my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » Justice Dept vs. Cinemark/RAVE

Author Topic: Justice Dept vs. Cinemark/RAVE Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 05-21-2013 05:58 PM                        According to the Louisville newspaper, the Courier Journal: "Cinemark will have to sell Stoneybrook if it buys Rave. Cinemark will have 90 days to sell off one theatre each in Kentucky , New jersey, and Texas." Article dated May 21, 2013. Paramount Consent Decree is the basis of law for antitrust in the entertainment industry. Louis  |  IP: Logged Martin McCaffery Film God Posts: 2481 From: Montgomery, AL Registered: Jun 99 posted 05-21-2013 06:20 PM                        Wow. Who brought that to the Gov't's attention?  |  IP: Logged Mitchell Dvoskin Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1869 From: West Milford, NJ, USA Registered: Jan 2001 posted 05-22-2013 10:20 AM                     > Paramount Consent Decree is the basis of law for antitrust in the entertainment industry. I am confused. It is my understanding that the Paramount Consent Decree, like all consent decrees, applies only to the parties that agreed to them. A consent decree is not a law or a court judgement, it is an agreement between parties to terms that will end a court action. Neither Cinemark nor Rave is a party to the Paramount Consent Decree, so they should not subject to them. Further, the Paramount consent decree covered movie studios owning theatres and theatre circuits owning studios. It would not relate to this merger in any event. This seems to be a straight anti-trust issue, where the merged company would control all the venues in a given market.  |  IP: Logged Chris Slycord Film God Posts: 2986 From: 퍼항시, 경상푹도, South Korea Registered: Mar 2007 posted 05-22-2013 03:21 PM                     quote: Mitchell Dvoskin This seems to be a straight anti-trust issue, where the merged company would control all the venues in a given market. Or at least in a given portion/zone of a market.  |  IP: Logged Louis Bornwasser Film God Posts: 4441 From: prospect ky usa Registered: Mar 2005 posted 05-22-2013 06:23 PM                        There is a percentage rule, (value unknown to me) that if you exceed, you will sell off to get under. In Cincinnati, the Rave purchase of National Amusements put them over. National retained Showcase Cinemas, Springdale. Louis  |  IP: Logged Andrew Thomas Master Film Handler Posts: 273 From: Pearland, TX, USA Registered: Jun 2012 posted 05-22-2013 09:05 PM                     quote: Mitchell Dvoskin I am confused. It is my understanding that the Paramount Consent Decree, like all consent decrees, applies only to the parties that agreed to them. A consent decree is not a law or a court judgement, it is an agreement between parties to terms that will end a court action. Neither Cinemark nor Rave is a party to the Paramount Consent Decree, so they should not subject to them. Further, the Paramount consent decree covered movie studios owning theatres and theatre circuits owning studios. It would not relate to this merger in any event The consent decree is the MODEL for how the courts have handled anti-trust issues with regard to cinemas. It's not that these other cinemas are beholden to the Paramount consent decree, it is just that the "stare decisis" by which the courts have typically abided comes largely out of the Paramount case.  |  IP: Logged Mitchell Dvoskin Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1869 From: West Milford, NJ, USA Registered: Jan 2001 posted 05-23-2013 09:28 AM                     The business has changed so much since the 1950's that the consent decrees no longer have much relevance. In fact, the Justice Department has been letting signatories out of the decrees upon request, as they did for Sony/Columbia Pictures so that they could buy Cineplex Odeon (USA), and again for Loews Theatres so they could be acquired by Sony Theatres, which was subsequently renamed back to Loews Theatres before AMC acquired them. The point being that the consent decrees were the product of a time when most theatres were single screen and only played films of their respective studios, denying independents a venue for their product. Today, with most locations having more screens than there are studios, this is no longer the case.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.