Challenges Facing the International Film Industry

Your AI-generated content is legal in Japan, illegal in Mexico, and nobody knows about Europe. Welcome to the copyright nightmare. Here's a problem nobody's talking about but everyone's about to face. You create content using AI. It's perfectly legal where you are. But when you distribute it globally, you're suddenly violating copyright laws in twelve different countries you've never even visited. Denmark just proposed giving people copyright protection over their AI-generated digital replicas. Your deepfake that's legal in Singapore could land you in trouble in Copenhagen. Japan and Singapore let AI systems train on copyrighted data without consent. Mexico's Supreme Court ruled that purely AI-generated works get zero copyright protection. China recently denied copyright for certain AI images, leaving everyone guessing where they're headed. Same technology. Same content. Completely different legal status depending on which border it crosses. Think about what this means. You're a production company shooting in South Korea using AI-generated background assets. Those assets are copyrightable there. You distribute to Brazil and suddenly discover they might not have legal protection. Your Danish actress has different likeness rights than your Australian co-star. The music composer in Canada used AI tools that would be treated entirely differently under UK law. Who owns what? Where can you distribute? Which jurisdiction's laws apply when content is created in one country, processed on servers in another, and distributed everywhere? Nobody knows. And that's the problem. For filmmakers, production companies, and content creators working across borders, this fragmented landscape is a legal minefield. You might secure rights in your home jurisdiction only to discover those rights don't exist somewhere else. Content that's protected in one market could be public domain in another. The global nature of content distribution means you can't just pick one jurisdiction and ignore the rest. Your content doesn't stop at borders. Neither do the legal issues. So what do you do? You can't wait for international harmonization; it's not coming anytime soon. Different countries have different priorities and different approaches to balancing innovation with IP protection. The only strategy right now is vigilance. Monitor international developments as closely as domestic ones. Map out where your content will be created, distributed, and consumed. Identify which jurisdictions matter most. Track legal developments in those places. Build contingency plans for when laws change or conflict. This is the new reality for anyone creating content in a global, AI-driven world. The rules are inconsistent. The landscape is shifting. And pretending you can operate under one set of laws because that's where you're based is no longer an option. Happy creating!

From The Economist: Are hits like “Adolescence” good or bad for Britain? Such successes have established Britain as the “#Hollywood of #Europe”. Tax breaks, an abundance of talent and cutting-edge studio space have made Britain a magnet for productions such as “The Crown” and “Bridgerton”. Global #streaming platforms such as The Walt Disney Company+, Netflix and Amazon commissioned 123 new British TV series in 2024, a figure surpassed only by America’s 505 titles, according to Richard Broughton of Ampere Analysis, a research firm. American cable companies, studios and #TV networks have also waded into Britain, shooting #films such as “Wicked,” “Barbie” and “Andor”, the latest in the Star Wars saga. But beyond the red carpets and star-studded sets, the arrival of major content platforms with deep pockets has left Britain’s cash-strapped broadcasters and local production houses falling behind. Warp Films’ near-closure is mirrored elsewhere. Staff at EUSTON FILMS LIMITED, the production company behind “Nightsleeper”, a six-part series, were all laid off days before the show premiered on the BBC in September 2024, attracting more than 8m viewers. Critics say increased competition has strangled local markets. A handful of high-budget projects have fuelled competition for cast, crew and studio space, inflating costs and squeezing margins for others. Streaming platforms have doubled their commissions in Britain since 2019, ploughing hundreds of millions of pounds into British content. By contrast, spending by public-service broadcasters like the BBC has plunged. This contributed to a 25% decline in overall domestic spending on high-end TV productions last year. The influence of American content giants poses another challenge. Although streamers have meant higher wages for the people working on their shows, jobs have become less secure. After a post-pandemic production surge, most streaming services reined in their spending in 2023. As commissions out of Hollywood fell, so too did job numbers in Britain. Strikes exacerbated the problem: thousands of American screenwriters, actors and other #media professionals walked out in 2023. By July 2024 more than half of people who had been working in Britain’s TV and film industry were still unemployed. Just 6% had returned to their usual workload, according to Bectu, a trade union. https://lnkd.in/eDecwJkH

The entertainment industry just got dragged into America's trade wars. The proposed 100% tariff on films produced overseas reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of how modern entertainment operates in a global ecosystem. Approximately 25-30% of major US studio films are now shot primarily outside the United States, with the percentage rising to nearly 40% for films with budgets over $100 million. As I discussed with Bloomberg, this policy displays serious blind spots: 🎥 Film production is inherently global - from financing to talent to post-production 🌏 Foreign markets (especially China) are critical revenue drivers, accounting for over 70% of box office for major releases ⚙️ Implementation will be nearly impossible given complex production structures 📱Short-form video now accounts for 40% of all video consumption among viewers under 30. In fact, TikTok users consume over 95 minutes of content daily - directly competing with traditional film viewing time. 🤖 The real threat to American film jobs isn't overseas production - it's #AI and automation replacing traditional production roles regardless of location. The unintended consequences will likely hit American studios hardest as they face inevitable retaliatory measures in key overseas markets. For board directors, this represents a case study in navigating sudden regulatory disruption. Companies need governance structures that can rapidly assess impact, develop contingency plans, and communicate effectively with shareholders when facing unexpected policy shocks. Will this policy achieve its "America First" intentions or backfire on the entertainment sector? What's your take? #AIGovernance #BoardLeadership #GlobalTrade #Entertainment https://lnkd.in/gXK7wZDK

Screen production incentives create activity. When deployed within ecosystems, they create industries. For governments in the GCC and elsewhere building a film sector, that distinction matters. Screen production incentives are a powerful tool. They bring international productions in, boost short term spending, create jobs, and sometimes lift tourism. From the first incentive program in the US in the early nineties, today there are around 120 programmes worldwide at national and regional level, including several in the GCC, and public support for them runs into the billions of dollars each year. But incentives on their own do not build a film industry. They create bursts of activity. If a production attracted by a high incentive arrives and finds no skilled crew, no scalable services, and no real infrastructure, they won't be returning. The production leaves, and the impact leaves with it. The risk is measuring success by the number of projects shot, rather than the capabilities left behind. The real shift happens when rebates sit inside a complete ecosystem that you deliberately design. From a talent perspective: If you invest in attracting and training freelancers, skills grow from project to project, and the talent base deepens. From a funding perspective: If you have a fund that invests in international productions and finances local ones, the pipeline becomes steady instead of sporadic. If you have bridge financing providers, producers can plan more ambitious slates and local companies can scale in a sustainable way. From an infrastructure and services perspective: If you have studios that can see the pipeline growing, they will invest in more advanced facilities. When services like hotels, catering companies, transport operators, post production shops, and casting agencies cluster around production hubs, the destination becomes a repeat choice for producers, and maybe a long term home. And from a regulatory perspective: When regulations and permitting processes are clear, fast, and predictable, time on paperwork shrinks, time on set grows, and the country develops a reputation for being “hassle-free,” which may be the most powerful incentive of all. At that point the incentives become a catalyst. With every production, what remains is stronger talent, more capable infrastructure, more experienced service providers, and a domestic sector that can finance and deliver its own stories. From Saudi Arabia to the UAE and Qatar, the GCC is investing in attracting productions with ecosystems as the end game. The real opportunity now is to accelerate that ecosystem building and move from renting activity to creating an industry. If you are part of building a GCC film sector, where is your biggest opportunity today? #filmindustry #GCC #publicpolicy

Marvel's exit is a warning shot for all filmmakers. After years of blockbuster success in Georgia, Marvel has opted to move the majority of its slate overseas. Leaving Georgia’s once-bustling soundstages empty, and the silence is deafening. Georgia hosted 412 productions in 2022. This year? Just 245. That’s almost a 50% drop in three years. Crews and vendors are watching their jobs vanish, and the fallout is devastating. Despite what “linked in experts” may claim, these major players aren’t dumb. This is the moment when you watch the birds fly inland before a tsunami. There’s a shift happening and Marvel is getting ahead of it so they can retain their profit margin. The economics have shifted. Incentives have dried up. Costs are climbing. They’re adapting to survive. But are we? As a former Army Combat Medic, one of the greatest lessons I learned is: adaptability is survival. Most plans don’t survive first contact with the enemy. The same is true in film. Marvel wasn’t always in Georgia. It won’t always be where it is now. And here’s the hard truth that I’m struggling with. 1. We can’t hold onto American-based productions with tax codes alone. 2. Protests, petitions and public pleas only get us so far… we’ve all seen how protests end of late. 3. The future of American storytelling may not even be American-made. Likely, it will be global. Tech-driven. Creator-led. This shift may have to come from individual filmmakers themselves. Engaging international audiences, creators and forms of distribution, and that may very well be done through tech and many aspects of, dare I say, AI. Hollywood has always reinvented itself, and this moment is no different. In many ways, Hollywood is no longer a place, and hasn’t been for over a decade. It’s more of an idea and mindset… the word “Hollywood” now represents the global top-tier of filmmakers. And historically, the most adaptable creators will define this next phase. Filmmaker, producers, vendors… are we adapting fast enough? Full article: https://lnkd.in/gRmemVYQ

The Future of Film Has Always Been Global. Hollywood is not running out of ideas. It is actively rejecting them. For decades, the Western film industry claimed to be the center of global storytelling. But the truth is, the future of film has always been global. Hollywood simply whitewashed and erased that reality, repackaged it, and sold it back to the world with a studio logo and a marketing budget. Once considered the creative heart of cinema, North American film and television have become echo chambers of recycled content. In 2024, over 60 percent of major studio releases were based on existing franchises, and those films accounted for more than 80 percent of total global box office revenue. Original works are either buried by algorithms or never made at all. This formula may serve short-term business goals, but it is pushing audiences away. According to Deloitte, younger generations increasingly value meaningful, authentic experiences over repetitive content. Viewers are not just bored. They are tuning out. Streaming platforms like Netflix now find their biggest hits coming from South Korea, India, Nigeria, and Spain. These regions are not just making films. They are building new cinematic movements rooted in local voices, social relevance, and emotional honesty. These stories resonate with global audiences not because they check a diversity box, but because they are good. While Hollywood studios pour money into another Marvel sequel, creators around the world are telling better stories with smaller budgets and bigger hearts. Nigerian dramas, Indian science fiction, and South Korean thrillers are proving that audiences crave fresh perspectives and real storytelling. Hollywood is facing more than a creative slump. It is confronting an identity crisis. The studios are no longer driven by artists or storytellers. They are run by executives and data analysts who treat films as content assets and characters as merchandise. Strategy has replaced vision. Metrics have replaced meaning. The global box office in 2024 reached 30 billion dollars, still below pre-pandemic levels. In the United States and Canada, revenue dropped 3 percent from the previous year. The message is clear. The audience wants more than nostalgia and visual effects. They want something to care about. Cinema is not dying. It is growing up. And it is growing beyond the limits of Hollywood. The future of film belongs to creators who still believe in storytelling and to the global voices that never stopped. #hollywood #writer #profitoverquality #futureoffilm

The Real Reason Filmmakers Struggle With Distribution - No One Talks About This Filmmakers aren’t struggling because their film has no value, they’re struggling because the distribution system isn’t designed to be clear. Here’s what actually makes it difficult: ✖️ 1. TRUST - the biggest barrier Most filmmakers don’t know who is genuine, who has real buyer access, or who will protect their rights. Past experiences create fear, and fear kills deals. ✖️ 2. TRANSPARENCY- everything feels hidden Secret lists. Hidden fees. No reporting. Filmmakers don’t hate rejection, they hate silence. ✖️ 3. POSITIONING- where most films fail A film can be good… but not pitched, packaged, or placed correctly. Positioning is what determines whether a film travels. ✖️ 4. ACCESS- buyers aren’t where filmmakers look. Buyers are not on Instagram or FilmFreeway. They’re in markets, private rooms, and distributor networks. ✖️ 5. EXPECTATIONS- Netflix or nothing hurts filmmakers Most filmmakers don’t realize how many revenue windows exist: educational, niche platforms, airlines, international TV, catalogs, and more. ✔️ So what’s the solution? Not another platform. Not another miracle promise. Not “submit everywhere and hope.” The real solution is having someone who can: ✔️ Position your film correctly ✔️ Open real buyer access ✔️ Map out the right revenue windows ✔️ Manage expectations with actual data ✔️ Communicate clearly so you’re never in the dark ✔️ Protect your film’s value and guide the strategy Distribution works when filmmakers stop guessing, and start partnering with people who understand the system. Because money comes after strategy. Platforms come after positioning. Deals come after access. Distribution shouldn’t feel like gambling. It should feel like guidance, clarity, and partnership. ------- I’m Michael Osheku, a film sales & distribution executive. I help filmmakers navigate film sales, festival strategy, positioning, and global visibility.

Here are some cross market learnings from looking at several national reports about 2025 box office side by side. - It is always interesting to see how much the narrative can differ from one market to another. Germany and Norway talk about recovery, while France and Spain talk about decline, without taking much into account 2024 performances and even when all markets remain structurally below pre-pandemic levels. I am beyond the point of hating that comparison, but I guess we cannot fully avoid it. - Concentration remains, with fewer films driving a larger share of total admissions. This is something David Hancock has been flagging for a long time already. - Big, known event titles continue to dominate, while mid range films struggle almost everywhere, regardless of nationality. - Family films remain the most stable category. This has been true for years and is again confirmed, with titles like Zootopia 2 already proving the point in 2026. In Norway, A Mouse Hunt for Christmas (Hvis ingen går i fella) led at the box office, in front of studio titles. - Europe remains highly dependent on Hollywood, even as the industry (rightly) complains about shorter windows, inconsistent release rhythms and weaker studio slates. In several markets, strong local films have not been enough to replace them, and European non-national films even less so. - Strong local films still mean a healthy local market. That logic holds, but local hits now need the same ingredients as global ones: cultural proximity, clear positioning, and often a franchise or well identified brand. - Italy reached its highest local market share in nearly a decade. Denmark posted record admissions for Danish films. Germany saw a strong local share, driven by Das Kanu des Manitu, the first German IMAX title. France, on the other hand, had no breakout local hits (after a very strong 2024). Spain continues to lose admissions despite a solid local market share. Nothing is ever that simple. - Arthouse cinemas and films continue to overperform relative to the wider market, as was already the case last year. It's been particularly highlighted in France, the Netherlands and Sweden, but also this week in Germany, with Christian Bräuer highlighting that arthouse revenues have for the first time surpassed pre-pandemic levels. And THIS is what continues to make me optimistic about the deep appeal of the cinemagoing experience.

(IMO) Here’s why I remain convinced Trump’s 100% Tariff on foreign made films impacts all of global cinema, not just American cinema.. It’s a protectionist policy, a blow to the foundation of the global film ecosystem. While framed as a move to protect American jobs, the consequences would ripple across continents, damaging international partnerships, financing models, cultural exchange mechanisms that fuel the modern entertainment economy. It disrupts a highly international production model: Modern cinema is global by design. Major U.S. studios film in Canada, UK, NZ, SA to access skilled labor, infrastructure, diverse landscapes, local incentives. A punitive tariff would discourage international shoots, forcing relocation to less optimal (often more expensive) domestic settings. Fewer greenlit productions mean fewer jobs everywhere, not more. Undermines international financing & pre-sales models: Films rely on cross-border financing, pre-sales, co-productions. This introduces major risk for American buyers & streamers who finance international projects. If Netflix or A24 invests in a film shot in Hungary, a 100% import tariff makes it financially unviable, discouraging early investment. Fewer films get made, financing dries up, new voices lose access to global markets. It threatens jobs & economies beyond US; UK, India, Mexico, Australia have built infrastructure to attract global productions, relying on American buyers & distributors. If deterred by tariffs, entire ecosystems suffer: crews laid off, studios go dark, regional funding evaporates. Provokes retaliation making it harder for American films abroad: Trade is reciprocal. If U.S. penalizes foreign films, other nations may respond w/ tariffs/restrictions on American content, limiting access for U.S. films in key markets like China, France, South Korea, which are critical to American box office revenue/growth. It erodes cultural exchange & soft power: Cinema is a tool of cultural diplomacy. U.S. audiences benefit from foreign films that bring diverse worldviews/stories. This risks creating a cultural echo chamber/silencing global voices in one of the world’s most influential markets. It sends a message of isolationism, undermining America’s soft power. It creates confusion & instability in global markets: Buyers, producers, streamers need predictability to fund/plan. A sudden, sweeping tariff w/ vague enforcement (does it include U.S. companies filming abroad? Co-productions? Streaming?) chills dealmaking. This uncertainty makes it harder for projects, especially from emerging markets, to secure financing, lock cast, move forward. My conclusion: Rather than strengthening American cinema, this tariff weakens it by severing the global ties that make the industry vibrant/profitable. The entertainment economy thrives on collaboration, not walls. The real threat isn’t international competition, but shortsighted nationalism that strangles creativity, financing, growth across borders.

The film industry is currently undergoing significant consolidation and contraction. While this climate of change can seem daunting, it also presents opportunities for those willing to adapt. As an independent filmmaker or smaller studio, the key is to find creative ways to position yourself for success amidst this consolidation. Here are a few strategies to consider: Forge Strategic Partnerships: Seek out opportunities to partner with the larger players. Pitch co-production deals, licensing agreements, or distribution arrangements that allow you to leverage their resources and reach, while maintaining creative control. Identify Niche Markets: With the major studios focused on blockbusters and broad appeal, there is space to thrive by targeting underserved niche audiences. Develop content that speaks to specific demographics or passion points not prioritized by bigger companies. Embrace Digital Distribution: The growth of streaming platforms has democratized content distribution. Leverage emerging direct-to-consumer models to bring your projects to audiences on your own terms, without the constraints of traditional gatekeepers. Diversify Revenue Streams: Consolidation means fewer buyers, so diversify your revenue by exploring alternative monetization strategies. This could include brand partnerships, merchandising, live events, or even crowdfunding. Invest in Talent Development: As larger companies absorb indie studios, skilled creatives may be seeking new opportunities. Identify and nurture emerging filmmaking talent that can help you stand out in a crowded market. The film industry is in flux, but those who stay agile, innovative, and focused on their unique value proposition can find ways to thrive. By adapting your approach, you can navigate the challenges of consolidation and position your work for long-term success.