Comments

Coursedesign wrote on 12/13/2005, 3:50 PM
Certainly not. If you are doing your own hosting, no content issue (unless your ISP has rules which happens).

If you are hosting with somebody else, they are likely to have rules.

There isn't much government regulation of the Internet yet (except in China of course).

The ratings on TV, etc. use a different format, and the FCC is seeking to make this more explicit.
p@mast3rs wrote on 12/13/2005, 4:47 PM
Ok, so lets say someone directs a film with foul language, drug use, and violence. Is thee anything that requires them to divulge that to the customer/viewer? I have noticed some directors are having a hard time getting R ratings for their flicks and it just seems like another avenue to use the net for distribution especially for the stuff that would be deemed R rated in the real world.

Much thanks for the answer.
Bob Greaves wrote on 12/13/2005, 4:59 PM
Regardless of the hassle this can be to a film maker, as a customer purchasing films I would like to have a sense of what I might expect before I buy. I would not be happy at all if I bought an interesting title and found it to be full of unmentioned profanity and nudity.
Jay Gladwell wrote on 12/13/2005, 5:58 PM

Everything I have seen on the Internet in the way of objectionable videos has had some kind of warning. As was said above, it would be to the owner's advantage to warn viewers thereby avoiding any ugly situations.

Remember, "Do unto others..." you can't go wrong!

Merry Christmas!


busterkeaton wrote on 12/13/2005, 6:06 PM
The MPAA ratings system is essentially a compromise between Hollywood and Washington. It represent a way of guaranteeing more open expression than what was allowed in films before 1968 which a segment of the audience wants with a way of protecting or informing the segment of the audience who doesn't want to see that kind of material or doesn't want their children to see that. It's a form of an industry policing themselves so the government won't step in. The government has just told baseball to police steriod use in the same way. It's basically a form of subtle threat. However it is not a law. It's not a perfect system, but it gives consumers a good general idea and is generally accepted by the moviegoing public.


You can make any film you want and exhibit it in any theater that will take it and the law can not do anything to you. [There are, of course, forms of speech (or films) that are illegal--slander, libel, threats, obscenity, child exploitation, etc, but that's outside this issue.] The reason filmmakers fight to get their film down to an R or PG-13 rating is a matter of economics and not legality. Many newspapers will not take advertising for an film that is rated X or now NC-17 regardless of quality, morality, etc, etc, and many theaters chains would do the same. (For example, I could think of a serious, non-exploitation movie about the Iraq war from many different political/moral viewpoints that would get an NC-17 rating for violence.) It saves them from having to make the choice, of being responsible for the decision. It's a hard and fast rule, you don't get the R ratings, we don't do business with you. You can get an NC-17 or unrated movie distributed theatrically, but you cut down your options. I believe Blockbuster still won't distribute NC-17 films. On smaller indie movies this isn't a problem because you were never going to play on 2,000 screens anyway, but for larger, more expensive movies it becomes an issue. You get less press during your theatrical run which affects cable and video sales and you cut yourself out of large retail distribution channels too. So it's economics.

However movies that played with R ratings in theaters are routinely released unrated on DVD because it's not against the law.
Many theater chains enforce the MPAA ratings as if they were law. For example, you may need to show a government ID, if you want to see an R or NC-17 movie. That is their right as a private business. They could also as a private business have a multiplex that had G movies in one room and Adult movies in another room, as long as those under 18 or 21 were kept out. It would be a terrible business decision, but in a lot of places it would be legal.

On the internet, it would be even more wide open. You can have any disclaimer or lack of disclaimer you want. (You can't use the MPAA ratings because they are copyrighted I believe and you must submit a film for review to use their logos.) As folks have pointed out, if you control your distribution/hosting, you're have the freedom to do as you wish. If not, your hosting service can drop you for any reason you wish. (Try making a film where characters speak the texts of Scientology and see if you hosts company is willing to put with the hassle.)

It is generally in your interest to have a disclaimer/informative preamble if you think some people will find your content objectionable or would find it objectionable for their kids.
p@mast3rs wrote on 12/13/2005, 6:08 PM
I totally agree with the warnings and all. Im just trying to figure out the law/rules to internet distribution as opposed to theatres/tv/etc...

Definitely not at any point of releasing anything but that mariposaHD link I posted got me thinking about what happens when more indies release exclusively through the web and all of sudden, the MPAA really has no control on any sort of ratings which I assume they collect a fee for viewing and assigning a rating correct?
busterkeaton wrote on 12/13/2005, 6:26 PM
You should be able to show anything that is legal if you host it.
You may have to find out what your locality (or the locality of where the server is) considers legal. Given the availability of what's out there on the net you probably have great leeway. Although, I bet the big "adult" sites are very, very familiar with what's legal and what's not and what they have to do to have their t's crossed and their i's dotted.

I have seen a lot independent films, foreign films or documentaries theatrically that did not go the ratings board. Sometimes this is because they don't want the hassle or expense or they thought they would lose or even just because it was unneccessary--I saw a movie called
Decasia that was entirely composed of clips of decaying films found in various archives. It's tiny, little experimental documentary. If I were the filmmaker I wouldn't bother having it rated.
filmy wrote on 12/14/2005, 9:23 AM
The MPAA will take any film and rate it as long as you pay to have it done. It is a risk to not have it rated if you ever plan on it going beyond the film fest, home video, internet route. We had to have one film rated because HBO would refuse to air it had it not been rated, but than came the after affects of that as well. Once you have the MPAA rate a film you are not supposed to ever recut it without re-submitting. also you are supposed to submit any and all promo material (including print ads, radio ads, internet ads, vide and DVD covers and so on) to the MPAA for approval. If you do not the MPAA threatens to take away your rating. We layed out and had the Video sleeve printed up and than sent it off to the MPAA with the street date of the film and they threated us because we did not submit the artwork to them for aprroval before it was done. (because the MPPA ratings are "owned" byt the MPAA they need to aprrove things like content and placement of their logo) Same goes for radio spots that were cut for a syndicated radio show, because the host had to voice over "This film has been rated "R" the MPAA has to "aprrove" the script.

Keep in mind that in the US there were certian government set guidlines for the longest time. I have a rather insiteful book from the 40's that outline the regualtions at the time. The MPAA system of ratings did not start until the late 60's and they had ratings like "M" and "GP" at the time. "M" sort of came over to "R" or "PG" and "GP", as near as I can figure for some of the old trailers I have, meant "General Patronage" which was somewhere between "G" and "PG". My mother always talked about going to see a Jane Russel film when it came out and it was rated "C" meaning the same a "X" is now.

Having said that - more and more people have tried to come up with alternatives to the MPAA ratings system. One of the ones that somewhat caught on in the 90's when video rentals really were hitting big buisiness is F.A.B. They bill themselves as the "only "official" rating system other than the MPAA". Like the MPAA they use letter ratings, "C", "F", "PD", "PD-M", "EM" and "AO". I have an issue with them only because some of the films I have worked on have gotten insane ratings - for example one film aimed at young kids (Maybe 5 - 13) that I directed got a "PD-M" rating, which would be equal to a PG-13 MPAA rating. Another film that I produced got a "EM" rating which is more like, I dunno - somewhere between a PG-13 and an R in MPAA land. The film is almost a joke because it was a first time directort who was trying to make a horror film...it is not scary, it is almost no blood in it, no foul language at all, no nudity and really bad special effects and yet it got the same rating as another film that has nudity, lots of blood and lots of foul language. So I can't say it is any more "fair" than the MPAA, but it is cheaper.

There are also others such as P.S.V which uses a color coded system and Kids in Mind which uses a number based system.

But the quesiton was specific to the internet - and while any of these can be used for the internet there has actually been a rating system in place for many years...not so much for films on the internet but for websites as a whole and for indvidual pages of websites. I use this for websites and it is more of a code based thing that no more and more people are using, and along with filters this is sort of the V-Chip of the internet. It is the ICRA. For example this site here - the sonymediasoftware/forums site gets this: Sorry, this site gets a red light. It either has no ICRA labels at all or only has ICRA labels with errors. But so do the Walt Disney, Nickeloden and Nick Jr sites. This is just something up to the webdesigner to put in place, and clealry not a lot of big names are doing it. There is also Safe Surf which you may want to check out.