appear in many copies of pirated DVDs. The trailer uses a sound-alike version of "No Man Army" by Prodigy.
Legal actions
The MPAA has taken legal actions against a number of peer-to-peer file-sharing sites (or BitTorrent trackers) that are used to upload and download copyrighted material (such as movies). Widely publicised examples include Razorback2 and The Pirate Bay.[11]
In February 2006 the MPAA released the following statement:
| “ |
"Today’s lawsuits are part of MPAA’s international campaign against online piracy which has experienced some significant victories as of late. Last week the server facilitating one of the largest Torrent sites in the Netherlands, Dikkedonder, was shut down and on Monday, Belgian and Swiss authorities shut down Razorback2 -- the number one eDonkey server in the world which facilitated the illegal file swapping by approximately 1.3 million simultaneous users. The MPAA’s strategy focuses on all levels of Internet piracy to cut off the major suppliers of illegal files and at the same time curtail facilitation of illegal file swapping by peer-to-peer networks. Approximately 75 Torrent and eDonkey sites have been shut down in the last year as a result of these efforts."[11] |
” |
Razorback2
On 21 February 2006, the servers located in a Belgian datacenter were confiscated by the Belgian police, and their operator, who lives in Switzerland, was arrested. This was done after a local judge authorized the confiscation at the datacenter in Zaventem near Brussels, after initiation by the MPAA.[citation needed]
In a Press Release the MPAA Chairman and CEO Dan Glickman stated:
| “ |
This is a major victory in our fight to cut off the supply of illegal materials being circulated on the Internet via peer-to-peer networks. By shaving the illegal traffic of copyrighted works facilitated by Razorback2, we are depleting other illegal networks of their ability to supply Internet pirates with copyrighted works which is a positive step in our international effort to fight piracy.[12] |
” |
The Pirate Bay
On 31 May 2006, Swedish police raided The Pirate Bay, a Sweden based BitTorrent tracker, prompted by allegations of copyright violations. Some 65 police officers participated in the raid, shutting down the site and confiscating its servers, as well as all other servers hosted by The Pirate Bay's ISP, PRQ Inet. Three people, Gottfrid Svartholm, Mikael Viborg, and Fredrik Neij, were held by the police for questioning.[13] Three days later, The Pirate Bay was fully functional again.
The raid became controversial in Sweden when the Swedish public broadcast network, Sveriges Television cited unnamed sources claiming that the raid was prompted by political pressure from the United States, which the Swedish government denies. Specifically, the claim is that the Swedish government was threatened with WTO trade sanctions unless action was taken against The Pirate Bay.[14] There have been claims of ministerstyre (lit. "minister rule", when a politician pressures another government agency to take action, which is unconstitutional in Sweden) in connection with this allegation.[15] A letter titled "Re: The Pirate Bay" from the MPAA to Dan Eliasson, the Swedish State Secretary, was dated two months before the raid and hinted at trade reprisals ("It is certainly not in Sweden's best interests to earn a reputation as a place where utter lawlessness is tolerated") and urged him to "exercise your influence to urge law enforcement officers in Sweden to take much needed action against The Pirate Bay".[16]
In a MPAA press release, 31 May 2006, entitled "Swedish Authorities Sink Pirate Bay", Dan Glickman, MPAA Chairman and CEO, states:
| “ |
The actions today taken in Sweden serve as a reminder to pirates all over the world that there are no safe harbors for Internet copyright thieves[17] |
” |
In the 2007 documentary Good Copy Bad Copy, as well as the film Steal This Film II[18], Glickman is interviewed in connection with the 2006 raid on The Pirate Bay by the Swedish police, conceding that piracy will never be stopped, but stating that they will try to make it as difficult and tedious as possible.[19]
Controversies
Rating system
One example is the film rating system. Many believe that the intent of the various ratings has been subverted. For example, there is widespread access to R-rated movies even for those under 17, while the NC-17 rating spells commercial death for a film,[20][21] undermining its purpose.
Film critic Roger Ebert has called for an entirely new system of ratings designed to address these issues. Some people criticize film-makers for editing their works to conform to the various ratings. For example, they might excise some extreme violence or sex to avoid an NC-17, or even "spice up" a children's movie so as to move from G to PG and appeal to older children.[citation needed] The ratings system itself is attacked as de facto censorship by free-speech activists, and conversely as too lenient in its content standards by some conservative critics, religious leaders, lawyers, and parental review sites. In This Film is Not Yet Rated, Kirby Dick argues that the MPAA tends to be considered more complacent with violent content than sexual, and that there is more bias against homosexual sexual content than heterosexual.
Copyright issues
Fight against online piracy
The rise of the Internet has further emphasized the MPAA’s role in controlling content. However, the Internet allows some users to access content they otherwise could not, such as viewing NC-17 movies that are not shown in theatres. The MPAA has responded legally by seeking to shut down piracy websites.
Although the MPAA has won several victories against online piracy such as the Razorback2 raid and a series of successful lawsuits against public torrent websites, online piracy is still growing steadily with modern studies showing more and more participants.
The effect MPAA raids have had on overall online pirating traffic is, to date, limited — the day Razorback2 (a major server on the Edonkey2000 network) was shut down, Edonkey2000 network traffic stayed the same, showing negligible change.[22][23][24] However the MPAA has had a very successful history shutting down networks of pirated material and torrent sites, bolstering a record of approximately 75 during 2006.[25]
Fraudulent piracy figures
In the MPAA press release from May 31, 2006 on The Pirate Bay raid the MPAA stated that they lost $6.1 billion dollars nationwide to piracy in 2005, and that internet piracy alone had cost the studios $2.3 billion.[26] This is especially so as over 20 percent, $1.4 billion, of the $6.1 billion figure represents what is essentially making a non-commercial backups, either virtually on a device or physically on another disc, which is protected under United States law. These numbers are further suspicious due to the private nature of the study, which cannot be publicly checked for methodology or validity.[27][28][29]
On January 22, 2008, it was revealed that the MPAA numbers on piracy in colleges was grossly inflated by up to 300%.[30] This came at a time when the MPAA were trying to push a bill through which would compel universities to crack down on piracy.[31]
Allegations of copyright infringement by the MPAA
In 2007, English software developer Patrick Robin reported that the MPAA was illegally using his blogging platform, Forest Blog. Forest Blog is distributed for free under a linkware license; anyone who uses it must link back to his site where Forest Blog is free offered for download. To remove the links back to his site, they must purchase a license. The MPAA had removed the links, without paying for a license.[32] They claim that they were only testing the blogging platform, and that the blog was “never advertised to the public in any way”. The torrent community in response mocked the MPAA saying that pirating movies is legal provided that they do not advertise them and only use them for testing purposes.[33]
On November 23, 2007, Matthew Garret notified the MPAA that it was in violation of the GNU General Public License (GPL) for distributing a software toolkit designed to help universities detect instances of potentially illegal file-sharing on school networks. This tool kit was based on the Xubuntu operating system, which is licensed under the GPL. The violation was distributing a derived work without making the source code available. On December 1, 2007, Garrett notified the Internet service provider for the MPAA that, in accordance with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, he was requesting them to disable the offending distribution web site. It is not clear if this request was ever honored. However, the MPAA did change the site so as not to offer the toolkit for distribution.[34]
In the DVD extras to the film This Film Is Not Yet Rated director Kirby Dick accuses the MPAA of making an illegal copy of his film during the process of reviewing the film for its rating.
Monopoly
Since the MPAA members are the Motion Picture industry's most powerful studios, representing some of the world's largest media corporations, allegations of monopoly are often brought up by critics. Critics also point to the MPAA's support for closed standards that hinder competition. Other critics, such as filmmaker Kirby Dick, have suggested that films released by major studios (members of the MPAA) are given more deference in terms of ratings than films released by independents.[35]
See also
References
- ^ The Production Code of the Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America, Inc.—1930–1934, enotes.com, http://www.enotes.com/1930-arts-american-decades-ps, retrieved on 2009-05-21
- ^ Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America, Hutchinson, http://encyclopedia.farlex.com/Motion+Picture+Producers+and+Distributors+of+America, retrieved on 2009-05-21
- ^ MPAA About Us - Members
- ^ Washington Post, Glickman Succeeds Valenti At MPAA
- ^ Motion Picture Association of America
- ^ [1]
- ^ IPOS: Launch of Anti-Piracy Movie Trailer
- ^ Knowledge@Emory: Can Sampling Help Curb Piracy?
- ^ 'You Wouldn't Steal a Car': Intellectual Property and the Language of Theft
- ^ Historical Piracy Warning Parody
- ^ a b http://www.mpaa.org/press_releases/2006_02_23.pdf
- ^ http://www.mpaa.org/press_releases/2006_02_21_razer.pdf
- ^ Blog by Mikael Viborg, 1 June 2006
- ^ "USA-hot bakom fildelningsrazzia", article in Swedish from Dagens Nyheter
- ^ "The Pirate Bay Not Impressed by Announced Prosecution". TorrentFreak. 04.05.2007. http://torrentfreak.com/the-pirate-bay-not-impressed-by-announced-prosecution/. Retrieved on 2007-05-20.
- ^ http://torrentfreak.com//images/pirate_mpa.pdf (PDF scan of original letter)
- ^ http://www.mpaa.org/press_releases/2006_05_31.pdf
- ^ Steal This Film, Part 2
- ^ Good Copy Bad Copy
- ^ "Ratings doc falls foul of raters". Guardian Unlimited. 2005-12-08. http://film.guardian.co.uk/news/story/0,,1662531,00.html. Retrieved on 2007-07-26. "The NC-17 rating [...] has proved the commercial death of many a film"
- ^ Teodorczuk, Tom (2006-08-14). "Classified material". New Statesman. http://www.newstatesman.com/200608140037. Retrieved on 2007-07-26. "An NC-17 certification [...] is seen in Hollywood as the kiss of commercial death."
- ^ "P2P Is Unstoppable". torrentfreak.com. 2006-04-12. http://torrentfreak.com/p2p-is-unstoppable/. Retrieved on 2007-07-26.
- ^ "Movie piracy more popular than ever". Computing.co.uk. 2007-01-29. http://www.computing.co.uk/vnunet/news/2173629/movie-pirating-popular-ever. Retrieved on 2007-07-26.
- ^ "P2P Raids and Lawsuits Just don’t Work". torrentfreak.com. 2006-06-22. http://torrentfreak.com/p2p-raids-and-lawsuits-just-dont-work/. Retrieved on 2007-07-26.
- ^ "STUDIOS MOVE TO THWART ILLEGAL FILE SWAPPING ON MAJOR PIRATE NETWORKS: MPAA Companies Take Action Against Torrent, eDonkey and Newsgroup Sites Used by Millions" (PDF). MPAA. 2006-02-23. http://www.MPAA.org/press_releases/2006_02_23.pdf.
- ^ "SWEDISH AUTHORITIES SINK PIRATE BAY: Huge Worldwide Supplier of Illegal Movies Told No Safe Harbors for Facilitators of Piracy!" (PDF). MPAA. 2006-05-31. http://www.MPAA.org/press_releases/2006_05_31.pdf.
- ^ Fisher, Ken (2006-05-05). "The problem with MPAA's shocking piracy numbers". Ars Technica. http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060505-6761.html. Retrieved on 2007-07-15.
- ^ "Movie Piracy Cost 6.1 Billion". torrentfreak.com. 2006-05-03. http://torrentfreak.com/movie-piracy-cost-61-billion/. Retrieved on 2007-07-16.
- ^ "Hollywood study examines costs of film piracy". ZDNet (Reuters). 2006-05-03. http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9595_22-6068198.html. Retrieved on 2007-07-16.
- ^ "MPAA admits college piracy numbers grossly inflated". arstechnica.com. 2008-01-22. http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2008/01/oops-mpaa-admits-college-piracy-numbers-grossly-inflated.ars. Retrieved on 2008-01-22.
- ^ "2008 shaping up to be "Year of Filters" at colleges, ISPs". arstechnica.com. 2008-01-22. http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080115-filtering-could-come-to-isps-colleges-in-2008.html. Retrieved on 2008-01-22.
- ^ Robin, Patrick (). "Forest Blog: License Agreement" (HTML). Host Forest. Host Forest. http://www.hostforest.co.uk/Products/blog.asp. Retrieved on 2009-04-21.
- ^ Dayal, Smaran (2007-02-28). "MPAA: We Were Only Testing Forest Blog" (HTML). TorrentFreak. TorrentFreak. http://torrentfreak.com/mpaa-we-were-only-testing-forest-blog/. Retrieved on 2008-08-10.
- ^ Paul, Ryan (2007-12-04). "MPAA’s University Toolkit hit with DMCA takedown notice after GPL violation" (HTML). ars technica. ars technica, LLC. http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20071204-MPAAs-university-toolkit-hit-with-dmca-takedown-notice-after-gpl-violation.html. Retrieved on 2007-12-07.
- ^ Kirby Dick (Director). (2006-01-25) This Film Is Not Yet Rated [Film].
External links
