Justice Department warns Oscar group against blocking streaming services like Apple TV+
In an unusual intervention, the U.S. Justice Department has warned the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences that it could run into antitrust laws if it excludes streaming services like Apple TV+ and Netflix from the Oscars.
"In the event that the Academy -- an association that includes multiple competitors in its membership -- establishes certain eligibility requirements for the Oscars that eliminate competition without procompetitive justification, such conduct may raise antitrust concerns," wrote DoJ antitrust head Makan Delrahim in a letter seen by Variety. The Academy acknowledged receiving a letter and responding, and said that its Board of Governors will receive submissions at an annual rules meeting on Apr. 23.
Delrahim's letter came in reaction to reports that director Steven Spielberg, an Academy board member, was aiming for rules limiting the eligibility of movies that debut on streaming services the same time as they arrive in theaters. A Netflix movie that adopted this strategy, Alfonso Cuaron's "Roma," took home Oscars for Best Director, Best Cinematography, and Best Foreign Language Film.
Spielberg and some other famous directors, like David Lynch, have sometimes vocally promoted theaters as the true home for movies, whether because of their immersive presentation or the social aspect. In 2018 Spielberg told ITV News that while streaming services have raised the quality of TV, "once you commit to a television format, you're a TV movie... If it's a good show -- deserve an Emmy, but not an Oscar."
The director's position is notable in that Spielberg appeared on stage at the Apple TV+ announcement, touting his reboot of the anthology series "Amazing Stories." While most of Apple's content is expected to adopt a TV format, some movies will be included as well, a few of which could theoretically be up for Oscars.
In fact Apple is reportedly assembling a team to put content in front of both Emmy and Oscar voters. Though fans and critics sometimes debate the legitimacy of those awards, they're nevertheless a mark of prestige -- particularly for streaming services needing to convince people to subscribe.
That could be even more crucial for Apple, which isn't expected to have much if any third-party content, though that could change by the time Apple TV+ launches this fall.
"In the event that the Academy -- an association that includes multiple competitors in its membership -- establishes certain eligibility requirements for the Oscars that eliminate competition without procompetitive justification, such conduct may raise antitrust concerns," wrote DoJ antitrust head Makan Delrahim in a letter seen by Variety. The Academy acknowledged receiving a letter and responding, and said that its Board of Governors will receive submissions at an annual rules meeting on Apr. 23.
Delrahim's letter came in reaction to reports that director Steven Spielberg, an Academy board member, was aiming for rules limiting the eligibility of movies that debut on streaming services the same time as they arrive in theaters. A Netflix movie that adopted this strategy, Alfonso Cuaron's "Roma," took home Oscars for Best Director, Best Cinematography, and Best Foreign Language Film.
Spielberg and some other famous directors, like David Lynch, have sometimes vocally promoted theaters as the true home for movies, whether because of their immersive presentation or the social aspect. In 2018 Spielberg told ITV News that while streaming services have raised the quality of TV, "once you commit to a television format, you're a TV movie... If it's a good show -- deserve an Emmy, but not an Oscar."
The director's position is notable in that Spielberg appeared on stage at the Apple TV+ announcement, touting his reboot of the anthology series "Amazing Stories." While most of Apple's content is expected to adopt a TV format, some movies will be included as well, a few of which could theoretically be up for Oscars.
In fact Apple is reportedly assembling a team to put content in front of both Emmy and Oscar voters. Though fans and critics sometimes debate the legitimacy of those awards, they're nevertheless a mark of prestige -- particularly for streaming services needing to convince people to subscribe.
That could be even more crucial for Apple, which isn't expected to have much if any third-party content, though that could change by the time Apple TV+ launches this fall.
Comments
I'm no lawyer by any means, but a lawyer acquaintance of mine who's represented quite a few companies in alleged Sherman violations, claims that the Sherman Anti-Trust act is worded such that the government can object to just about any business practice that it wants to. And define as "business practice" many things that most people would scratch their heads at.
EDIT: My grandson's baseball team members all got trophies, seems the fair way to do things now according to whoever.
Netflix (and Apple presumably) are arguing that their productions are films.
The distinction may have to do with advertising. It's all arcane to me!
Probably what should happen, federal meddling aside, is to use the inverse of the Emmy rule for eligibility for eligibility for an Oscar: 70 theatrical play dates...number of days in theater x number of theaters. 70 or under = Emmy. 71+ you get an Oscar.
I'm an Academy member.
1. No one is being "excluded." The proposed rule change is about fairness. Netflix and services that are primarily about streaming have an unfair advantage over traditional film studios because the streamed films are potentially seen early by millions of viewers in their homes, whereas traditional studios' films are first shown in theaters before eventually streaming later. (In fact to be eligible for an Oscar, a film must be shown in a commercial theater for at least one week.)
The proposed change would simply require that Netflix, et al, show their films in theaters only (at first), just like other movie studios. It merely evens the playing field.
2. The Justice Department has literally NO jurisdiction here, and they know it (which is why this letter was leaked, instead of published by the government, which is the norm).
Justice Department officials are reportedly mortified that they've been required to stoop to such petty nonsense. This laughable "warning" was clearly requested by the president, who has on numerous occasions attempted to "stick it" to companies or organizations with whom he has a personal grudge.
That said, who gives a shit about the Academy and the oscars anyway? Maybe it once meant something It’s like a royal celebration of overindulgement, but with no taste.
Oprah: "YOU get an Oscar, and YOU get an Oscar, and YOU get an Oscar..."