{"title":"Dr. Strange Geo-Blocking Love Or: How The E.U. Learned To Stop Worrying About Cultural Integration And Love The TV Trade Barrier","authors":"Batia M. Zareh","doi":"10.7916/JLA.V41I2.2032","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The E.U. Antitrust Case that opened on July 23, 2015 against Sky U.K. and six American studios—Disney, Fox, NBCUniversal, Paramount Pictures, Sony and Warner Brothers—has its structural roots in the Television Without Frontiers Directive, which was vigorously debated as a last-minute standoff that threatened to derail the conclusion of the GATT Uruguay Round of trade negotiations and is still considered to be the cornerstone of the European Union’s audiovisual policy. This Article examines the unique history of a Cultural Exception with respect to audiovisual works as applied in trade negotiations to Hollywood film and television productions, and argues that, rather than violating E.U. regulations, the decades-old practice of regional contractual restrictions and geo-blocking is both consistent with and a direct result of the E.U.’s protectionist and paternalistic efforts to shield its individual member states’ local production entities from competition and its populations from a perceived and decidedly unwelcomed Svengali-like juggernaut of American cultural influence. The E.U. antitrust action is therefore in direct contravention to the spirit of the trade laws over which Hollywood studios were so stridently subjected to debating and is inconsistent with stated E.U. audiovisual norms. Abolishing regional access limitations will put the future of the E.U.’s various local distributors at risk, for the existing patchwork of distribution related rules impacting foreign property directly impacts American producers’ decisions regarding whether and how to continue to do business in the region. Thus, any attempt to implement the E.C.’s aspirational Digital Single Market 2020 target terms must be reconciled in light of the current political climate in Europe and global technological capabilities if the E.U. is to remain a relevant market at the forefront of the modern entertainment industry and continue to benefit from the uniquely privileged relationship it has enjoyed for nearly a century with its many Hollywood studio production partners.","PeriodicalId":222420,"journal":{"name":"Columbia Journal of Law and the Arts","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Columbia Journal of Law and the Arts","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7916/JLA.V41I2.2032","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
The E.U. Antitrust Case that opened on July 23, 2015 against Sky U.K. and six American studios—Disney, Fox, NBCUniversal, Paramount Pictures, Sony and Warner Brothers—has its structural roots in the Television Without Frontiers Directive, which was vigorously debated as a last-minute standoff that threatened to derail the conclusion of the GATT Uruguay Round of trade negotiations and is still considered to be the cornerstone of the European Union’s audiovisual policy. This Article examines the unique history of a Cultural Exception with respect to audiovisual works as applied in trade negotiations to Hollywood film and television productions, and argues that, rather than violating E.U. regulations, the decades-old practice of regional contractual restrictions and geo-blocking is both consistent with and a direct result of the E.U.’s protectionist and paternalistic efforts to shield its individual member states’ local production entities from competition and its populations from a perceived and decidedly unwelcomed Svengali-like juggernaut of American cultural influence. The E.U. antitrust action is therefore in direct contravention to the spirit of the trade laws over which Hollywood studios were so stridently subjected to debating and is inconsistent with stated E.U. audiovisual norms. Abolishing regional access limitations will put the future of the E.U.’s various local distributors at risk, for the existing patchwork of distribution related rules impacting foreign property directly impacts American producers’ decisions regarding whether and how to continue to do business in the region. Thus, any attempt to implement the E.C.’s aspirational Digital Single Market 2020 target terms must be reconciled in light of the current political climate in Europe and global technological capabilities if the E.U. is to remain a relevant market at the forefront of the modern entertainment industry and continue to benefit from the uniquely privileged relationship it has enjoyed for nearly a century with its many Hollywood studio production partners.
2015年7月23日,欧盟针对英国天空电视台(Sky U.K.)和六家美国电影公司(迪士尼、福克斯、nbc环球、派拉蒙影业、索尼和华纳兄弟)发起的反垄断案,其结构性根源在于《电视无国界指令》(Television Without borders Directive),该指令在最后一刻被激烈辩论,有可能破坏关总协定乌拉圭回合贸易谈判的结果,但仍被认为是欧盟视听政策的基石。本文考察了在好莱坞电影和电视制作的贸易谈判中应用的视听作品方面的文化例外的独特历史,并认为,与其违反欧盟的规定,几十年来,区域契约限制和地缘封锁的做法既符合欧盟的保护主义和家长式的努力,也直接导致了欧盟保护主义和家长式的努力,以保护其个别成员国的当地生产实体免受竞争,保护其人口免受美国文化影响的影响,这种影响是显而易见的,显然是不受欢迎的。因此,欧盟的反垄断行动直接违反了好莱坞电影公司激烈争论的贸易法精神,也不符合欧盟规定的视听规范。取消区域准入限制将使欧盟各种当地分销商的未来面临风险,因为现有的与分销相关的零散规则直接影响到美国生产商是否以及如何继续在该地区开展业务的决定。因此,如果欧盟想要保持其在现代娱乐产业前沿的相关市场地位,并继续受益于其与众多好莱坞制片合作伙伴近一个世纪以来所享有的独特特权关系,那么任何实施欧盟梦寐以求的2020年数字单一市场目标条款的尝试都必须与欧洲当前的政治气候和全球技术能力相协调。