Rational Action

I write editorials because I believe, perhaps incorrectly, that in doing so I can influence policy. Before this semester, having written three of them, there was just about no evidence that my writing had effected much change anywhere. But today I picked up a copy of the Spectator to find this article on the front cover:

Student Clubs Stung by Film Copyrights
Stricter Enforcement Jacks Up Price of Movie Screenings; Groups Seek Relief

New enforcement of the copyright law protecting public movie screenings will cost Columbia clubs hundreds of dollars per showing this semester. As student groups are left grappling with preexisting budgets to accommodate new fees, there has still been no agreement on a solution to alleviate the costs.

Wahoo! They noticed! (Confused? I recently wrote two op eds about this copyright policy, one explaining how the new situation was inefficient, the other outlining a solution in which clubs cut a special deal with the MPAA to license movies cheaply.)

You might be thinking, “Who cares if they reported on something you said was a problem. What really matters is solving the problem, and you haven’t had any influence there.” Wrong! It turns out that Stanley Tan, who runs the Activites Board of Columbia, is considering the “collective bargaining” solution just like the one that I outlined in my editorial:

[Tan says,] “In the short run, ABC is willing to provide funding on a case-by-case basis. In the medium run, we’re working on whether we can get a collective bargaining deal, which means that SDA and ABC will negotiate for all clubs at Columbia with one of the [distribution] companies, but this is very premature.�

And more importantly, this wouldn’t be the first time a student group tried to cut a deal with a the movie industry:

Ferris Reel screens films in Lerner Cinema on Thursday nights and has been operating under the copyright rule for many years. Snow said the group arranged a deal with Swank Motion Pictures, a big distribution company, so that renting 6 reels cost them $4,000 instead of $7,000.

The group’s needs are slightly different from that of the average culture club because they are renting the reels, not simply purchasing public performance licenses. But Snow thinks Columbia could arrange a similar deal on behalf of its clubs.

“I would like to see the University or SDA step up to strike a deal with the distribution companies,� she said.

Fantastic!

The Spectator has published my second editoral on the movie screening fiasco. Again, I didn’t choose the title, and again, they gave me a nifty picture!

Copyright Wars: Looking for a Solution In yesterday’s submission, I explained how Columbia’s decision to require performance licenses for public screenings of movies was harmful to everyone. Because movie distributors charge so much money for these licenses, few clubs will screen films on campus, destroying a vital element of campus life. Since clubs will acquire so few licenses, it is hard to see the movie distributors making much of a profit themselves. This outcome benefits no one, and we can do much better. Read on…