A faction of the Screen Actors Guild yesterday staged a protest outside the US Department of Justice office in Los Angeles, calling for an investigation of alleged antitrust law breaches by the large film studios.
Actor Scott Wilson, a member of the "Membership First" faction and one of the organisers of the protest, which is not an official SAG action, says that the large conglomerates that finance, distribute and exhibit films "have gained unchecked control over the entertainment industry."
According to fellow SAG member Arlyn Miller, although studios no longer own cinemas, conflicts of interest occur because they own TV and cable networks, and are entering the internet broadcast market through deals with internet companies that bypass collective bargaining agreements with actors.
Additionally, Miller says the studios have publicly proclaimed their intention of getting rid of residual payments, "the life blood of actors", along with an end to the SAG rule that members cannot do non-union productions.
Residuals are royalty payments that actors obtain from DVD sales or each time a TV programme is aired.
"They are denying the professionals of the Screen Actors Guild below star level a fair participation in the rewards of this very lucrative business," Wilson says. "We call on the Department of Justice to investigate the antitrust implications of these corporations that have abused their market power to disadvantage the entire creative community."
A spokesman for the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP) says the allegations are without merit – that multi-employer bargaining is legal and exempt from antitrust laws. "Multi-employer bargaining has greatly benefited SAG members and their union because the only alternative would be separate negotiations with each of the more than 300 producers that are signatory to the contract."
SAG and the studios are at an impasse over the expiration of the union's feature-primetime contract, with SAG insisting on a two-year deal and the studios, represented by the AMPTP, pushing for a three-year term. Pay is also an issue – the AMPTP says its offer is generous given the current economic climate, but Membership First is pushing to reject it in the hopes of improving the deal.
Jeff Cohen at Cohen & Gardner LLP in Beverly Hills says although the previous cases against studios were successful, the protest on antitrust grounds is more of a sign of frustration from within the union over the contract dispute than a credible complaint. "It will be very difficult to make an antitrust case out of this," he says.
There is a history of antitrust enforcement in Hollywood. In 1948, the US Supreme Court found that studio ownership of cinema chains was in violation of antitrust laws and forced the studios to divest the chains.
Then, in a ‘conflict of interest' case in the 1960s, the Department of Justice under Robert Kennedy prevented the head of the MCA talent agency, Lew Wasserman, from owning both the agency and the Universal film studio, saying that this would breach antitrust laws. Wasserman was forced to dissolve MCA in order to acquire Universal.
Image
