Boxoffice-May.03.1952

m
ARBITRATION PLANS READY
FOR REGIONALS LATE IN MAY
After Approval They Go
To Justice Department
For an Official OK
NEW YORK—All indications point to
completion of an arbitration plan during
the week starting May 26. After that It
will be necessary to refer the plan to regional
exhibitor units for approval and to
send it to the E>epartment of Justice.
Justice department approval is necessary
because the plan will involve amendments
to the antitrust decrees.
Some of the conferees who attended the
four days of conferences—April 22-25—at the
Hotel Astor expressed the opinion that the
new arbitration system could be put into operation
with the opening of the new selling
season in the fall.
BASIS FOR OPTIMISM
This optimism was based on the remarkable
progress made during four days.
In that period it was agreed that the system
would be administered by a national
committee to consist of 12 members, three
each from Allied. TOA, distribution and one
each from ITOA. MMPTA and WTO, with
seven members constituting a quorum. Details
of the committee's work would be handled
by an executive secretary and whatever
staff he may consider necessary, with the
understanding that expenses will be held
down.
Adoption of this plan disposed of the suggestion
from some quarters that an outstanding
figure be hired to administer the
system.
The national committee, which probably
will have New York headquarters, will send
out forms and regulations for guidance of
local arbitration committees in exchange
areas, so that procedures will be uniform.
How many local committees will be set up
remains to be decided. It is not expected
that there will be committees in every exchange
area. While the Goddard consent decree
arbitration system operated, some offices
had nothing to do. Distributors and exhibitors
will be equally represented on each local
committee.
LEGAL COSTS A MINIMUM
Expensive legal technicalities will be kept
out if possible. If an exhibitor does not have
counsel, distributors will not be entitled to
counsel. If an exhibitor appears with counsel,
one lawyer will be named for all the distributors
included in the complaint.
There will be no appeal board.
Specific plans for operation will be drafted
by a committee which includes Herman Levy.
chairman; Nathan Yamins, Allied; L. S.
Hamm. WTO; Mitchell Klupt, MMPTA; Milton
C. Weisman. ITOA, and Robert W.
Perkins, distributors. It is expected that this
report will be ready May 26.
Another committee, which will report at
the same time, will draft rules and regulations.
This group includes Abram F. Myers,
Allied; Mitchell Klupt, MMPTA; Milton C.
Weisman, ITOA; L. S. Hamm, WTO; Austin
GRANT POWER TO
AWARD DAMAGES
Bidding Disputes Placed
On Arbitration Lineup
NEW YORK—On the final day of the industry arbitration conference
Friday (25), the delegates agreed on the following importont provisions in
the proposed plan:
1. An agreement by the distributors to arbitrate any claim brought
against them for discrimination in the award of any picture under competitive
bidding.
2. Agreement by the distributors to arbitrate any claim that an exhibitor
overpaid or overbid in order to deprive another theatre owner of pictures
under competitive bidding. The conference recommended that the successful
bidder should be brought in by the complainant in such cases.
3. Agreement by the conference that arbitrators have the power to
award damages. The scope of this power and the rules relating to the granting
of damages were referred to the rules committee, with the recommendation
that the dominant exhibitor be brought in by the complainant in
such cases.
4. Agreement by the conference that unless the exhibitor has counsel
at an arbitration proceeding, that the distributors will not be represented by
counsel. It was further agreed that if the exhibitor has counsel at the proceeding,
then all distributors will designate a single common counsel.
Keough, Robert W. Perkins and Adolph
Schimel, distributors.
Two important topics remain for discussion.
One is how to finance the plan and the other
is whether or not film rentals shall be in-
Plan Is
'Not Ripe Yet'
For O.K., Says Meyers
WASHINGTON—Last week's all-industry
arbitration meeting which, according
to Allied Board Chairman Abram F.
Myers, settled nothing except that "the
distributors would not agree to the allinclusive"
Allied proposal, will be the
main topic of discussion at the Allied
board meeting opening today (3) in Colorado
Springs.
Announcing the agenda Thursday (1),
Myers said that since nothing concrete
was concluded, "the plan is not ripe for
any approving action by the board and,
in view of the fact that the negotiations
are scheduled to be resumed on May 26,
it is not expected that Allied will withdraw
at this time."
Myers pointed out that, although some
"informal agreements" regarding runs,
clearances, contract violations and other
controversies as regards their inclusion
as subjects for arbitration had been
reached at the meeting, "no attention was
given to the conditions and limitations
governing such arbitrations or the scope
of the awards to be entered."
eluded among arbitrable subjects.
Estimates on how much the plan will cost
are vague. Some run as high as $200,000. The
old consent decree system cost up to $300,000
per year, and as it approached its end in
1947 it was operated on a month-to-month
basis with appropriations running at the rate
of $25,000 per month, with only Paramount,
MGM. Warner Bros, and 20th Century-Fox
contributing. Columbia, United Artists and
Universal withdrew when the Goddard consent
decree lapsed in 1942.
There was a steady decline in cases under
that system. In 1941 there were 148; in 1942
—116; 1943—83; 1944—45; 1945—32; 1946—49.
One of the reasons for this was the expense
of carrying on cases with counsel for both
sides and with appeals. The salaries of the
appeals board members totaled $40,000 per
year, and maintenance of regional offices was
expensive.
For the fiscal year ending Nov. 30, 1943,
four offices had no complaints — Charlotte,
Denver, Kansas City and Seattle.
A greater variety of arbitrable subjects will
make the new system different from the old.
It has already been agreed that claims of
discrimination can be arbitrated and damages
awarded; that over-payments and overbidding
to deprive another exhibitor of pictures
can come up. Details on these plans
will be worked out in committee.
There is some sentiment among distributors
for sharing expenses between distributors
and exhibitors. Income from filing fees
and other expenses will be only a minor item
for the regional boards.
8 BOXOFFICE May 3, 1952