Video Labels

You missed an important point in your exposition of what is at stake if denigrating labels on films are legislatively mandated into existence (Aug. 18). The proposed legislation is not about “aesthetic sensibilities.” It’s about money and power in Hollywood.

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) supports this legislation, a position which seems incomprehensible to the Video Software Dealers Assn., the trade association for the video industry. Boxer claims that this obnoxious labeling falls into the category of “consumer protection.” In reality, the only thing this bill would protect is the collective bargaining rights of directors and screenwriters--already among the highest-paid artisans in the world.

Such labeling protests, added to the packaging and leaders on each film, would only serve to confuse the public and make them believe that the video they were contemplating watching, renting, or purchasing was inferior to the theatrical version. Or, they would serve to hold up distribution of a video until the power plays had been resolved--long after the public had lost interest in seeing the video at all.

With over half of studio revenues coming from the home video market, this bargaining tactic would hurt everyone: the studios, the distributors, the video retailers and the American public, some 57 million of whom visit their local retailer each week. In the end, the studios would hardly be in a position to pay more to their creative artists, or to produce “long shot”’ films, or support new talent. In this instance, everybody loses. Including Sen. Boxer.

JEFFREY P. EVES

Video Software Dealers Assn.

Encino