What SEC's Approval of Title II of the JOBS Act Means for Indie Filmmakers

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) voted on Title II of the JOBS Act this last Wednesday, with a 4-to-1 vote in favor of lifting the ban on "general solicitation of private placements to accredited investors." Basically that means that previous to this legislation, filmmakers, producers, or whomever was looking to get their film projects funded (or any other small business) were required to meet with potential investors individually. Now that the ban is lifted, those wanting funds may "advertise their fundraising publicly" as long as investors are accredited through the SEC. What could this possibly mean for independent film? Hit the jump to find out.

According to Slated, who posted a great article on the topic, "tweeting, Facebook postings, press mentions, even billboards on Sunset Boulevard will be legal," and would amend the 80-year-old regulation. Perhaps the ones most affected by the ruling are those who wish to crowdfund their projects through government registered "funding portals". There are still 60 days until filmmakers can advertise, and those interested may have to fill out "Form D."

Here's an excerpt from the full brief (pg. 81 if you're curious:)

We believe that it is reasonable to conclude that allowing issuers to have wider access to accredited investors by eliminating the prohibition against general solicitation for a category of Rule 506 offerings will significantly improve their access to capital and potentially enhance capital formation and lower the issuance cost

As for Title III, we have to wait until next year for the ruling -- which is unfortunate considering that it would allow investors to forgo having to be accredited by SEC. But, the good news here is that your reach as filmmakers is growing even further, and the potential capital you could be earning by crowdsourcing is just going up with this ruling.

What do you think? How do you think the SEC's decision on Title II & III of the JOBS Act will affect filmmakers?


You Might Also Like

Your Comment


Good grief, what crazy regulation! Why can't they just leave in peace two people making voluntary private dealings with each other? Makes me kinda glad I'm not living in the USA.

July 16, 2013 at 3:30AM, Edited September 4, 8:21AM


This is a double edged sword, because there have always been more scam artists in Hollywood than legitimate filmmakers. This new law is all very well and good as long as filmmakers remember that investors are not giving you the money. They, unlike present crowd funding, expect, and have a right to, a return on that money. Investors are gamblers and they are gambling with the filmmaker. If the filmmaker puts all the money on the screen, and tries to tell the best possible story, It's a fair bet. but if the filmmaker just pockets the investments and makes a piece of crap, with nothought of making an ROI, then the investors will dry up faster than you can blink an eye, And many investors will not want to bet on filmmakers again, if ever. When you approach investors be honest and up front about the fact that this is a HIGH RISK investment and if you can't afford to lose the money, don't invest.!!

August 1, 2013 at 6:51PM, Edited September 4, 8:21AM

AE Randall

miu miu 新作 財布

August 15, 2013 at 2:20AM, Edited September 4, 8:21AM