It was great that the Sheffield organizers invited James Boyle and Jennifer Jenkins from Duke University Law and authors of Bound by Law? to speak at an Industry Session, but it was problematic because a.) UK law and US law differ and Boyle and Jenkins hadn’t prepared even an addendum to help the European filmmakers understand where US and UK law are similar, and b.) they didn’t address how filmmakers here in the US articulated their rights through the Documentary Filmmakers’ Statement of Best Practices in Fair Use and the process by which they lobbied business affairs and insurers to accept their findings.

They discussed Bound by Law? which is a great tool for understanding law as it applies to filmmaking, but what I think UK filmmakers need an organization that will step up to the plate, as the Center for Social Media did, to help filmmakers articulate fair dealing as it applies to working in the UK and to garner support among the various organizations that support filmmakers. I heard over and over at screenings that films had to be cut down because makers couldn’t afford the rights. What a shame for culture in the UK.

I noticed, in my Google seach, that there was definitely an entry that matched my query. I find a press release, that states in part:

“We are thrilled to be involved with this incredible movie franchise that has engaged the imagination of our core consumers – kids and their parents in fun-loving households who enjoy our products as well,” said Tim Zimmer, vice president, Sara Lee Fresh Bakery. “As families eagerly anticipate the movie’s release, we are integrating our brand into the movie at every imaginable consumer touch point in a way that is unprecedented for a bread brand.” Read the press release>>

In the release, I see the URL of the ad campaign (not very friendly considering it didn’t come up in early Google search results), I click on it. Maybe my embeddable video will be there? Nope, but I did find what seems to be a link to “movie clips” of which the Sara Lee “Dance With Joy” commercial was included. After a very slow flyout graphic (I don’t know anyone with a Sidekick anymore, even Karina has an iPhone), you can watch the commercial. That is, if you have enough of an attention span to find it, which I nearly don’t. I only found it because I figured I should exhaust all options if I was going to write about it (I had some loading issues with the Flash as well).

I think the company that designed the website doesn’t know enough about website users and what they do online. But also, for filmmakers, consider your product placements carefully. A silly ad campaign makes the film look silly–probably the point in this case–whatever message you are trying to achieve, your product placement should be part of the plan. Oh, and there were no exportable images for me to illustrate this post and subliminally advertise to you. Sorry.

Independent filmmakers are known for taking risks with their art, but many are wary of digital distribution. Now, as perceptions shift, they’re going online in growing numbers. Thursday, “Haze,” a film making its debut at the Hamptons International Film Festival in New York, also got a wide release on the Web through SnagFilms.com, a service that lets anyone host the movie for free on their own Web page. Other full-length films are following a similar path with online-only premieres on iTunes and video hubs such as Hulu.

Behind the shift: a glut of movies jockeying for theater screens. Last year 603 feature films were released in the United States, a 29% increase from 2002, according to the Motion Picture Association of America. Meanwhile, the once-bullish market for movies with budgets under $15 million recently lost some of its core buyers. For instance, Time Warner and Paramount have either closed or scaled back three of their specialty divisions. Read the entire article>>

Hundreds of millions of people around the world were able to engage and experience the Olympics online, many of whom never had never had the opportunity to see the Games on their televisions. All of this took place while NBC, the broadcaster that owned the rights to the Olympics in the US, effectively used our Video ID technology to monitor and quickly block copyrighted Olympic content uploaded to the site.

Later, he expands on the details of this technology:

From the very beginning, we’ve been committed to working with content owners to make sure YouTube remains a platform for distribution, not unauthorized uploads. In fact, over 300 media companies, including NBC, RAI, Formula One, the Olympics and Lionsgate are using innovative products like YouTube’s Video Identification tool to better manage their presence on our site. Along with the other tools in our Content management system, Video ID helps content owners decide whether to block, promote, or even generate revenue from their content. Read the entire speech on TechCruch>>

This kind of technology puts control into the corporate hands to decide what you can and cannot upload. I’m thinking that whether or not a content producer has a fair use claim for something they want to show, it could be pulled by a corporate cog because it contains their material. There is no judgement involved. There are a couple of interesting pieces from The Center for Social Media on this issue, A Case of Selective Censorship and Unauthorized: The Copyright Conundrum in Participatory Video.

The panel thought that Brokaw’s decision not to fact-check the candidates or challenge their spin was a problem: 83% of Obama supporters and 75% of McCain supporters wanted to see more challenging follow-up questions from the moderator. Read the press release>>

Following on the heels of that report, I received today another disconcerting tip of spin at work:

Evil Twin Booking, a West Philly-based talent agency, has been inundated with e-mails and phone calls related to its representation of former Weather Underground radical Bill Ayers. Gov. Sarah Palin has recently ramped up criticism of Sen. Barack Obama’s ties to Ayers, who, along with his wife, Bernardine Dohrn, and other members of the radical group bombed various government buildings in the ’70s. Read the entire post>>

My commentary: If we ever need a media literate nation, it is now.

But the thing I’m most excited about is that Hope was able to get the issue of net neutrality into indieWIRE! Brian Newman, CEO of the Tribeca Film Institute, asked me to start writing this blog many moons ago as a way to share information about critical policy and technology issues that impact filmmakers. The idea being that without AIVF, which had long served as an advocacy arm for the film community, we had better at least be talking about the issues. But I’ve felt like I’m a party of one in talking about those issues here. I’ve received few comments or interest from the film community about an issue that is of vital importance: net neutrality.

All signs keep pointing to distribution via the web to be where all the lanes will converge, yet big media companies are quietly working to limit our access to the net, and thus, whatever we want to see. If they control the pipeline into your home, they have the capacity to control what you can watch, or at least make it very expensive. But, don’t take my word for it. Hope writes:

We have never had this sort opportunity before and the great tragedy is that just as we are learning what it means, forces are vying to take it away from us. The principal that all information, all creators, all audiences should be treated equally within the structure that is the Internet is popularly referred to as Net Neutrality. The Telecos, the Cable Companies, and their great ally, the Hollywood Motion Picture Studios and the MPAA are now trying to end that equality. And with it you will lose the opportunity to be TRULY FREE FILMMAKERS. But they are not going to succeed because we are going to band together and organize, we are going to save the Internet, and keep equal access for all. Read Ted Hope’s comments>>

One thing that continues to strike me is the supposed “glut” of content. But again, I walked out of the Blockbuster empty handed last night. It seemed that every 3rd “new release” was a low-budget hack horror film (I love horror, but have been burned too many times by such derivative fare). So, I checked out the listings on my parents’ pay-per-view service. Again, abysmal selection. I couldn’t find a single film I wanted to watch.

The problem is not the glut of content. It’s the stupidity of the old-guard in getting that new content to a consumer like me with $5 burning a hole in my pocket.

From Block’s comments here on Resources:

It doesn’t solve the problem that are inherent in most of the independent docs and fiction features. They are not commercial. People don’t want to see most of them. They have no hooks to use in marketing them. It’s not old v new but rather commercial v non-commercial v marginally commercial.

Anthony Kaufman also believes, from his research, that it is “important to temper some of the enthusiasm for the ‘New World’ of distribution.” His reasoning is due to the same idea that Block is getting at, that successful sales require a large cash outlay (e.g. theatrical release):

To sum up briefly, what’s seemingly astonishing about VOD is Sehring’s claim that the gross dollar revenue ratio from VOD to theatrical is 2 to 1. That means a film such as “This is England,” for example, which made about $350,000 in theaters made another $700,000 on VOD.

It’s true that with my festival programmer hat on, I’ve seen a ton of films that I never saw anything about again. And sometimes they were even decent! But I’d suggest that looking to IFC Films to intimate what might happen with a film that isn’t picked up by them is exactly where Broderick is working. There are films that are having success on the festival circuit, building their audiences online and making money selling their DVDs. How about Todd Sklar with Box Elder or David Redmon and Ashley Sabin with Made in China and Kamp Katrina? Low overhead, a willingness to roll up their sleeves and market themselves, and movies that are made inexpensively are the keys to their ability to keep making movies.

We can’t talk about two different markets as though they are the same. Man on Wire is a great example of a mass market success, not a niche success model.

Part I Here.

Part II Here.

Or download a PDF from Broderick’s website.

Here are some of Broderick’s take-away tips about how you should consider approaching distribution:

Be strategic - In the Old World, most filmmakers have reactions not strategies. They chose the best offer from those they receive. It is essential to be proactive in the New World. You need a strategy to navigate it successfully.

Think long term - Be clear about your goals. Are you creating a business around a group of films with common content? Are you building a career as an artist with a core personal audience?

Stay flexible - Implement your strategy stage by stage and modify it as you go. You learn valuable information in every stage that will enable you to improve your plan for the next stage.

Split rights - Retain overall control of your distribution. Take a hybrid approach, dividing certain rights among distributors and retaining the right to do direct sales.

Target audiences - Research, test, and refine your approach to core audiences. Understand who is most responsive to your films, and how to reach them most effectively.

Find partners - Look for national nonprofits, websites, sponsors, and distributors to team up with to bring your film to their members, subscribers, and customers.

Build a team - Find teammates who can help with the website, outreach, fulfillment, theatrical, domestic sales, and foreign sales.

Harness the internet - Use your website to build awareness, develop a mailing list, attract user-contributed content, and make direct sales. Design a compelling site that will have a life of its own.

Be creative - Avoid formulaic distribution ruts. Apply the same creativity to distribution as production. It is often harder to bring a movie into the world than to produce it. An innovative approach to distribution can make all the difference.

Make distribution happen - Design a distribution strategy and find the distributors, partners, and teammates to help you implement it.

From what we understand, Samuel George, Andrew’s translator, and another man who was detained with him are returning to the State Security Service (SSS) tomorrow.  We hope that they will be fully cleared then.  International journalism relies on the work of such trusted friends as Samuel, and we ask you to check in tomorrow to learn of their status.  If there’s more we need to do to help them, we will be the first to let you know.

And after Andrew has had a few moments to recover from this experience, check back here to learn more about his experiences in detention and the broader issues of press freedom in Nigeria, Africa, and elsewhere, as well as to see excerpts of his upcoming film, Delta Boys.

The workshop takes place as part of the PaleyDocFest08, which has a great looking program, including one of the former winners of the pitch contest, Whatever It Takes by Christopher Wong (still from the film, upper right) as a work-in-progress. Good luck!