Is film piracy as big a problem as it's made out to be?

Blisterman · 07-07-2011 11:00AM #1

Reading this artical. http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/14029865

And apparently the top 5 movies in the UK were downloaded a total of 1.4 million times. Which, compared to the overall population of the UK, equals 1 download per 40 people, per year.

According to the industry 1.4 million people downloading a movie equals a 170 million pound loss for them! Yeah, maybe at £150 a ticket!

So clearly the figures don't add up. Does anyone else get the impression that the industry is playing the victim a little bit too much?

seamus · 07-07-2011 11:11AM

Blisterman wrote: »

Does anyone else get the impression that the industry is playing the victim a little bit too much?

Hasn't it always?

Simple fact of the matter is that the majority of people will take the easiest route to obtain their entertainment, even if it's not the easiest. Torrenting & downloading is easy, relatively speaking, but the vast majority of people are unaware of it, nor would they be confident about what to do with a downloaded movie once they had it.

It's the same reason why "click & select" interfaces to download music, like iTunes, are far more popular for the man on the street than torrenting, which is arguably only slightly more difficult.

Pirating has always required a certain level of know-how. Even looking back to the days of cassettes and recording someone else's stuff, you needed a dual tape player and you needed to know someone else who had a copy of the album, and then you had to spend time recording it. Or you could just walk into the shop and buy it in 2 minutes.

For as long as getting your movies and music legit is even remotely easier than doing it illegaly, then the vast majority of people will go the legit route.

The problem is that the entertainment industry are notoriously slow at changing their business models. Napster, for a time, made it easier to get your music illegally than to get it legally because the music industry had missed the obvious benefits to online music delivery. And some of them still whinge about it, even though online delivery has revolutionised their business, not least by reducing the cost of production to effectively nothing.

johnny_ultimate · 07-07-2011 12:00PM

I query how exactly they got those figures - did they include things like illegal streaming in their analysis, or even subscription sites that provide unlimited downloads?

I do think the situation is over-exaggerated, and that unfortunately the only people who really suffer are people who buy legal copies (frickin' anti-piracy ads). But I do still feel it's a big problem for smaller and independent film. Hollywood can take the hit, others can't. The big studios only have themselves to blame too - if film and television was as readily available as it is in the States over here, I'd say you'd be looking at much less piracy.

Jagle · 07-07-2011 12:08PM

show me that the money they make from sueing people for downloading music/movies goes back to the artist/actors.

it doesnt. many artists have come out against this practice. I even read(ill try find a link) showing how much they spent combating piracy vs how much they made back, ill ruin he surprise, they lost millions, so thats not the reason they do it.

Found link:http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100713/17400810200.shtml what shocking figures

Fysh · 07-07-2011 12:13PM

Between iTunes & Netflix you've got 2 services that have been running in the US for years that make it trivially easy to pay for digital content.

If I could pay £1-2 per episode for a DRM-free download of eg True Blood released within 24 hours of the OTA broadcast, I'd happily do so. Hell, I'm even willing to pay £3-4 for a time-limited stream of a film - for the kind of film you watch once it's easier than either renting physical media or buying it on Play/amazon for £5 and then having to sell/eBay/gumtree the disc that you no longer want. Instead the only legal option I have is to wait about for the DVD release (3-6 months for a film, usually 12 months for USTV shows). If I'm waiting that long anyway, waiting another 6 months for the half-price sale isn't much of a hit.

I wish the film & tv industry in europe would look at the games and music markets - between downloadable content on the Wii and Steam with their devilish ever-present sales, I spend a similar amount on game downloads as I do physical media games. If the download option weren't there, I just wouldn't be spending that money.

johnny_ultimate · 07-07-2011 12:22PM

The lack of Netflix or equivalent over here is an absolute joke. TBH iTunes rentals aren't the worst even with DRM (wait a few weeks and the price drops from the OK four euro to a very attractive one euro, which is more than reasonable for a restricted download) but we need subscription based services.

If I was in the States, I could switch on my 360 or PS3 and instantly stream extremely high quality films from a huge library for a reasonable monthly fee. Over here, no such joy.

Rights issues or not, someone's losing an absolute fortune by not sorting it out.

Jagle · 07-07-2011 12:25PM

Fysh wrote: »

Between iTunes & Netflix you've got 2 services that have been running in the US for years that make it trivially easy to pay for digital content.

Indeed and on that note

Link about how pirates :http://www.switched.com/2009/11/03/music-pirates-also-buy-more-tunes-than-others-poll-finds/

i can illegally have any movie in about 10-15 minutes on my couch, offer me a legal service and if its good enough i might use it like

Sad Professor · 07-07-2011 12:41PM

Like the music industry, the film industry tries to make out that everyone who downloads an illegal copy of a film would have bought or paid to see that film legally if not for illegal downloading. I don't believe this for a second. Many of them would have paid, yes, but certainly not all of them. I think a lot of people like getting stuff for free and if they couldn't get it for free they wouldn't be interested. So in that sense I do think it is exaggerated. However, that's not to say illegal downloading isn't doing tremendous damage. But it's the independent films and smaller foreign film industries that it's really harming.

Jagle · 07-07-2011 12:45PM

Sad Professor wrote: »

However, that's not to say illegal downloading isn't doing tremendous damage. But it's the independent films and smaller foreign film industries that it's really harming.

indeed Avatar still cleared

Total Lifetime Grosses
Domestic: $760,507,625 27.3% + Foreign: $2,021,767,547 72.7% = Worldwide: $2,782,275,172

Goldstein · 07-07-2011 01:28PM

No it's not. Equating every illegal download with a lost sale is I'd guess 85%+ inaccurate.

When something reaches DVD/Blu-Ray release then there's nothing you can do to stem illegal copies leaking, but before that they should keep a tighter rein on the review copies they send out. Individually watermark each one. It's simple to do this and visually undetectable (a few pixels at a precise position and time code within the movie is all that's needed, not a big obvious serial number that could be blurred). Then just keep a database of who has each one. Perhaps then they could trace exactly where the leak came from.

If people want to download an abysmal quality cam, then off with them. Even if it's free you won't get many people who'd accept such a poor experience. It's the decent quality early releases that have the potential to do damage to sales.

One instance where they only have themselves to blame is when there is a large disparity between cinema release dates between different countries (Super 8 as a recent example). Simultaneous or near-simultaneous releases should be standard.

Voodu Child · 07-07-2011 02:13PM

Goldstein wrote:

When something reaches DVD/Blu-Ray release then there's nothing you can do to stem illegal copies leaking, but before that they should keep a tighter rein on the review copies they send out. Individually watermark each one. It's simple to do this and visually undetectable (a few pixels at a precise position and time code within the movie is all that's needed, not a big obvious serial number that could be blurred). Then just keep a database of who has each one. Perhaps then they could trace exactly where the leak came from.

Most retail-quality pirate movies come from distributers, stores or pressing factories rather than review copies. The movies are all pressed and packaged a couple of weeks before release date.

And the high(ish) quality copies that come out before then are sourced from official R5 and RC releases. You can actually go into a shop in Russia or wherever and buy a legit DVD or Bluray copy of the movie while it is still in the Cinema. They do it to combat piracy, in a 'if you can't beat em, join em' kind of way.

They don't come with English audio and the quality is slightly lower because they are telecined (by the movie company at high quality) off a release print rather than scanned from the negative or interpositive.

Chardee MacDennis · 07-07-2011 02:16PM

Fysh wrote: »

Between iTunes & Netflix you've got 2 services that have been running in the US for years that make it trivially easy to pay for digital content.

If I could pay £1-2 per episode for a DRM-free download of eg True Blood released within 24 hours of the OTA broadcast, I'd happily do so. Hell, I'm even willing to pay £3-4 for a time-limited stream of a film - for the kind of film you watch once it's easier than either renting physical media or buying it on Play/amazon for £5 and then having to sell/eBay/gumtree the disc that you no longer want. Instead the only legal option I have is to wait about for the DVD release (3-6 months for a film, usually 12 months for USTV shows). If I'm waiting that long anyway, waiting another 6 months for the half-price sale isn't much of a hit.

I wish the film & tv industry in europe would look at the games and music markets - between downloadable content on the Wii and Steam with their devilish ever-present sales, I spend a similar amount on game downloads as I do physical media games. If the download option weren't there, I just wouldn't be spending that money.

sure everytime there is an apple announcement I wait with my credit card in hand for a subscription service for music and video - i'd pay €40 a month i reckon for all you can eat music and video (spotify type service)...

Dempsey · 07-07-2011 02:21PM

Jagle wrote: »

indeed Avatar still cleared

Total Lifetime Grosses
Domestic: $760,507,625 27.3% + Foreign: $2,021,767,547 72.7% = Worldwide: $2,782,275,172

That would be an exception to the rule because of its use of 3D technology and it successfully marketed as a film that you really need to see on a big screen in 3D.

Sad Professor · 07-07-2011 02:26PM

BastardPrince wrote: »

sure everytime there is an apple announcement I wait with my credit card in hand for a subscription service for music and video - i'd pay €40 a month i reckon for all you can eat music and video (spotify type service)...

I don't know, but I can't see Apple ever doing this. Jobs feels strongly that people want to own music rather than rent it, and I think he's right for the most part. It's a bit different with films. Apple seem have given up on the idea of owning digital downloads of films. They still offer them, but renting is clearly what they're focused on.

mikemac · 07-07-2011 02:32PM

People on boards have knowledge and confidence with computers but the majority of people in Ireland do not know how to use torrents.

So easy to use legal solutions work.
itunes is very easy to use.
audible.co.uk has a great selection of audiobooks, you subscribe every month and get a set number of downloads and they give bonus downloads. You can preview every book. This is a great legal site and I subscribe every month.

While I don't go near xtravision anymore, xbox live is an ok service.
But if we didn't need to wait months for releases, if they have a better selection and if Ireland had better broadband I'd use this service all the time.

Legal options can work, not everyone knows or feels confident about torrents. Yeah it's easy when you know how but sure everything is easy when you know how.

I still go to the cinema, any film I torrent is probably an old one from the 80's or 90's. It's not a lost sale, I would never have bought it anyway.

Currently watching Generation Kill online, I asked xtravision three times if they had it and would they order it in the boxset for me. They didn't, I watch online so maybe that's a lost sale for xtravision

Jagle · 07-07-2011 02:36PM

Dempsey wrote: »

That would be an exception to the rule because of its use of 3D technology and it successfully marketed as a film that you really need to see on a big screen in 3D.

so then they need to market more, but 3d is just bs to boost sales its been proven before.

And also the whole argument reads like a flashback in time, same horror stories arose when vhs was coming out, saying home taping would kill the movie industry, same with radio, never in its history has either the movie or music business shown any cop on or attempt to keep up with the times, i for one am delighted and hope they all go down

r3nu4l · 07-07-2011 02:43PM

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

If I was in the States, I could switch on my 360 or PS3 and instantly stream extremely high quality films from a huge library for a reasonable monthly fee. Over here, no such joy.

Rights issues or not, someone's losing an absolute fortune by not sorting it out.

In the UK LoveFilm streams direct to PS3, only problem is that once again not all new releases are available for streaming and even at that it's only months after the original cinema release (going back to the same point made by Fysh!).

Tragic.

There's certain sites out there that allow me to watch a good quality cinema release within 24 hours of release (sometimes even before release, although that's more rare these days).

If I only had to wait two weeks from cinema release to download a high quality version of a movie then I'd probably wait for that version and pay for it, providing they were reasonable with the costs and didn't want to charge me cinema prices!

Dempsey · 07-07-2011 02:52PM

Jagle wrote: »

so then they need to market more, but 3d is just bs to boost sales its been proven before.

And also the whole argument reads like a flashback in time, same horror stories arose when vhs was coming out, saying home taping would kill the movie industry, same with radio, never in its history has either the movie or music business shown any cop on or attempt to keep up with the times, i for one am delighted and hope they all go down

You somehow think that I'm trying to defend the film & music industries. I'm not, I'm just explaining why Avatar is an exception because of the 3D technology used in the film. Very few people wanted to see it via torrent before they saw it in the cinema.

Phony Scott · 07-07-2011 02:57PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqDdrT2-bH4

I'm surprised a bigger fuss isn't made of these massive second hand shops, which seem to have popped up recently, which take 100% of the profits, the artists and distributors see none of it and the second hand shops close after six months.

Who is the bigger criminal, the student who downloads films for free or the supposedly legitimate companies on the street who make huge profits?

Blisterman · 07-07-2011 03:09PM

Yep, another thing the studios should do is put ALL of their movies for streaming.
At the moment, there's a far bigger selection of movies on DVD than online streaming, despite the fact that they need to be printed, distributed etc.

One of the reasons iTunes is so popular is because it has millions of songs available. The storage costs are negligable. Even if every movie only gets downloaded a few times a year, it's millions in revenue.

McLoughlin · 07-07-2011 03:09PM

Phony Scott wrote: »

I'm surprised a bigger fuss isn't made of these massive second hand shops, which seem to have popped up recently, which take 100% of the profits, the artists and distributors see none of it and the second hand shops close after six months.

Who is the bigger criminal, the student who downloads films for free or the supposedly legitimate companies on the street who make huge profits?

I would say the the majority of DVDs i buy are second hand or pre owned from Xtra Vison and I regularly get into the cinema for free thanks to a staff pass so the industry gets no money from these activities.

seamus · 07-07-2011 03:10PM

Fysh wrote: »

If I could pay £1-2 per episode for a DRM-free download of eg True Blood released within 24 hours of the OTA broadcast, I'd happily do so.

This. People would even pay for a limited-life version. As pointed out, unlike music, most people aren't so concerned about holding onto their video collections.

I've downloaded the entire first season of Game of Thrones last week. For no reason except that I have no other option. Can't get satellite, and it won't be shown on any Irish or British station for at least six months (I reckon). If HBO had opened a subscription service that let me access the whole series for €10, I'd be all over that ****. But they haven't, so I downloaded it.

This is what they're missing, and they're losing a ****load of revenue over it because they have unfounded fears about delivery mechanisms where they don't control every step.

Jagle · 07-07-2011 03:18PM

Dempsey wrote: »

You somehow think that I'm trying to defend the film & music industries. I'm not, I'm just explaining why Avatar is an exception because of the 3D technology used in the film. Very few people wanted to see it via torrent before they saw it in the cinema.

jesus i dont.

i was adding more fuel to the fire by mentioning what i did int he second paragraph, and i understand why maybe avatar grossed so much, but if they pulled over 2billion from some people because the movie had 3D...

surely that proves that if they offer a good enough movie people will come, jesus lets not go through the 90% crap they release

Blisterman · 07-07-2011 03:19PM

Out of interest. If I rent an old movie from Xtra vision for €3, do the film makers get any of it, or did they just get the money from the original sale of the DVD?

mikemac · 07-07-2011 03:21PM

Just on Game of Thrones, why is the boxset not ready to go immediately after the Series ended?
Is it because they want to sell it to international networks first?

Boxsets are a money spinner and people will gladly pay for them and for the extra content like seeing the production team, costumes, music and locations.
I'd definitely buy it and I'm constantly buying boxsets.

But as of today, there is no boxset on sale, a release date hasn't been set and unless you have Sky Atlantic and the ability to record, the only option is to go to the internet

I want to buy it legally and can't!
And this has always been the way. With work I often miss TV so I wait for the boxset at the end. But the likes of 24 or Friday Night Lights or others would wait four or five months after the series ended to release it.
Why not have it on sale ready to go?

07-07-2011 03:24PM

I spend a fortune on movies, but there are actually movies out there that i wouldnt even waste my bandwidth on.

overshoot · 07-07-2011 03:29PM

Blisterman wrote: »

According to the industry 1.4 million people downloading a movie equals a 170 million pound loss for them! Yeah, maybe at £150 a ticket!

So clearly the figures don't add up. Does anyone else get the impression that the industry is playing the victim a little bit too much?

the record companies quote the figure of the standard fine for downloading x however many downloads. they are a joke, i saw somewhere where they tried to sue a download site for billions and the judge laughed them out. (this was a few months ago so i doubt il find the link, i just remember it beacuse if put the figure as a percentage of world gdp)

Jagle · 07-07-2011 03:40PM

overshoot wrote: »

the record companies quote the figure of the standard fine for downloading x however many downloads. they are a joke, i saw somewhere where they tried to sue a download site for billions and the judge laughed them out. (this was a few months ago so i doubt il find the link, i just remember it beacuse if put the figure as a percentage of world gdp)

the site they sued was the pirate bay, the biggest tracker for torrents, and all completely legal by the way, YES LEGAL

sorry i ment to say that the pirate bay website was entirely legal, it didnt break any laws didnt hold any copyright info on there server, its like suing the person who built the road cos you someone used it to move drugs across the country

http://cdn-www.cracked.com/articleimages/ob/piratebay_header.jpg

Dempsey · 07-07-2011 03:44PM

Jagle wrote: »

jesus i dont.

i was adding more fuel to the fire by mentioning what i did int he second paragraph, and i understand why maybe avatar grossed so much, but if they pulled over 2billion from some people because the movie had 3D...

surely that proves that if they offer a good enough movie people will come, jesus lets not go through the 90% crap they release

If its good enough, you'd think so. I think the 'bigger the screen the better factor' is another. If the viewing experience isnt going to be enhanced by viewing it in the cinema then this is why some torrents gets alot of traffic.

Hollywood couldnt be more unoriginal or unimaginative if they tried at the moment, them attributing this to the effects of piracy is just bull aswell.

I think the problem for the industry is that nobody wants to back the next betamax so they continue with methods that have been successful in the past whilst being ignorant to the current market and the technology available to make a sale. They are looking for a delivery method that will last them years but with the current rapid progression in technology they dont know what to put their money on.

Next they be bitching at people with 50" Plasma TV's & 6.1 sound at home for the decline in cinema sales. :rolleyes:

Jagle · 07-07-2011 03:53PM

Dempsey wrote: »

Hollywood couldnt be more unoriginal or unimaginative if they tried at the moment, them attributing this to the effects of piracy is just bull aswell.

I think the problem for the industry is that nobody wants to back the next betamax so they continue with methods that have been successful in the past whilst being ignorant to the current market and the technology available to make a sale. They are looking for a delivery method that will last them years but with the current rapid progression in technology they dont know what to put their money on.

Next they be bitching at people with 50" Plasma TV's & 6.1 sound at home for the decline in cinema sales. :rolleyes:

indeed they couldnt be more unoriginal or unimaginative if they tried.

While noone may want to back the next betamax, who wants to continue to push your old ways onto a generation who are moving faster with technology then anyone could of imagined. If i told you ten years ago you can use your mobile phone to download movies on your pc at home you would laugh at me, if i said you can use your pc to rent/buy movies straight to your tv screen id be called stupid.

they need to wake up and realise the old ways are gone, adapt of fcuk off.

and indeed like how colour tv destroyed black and white, or how the mp3 player destroyed the music business

The Mad Hatter · 07-07-2011 04:47PM

Is film piracy as big a problem as it's made out to be?

Is anything as big a problem as film piracy is made out to be?

Is film piracy as big a problem as it's made out to be?

Comments