By Robert Goldrich
It’s definitely a panel discussion we’d like to see develop in time for next year’s Association of Film Commissioners International (AFCI) Locations Trade Show. In our coverage of the 2005 Show last month (SHOOT, 4/22, p. 1), there was a session–sponsored in part by the AFCI prior to the start of Locations–designed to address how to best take advantage of filming incentives. That discussion focused primarily on benefits available to features and TV programs, which is understandable given what’s typically been the nature of anti-runaway legislation.
However, AFCI president Pat Swinney Kaufman–executive director and deputy commissioner of the New York State Governor’s Office For Motion Picture and Television Development–noted that by this time next year, it might make sense to schedule a panel discussion about how to capitalize on spotmaking incentives since momentum as of late seems to be building on that legislative front. “I’m making a mental note to consider putting that discussion on next year’s [AFCI Locations] agenda,” said Kaufman.
SHOOT has recently reported on filming incentive prospects for commercials in California (SHOOT, 3/11, p. 1) and New York (SHOOT, 4/8, p. 1). The latter proposal has taken the form of bills in the New York State Senate and Assembly (SHOOT, 4/22, p. 1). No measure has yet been introduced in California but word is that the administration of Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-CA) intends to push a major anti-runaway bill that will cover features, TV and spots.
While there are still significant hurdles to be cleared in order for these incentives to become reality in California and New York, clearly there’s been substantive high-powered support for lensing-related reform that is inclusive of commercials. Furthermore, Illinois is in the second year of its 25 percent wage tax credit initiative, which encompasses theatrical motion pictures, TV shows, spots and branded content. And slated to firmly take hold on July 1 is Los Angeles City business tax reform, which will benefit small and medium-sized production houses–both California-based and from out of state–that film in Los Angeles. Many of these shops are primarily involved in spotmaking (SHOOT, 11/26/04, p. 1).
At the same time, operating somewhat under the industry radar are anti-runaway measures in states outside the so-called major markets. Several of these surfaced as SHOOT made its rounds through film commission booths at the AFCI Locations event, including Georgia and South Carolina. There’s also a possible pending initiative in Hawaii. In total, there are about a dozen states considering or about to institute filming incentives for which commercials could qualify.
Additionally, the proposed New York State tax credit for commercials is generally regarded as precedent setting for the advertising industry. While there have been feature/TV tax credits and other broad-based anti-runaway programs that have included spots, the New York State initiative is believed to be the first major standalone measure specifically designed for and exclusively targeting commercial production.
So we’ll keep tabs on the April ’06 calendar with our fingers crossed about that year’s Locations Trade Show schedule. Hopefully the session Kaufman envisions will come to fruition, spurred on by the creation of relevant, more easily accessible filming incentives for the spotmaking community.Google Opens Its Defense In Antitrust Case Alleging Monopoly Over Online Ad Technology
Google opened its defense against allegations that it holds an illegal monopoly on online advertising technology Friday with witness testimony saying the industry is vastly more complex and competitive than portrayed by the federal government.
"The industry has been exceptionally fluid over the last 18 years," said Scott Sheffer, a vice president for global partnerships at Google, the company's first witness at its antitrust trial in federal court in Alexandria.
The Justice Department and a coalition of states contend that Google built and maintained an illegal monopoly over the technology that facilitates the buying and selling of online ads seen by consumers.
Google counters that the government's case improperly focuses on a narrow type of online ads — essentially the rectangular ones that appear on the top and on the right-hand side of a webpage. In its opening statement, Google's lawyers said the Supreme Court has warned judges against taking action when dealing with rapidly emerging technology like what Sheffer described because of the risk of error or unintended consequences.
Google says defining the market so narrowly ignores the competition it faces from social media companies, Amazon, streaming TV providers and others who offer advertisers the means to reach online consumers.
Justice Department lawyers called witnesses to testify for two weeks before resting their case Friday afternoon, detailing the ways that automated ad exchanges conduct auctions in a matter of milliseconds to determine which ads are placed in front of which consumers and how much they cost.
The department contends the auctions are finessed in subtle ways that benefit Google to the exclusion of would-be competitors and in ways that prevent... Read More