In recent weeks, the Los Angeles news media has provided extensive coverage of the MPAA's decision to ban so-called movie "screeners" because of concerns about digital piracy. "Screeners" are DVDs of movies that the studios want voters for the Academy Awards and various other industry prizes to watch prior to casting their ballots. Just about everyone in the film industry except the studio heads has complained about the ban. Smaller studios, including the "arthouse" subsidiaries of the seven MPAA members, have been especially troubled, feeling that their films won't be seen if they aren't allowed to circulate screeners. And if the "arthouse" films aren't seen, they won't win any awards, which in turn means that they'll be deprived of the additional viewings and revenue associated with a major award.

Which leads me to wonder why the MPAA and its seven major studios aren't violating the antitrust laws? If screeners help the smaller shops compete, how can the MPAA ban them? I assume an industry association like the MPAA is very sensitive to antritrust issues, so I'm sure they have an answer. What might it be?