Suchergebnisse

Die Arbeit ist mit den ökonomischen Auswirkungen von Regulierungen, die für die deutsche Filmwirtschaft relevant sind, befasst. Es werden die ökonomischen Effekte dreier Regulierungsfelder, die in der öffentlichen Debatte diskutiert werden, betrachtet. Diese sind: Das deutsche Filmförderungsgesetz (FFG), das Urheberrechtsgesetz (UrhG) und der Rundfunkstaatsvertrag (RStV). Im Zentrum der Analyse steht die Frage, wie die jeweiligen Regulierungen die ökonomische Effizienz beeinflussen. Darüber hinaus werden wesentliche institutionelle und marktliche Charakteristika der deutschen Filmwirtschaft betrachtet. Teile der Untersuchung sind in eine breit angelegte Regressionsanalyse über die Determinanten des Erfolges deutscher Kinofilme eingebettet. Die Arbeit zeigt, dass die betrachteten Regulierungen im Allgemeinen negative Auswirkungen auf die ökonomische Effizienz haben. ; This work deals with the economic impact of regulations on the German film industry, focusing in particular on the effects of three pieces of legislation central to Germany's public debate on film politics. The legislation considered is the Film Act (Filmförderungsgesetz - FFG), the amendments to the Copyright Law (Urheberrechtsgesetz - UrhG), and the Inter-State Agreement on Broadcasting (Rundfunkstaatsvertrag - RStV). The inquiry examines how these statutes affect economic efficiency. In addition, major market and institutional characteristics of the German motion picture industry are studied. The analysis is partly embedded in a broadly disposed regression analysis of the determinants of performance of German movies in the theatrical market. The work indicates that the regulations considered generally detract from economic efficiency.

Thesis (PH. D.)--University of Pennsylvania, 1922. ; Mode of access: Internet.

Description based on: Aug. 6, 1982; title from caption. ; 2 issues published in 1981. ; Each issue supersedes previous issue. ; Mode of access: Internet.

Mimeographed. ; "16mm sound films selected and recommended by an Office of Education Advisory Committee."--T.p. ; Mode of access: Internet. ; OSU's copy 1 gift of John A. Flory.

The purpose of South Carolina motion picture incentives is to bring economic benefit to the State of South Carolina by using South Carolina as a site for film and television production, promoting the hiring of South Carolina residents as staff, cast, and crew, and promoting the purchase of supplies and services from South Carolina companies.

The purpose of South Carolina motion picture incentives is to bring economic benefit to the State of South Carolina by using South Carolina as a site for film and television production, promoting the hiring of South Carolina residents as staff, cast, and crew, and promoting the purchase of supplies and services from South Carolina companies.

The purpose of South Carolina motion picture incentives is to bring economic benefit to the State of South Carolina by using South Carolina as a site for film and television production, promoting the hiring of South Carolina residents as staff, cast, and crew, and promoting the purchase of supplies and services from South Carolina companies.

The purpose of South Carolina motion picture incentives is to bring economic benefit to the State of South Carolina by using South Carolina as a site for film and television production, promoting the hiring of South Carolina residents as staff, cast, and crew, and promoting the purchase of supplies and services from South Carolina companies.

A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE USDA MOTION PICTURE SERVICE TO 1943 The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) began producing films in the early 1900s and continued for decades. Millions saw these films in a wide variety of venues, including public schools, colleges and universities, civic meeting halls, libraries, church halls, and even open fields. Over the period of several decades, from the silent-movie era through the 1950s, the USDA was a significant government filmmaking organization, touting itself to be not only the first government agency to organize a filmmaking division but also the most prolific. The USDA motion picture branch was internationally respected, and the distribution of its films was high for US government institutions, particularly in the 1920s and 1930s. The USDA showed its films practically anywhere extension workers or others could gather a small group or a large crowd. The role of the films varied,.

"U.S. Government Printing Office: 1944 622504"--P. 25. ; Cover title. ; Mode of access: Internet.

The nineteenth century culminated in a wealth of scientific inventiveness which resulted in a complete and fundamental change in social life within the following fifty years. The more widespread use of telegraphy, the expansion of the telephone service, the increased application of electricity and the invention of the motor car, the sudden appearance and phenomenal development of the cinema, and finally the invention and speedy public utilisation of the aeroplane and the wireless have combined to obliterate (except in trivial instances such as its "naughtiness") appreciation of the atmosphere of the period in which motion pictures first appeared. In South Africa, a remarkable degree of self-reliance was practiced by the populations of comparatively isolated towns during the nineties. Despite the slowness of communication, the laboriousness of travel and the leisurely tempo of life in general, despite every adverse circumstance, people construed out or their immediate surroundings a cultural life far more enterprising than that produced by favourable modern conditions.

Mode of access: Internet. ; OSU's copy 1 gift of John A. Flory.

"LCD-78-113." ; "B-185085." ; Cover title. ; Mode of access: Internet.

Academic, trade, and popular publications commonly assert that 80 percent of motion pictures fail to make a net profit, suggesting also that the main players of the motion picture industry operate in highly volatile market conditions. More importantly, major film companies use this argument to negotiate for better terms with their production and distribution partners, to lobby for stricter copyright protections, and to argue in favor of media conglomeration as a hedge against adverse market conditions. This article disputes these assertions by calculating the full range of income that major motion pictures derive from their primary and secondary markets. It demonstrates that a large share of studio films are ultimately profitable, therefore challenging the arguments that conglomerates make with industry partners and government policy makers. ; (VLID)1566703

A letter report issued by the General Accounting Office with an abstract that begins "The Digital Millennium Copyright Act was enacted to ensure that members of actors', directors', and writers' unions were paid residuals when films were reused in television and video. GAO's analysis of motion picture industry data found that, in the three years leading up to the 1998 legislation, at most, about 2 percent of the $1.7 billion in residuals owed went unpaid. The unpaid residuals accrued when production companies did not require distributors to pay residuals upon reuse of the film. In reviewing films made under contract with an actors' union between 1996 and 1998, GAO found 771 films for which residuals had not been paid or obligations assumed. About 87 percent of these films were low-budget productions costing less than $2 million. Because these low-budget films typically generate little in the way of earnings on which residuals are based, the amount of lost residuals is relatively small. Although there has been little impact on the motion picture industry so far, the legislation could affect the profitability of low-budget films. The payment of previously unpaid residuals could increase the production and distribution costs of low-budget films, thereby diminishing the profits. However, even if the legislation caused some low-budget films to become unprofitable, gross revenues in the motion picture industry would fall by less than 2 percent. Although the legislation's impact on the overall motion picture industry may be small, some individuals working on low-budget films could experience substantial losses."