'Pirates' Thriving, In Spite Of Pirates

from the file-sharrrrrrring dept

Mon, Jul 24th 2006 10:46am — Carlo Longino

It's being pointed out that the new Pirates of the Caribbean sequel not only is the top movie at the box office, it's also atop the P2P file-sharing charts. This isn't the first time a movie's been widely downloaded and still done well at the box office, and it won't be the last, either. So despite what movie execs say, their films can "compete with free" -- and do pretty well. Whether it's offering something more convenient, offering moviegoers a better experience, or using free content as a jumping-off point to sell people other stuff, there's lots of ways movie studios and theaters can thrive in the face of file-sharing. But to do that, they've got to own up to the obvious, and quit blaming piracy instead of changing how they do business.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

78 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2006 @ 11:10am

Doing pretty well is not the same as doing as well as you should.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
the Minute, 24 Jul 2006 @ 11:14am

Seconds
Second!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Pirate of the Intraweb, 24 Jul 2006 @ 11:17am

Pirates
The point is the movies are still making money, which is what the industry is all about anyway. And I don't know about you but most ppl want see a movie like that in all it's glory and not on pixely, wabbly 17" monitor at home. Unless your just a loser in your parents basement.....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ben (profile), 24 Jul 2006 @ 11:18am

Those aren't the sales they're looking for.
P2P piracy wouldn't hurt the movie release -- the movie is a different experience. Their argument is it will/does hurt DVD sales which is where it seems most moview are expecting to make their money these days.

Personally, the reason to buy the DVD is to egt the 'extras' they usually include; i.e. added value.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ScaredOfTheMan, 24 Jul 2006 @ 11:20am

"Pirates" passed the 300-million-dollar gross mark this weekend on its 16th day in theaters to become the first film in box office history to pass the milestone so quickly

So how Tell me anonymous Coward....How well "should" they have done?

The Post is correct, if movie producers would only take the leap of faith, and realize content set free (not necessarly free) is future of their industry, they would be much better off.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Kevin, 24 Jul 2006 @ 11:24am

Hay anyone know where I can get a good copy of that file....... only joking.

No matter what they try to do to stop piracy it will always happen, I hear they are tryign to get ISP's to block P2P now! that will never work.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Philippe The Pirate Monkey, 24 Jul 2006 @ 11:26am

I sometimes will watch a not legal version to see if its worth going to the theatre for. Why pay $10 for yourself and another $10 for a date to see a movie thats not worth paying the $4 blockbuster fee. Nothing beats a good theatre experience, although not all theatres are created equally...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2006 @ 11:29am

Re: Those aren't the sales they're looking for.
Personally, I refuse to buy dvds until they make them without menus or extras or FBI warnings or trailers. If they waste a single bit on pointless non-movie content, I object to it on philosophical grounds.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sohrb, 24 Jul 2006 @ 11:32am

Mike, you seem to at some point not understand Hollywood or what the execs mean. yes the movie is doing well but like others pointed out, it could be doing that much better.

Stating that going after file sharrers is pointless because they werent going to pay regardless for the movie is the worst argument ive ever heard. Its like saying, well its ok for me steal that car, I was never going to buy it anyways.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
AdverseE, 24 Jul 2006 @ 11:36am

Money Lost?
I think one aspect of this whole 'piracy problem' that the movie studios are miscalculating is that people who download full-length movies or 'pirates' as we call them, are more often than not people who wouldn't have paid to see the movie in the first place if it wasn't free. They may be stealing content but the movie studios aren't losing any box-office proceeds for the downloaded film. Why do I say this? Because you have to be one hardcore dedicated downloader, even using a fairly fast bittorrent connection, to download full-size movies, not to mention be willing to put up with the possibility of a grainy picture/bad sound/South Korean movie-goers standing up to get popcorn and other nonsense, not to mention the fact that you're watching it on a monitor. (Despite all the press it gets, not everyone in America has a high-definition large screen entertainment unit with their computer running Windows Media Center.) So, how much money is really being lost and why? Well, until some service as public-friendly as Napster shows up and gives out free 5 minute downloads of picture-perfect movies, I'd say the movie studios should take a look at their product and figure it out and stop blaming 'the pirates.' Aargh.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Technologic, 24 Jul 2006 @ 11:38am

Re:
Again, you make the falacy of compairing physical property rights with "intellectual property" rights. Thus, your analogy fails.
There are no starving movie executives.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DMAC, 24 Jul 2006 @ 11:38am

Re: ScaredOfTheMan comment
So according to that thinking you would be OK if all of us got a piece of your paycheck. Because as you stated "How well should" you have done. Do you really need all that money. I mean there are lots of people making less than you.

Doens't really make sense when its your money.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
mastmaker, 24 Jul 2006 @ 11:40am

Mike, you seem to beat SOME obsolete business models which try to use political and legal means to stay relevant while ignoring the OTHERS. Why blame RIAA, MPAA and telcos for this strategy while other (for more obsolete) business models like Christianity, Islam and Hinduism have been using it for centuries?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Derek Reed, 24 Jul 2006 @ 11:41am

RE: Sohrb
An analogy to a physical object only applies if there is truly a limited supply. It costs practically nothing to repeat a series of 1s and 0s. If it was suddenly technoligically possible to replicate food or medicine for free, but some corporate entity had the legal power to stop Jonny Dogood from making free bread for starving children, do you think we would be having this same arguement?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2006 @ 11:41am

Re: Pirates
Shut Up!

*sniff*
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2006 @ 11:43am

"You can never compete with free"
Carlo offered a rebuttal to that. Apparently pirates-movie is competing fairly well with free. Nobody here speculated how much more money could have been made without pirates-freeloaders on the scene. The criticism here is the media industries blowing the issue all out of proportion and using that to justify their apocalyptic policies. Nobody on _techdirt_, for chrissakes, is complaining about fatcat profiteer media moguls making more than they "should". Use your brains, kids.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Starky, 24 Jul 2006 @ 11:48am

Re to Philippe the Pirate Monkey
You're not the only one who does that. I've done that to many movies and cd's, and it seems to work.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2006 @ 11:50am

But did it beat Aquaman in the box office??
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2006 @ 11:50am

Tit for Tat
Untill the MPAA starts offering to replace my scratched DVD/CD for only the cost of the media I don't want to hear any sob stories, bought it once on vinyl, again on cassete and again on cd and again on itunes. It's a double standard, either I am buying the CD or I am buying the content
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Saboteur, 24 Jul 2006 @ 11:55am

Re: Re: Those aren't the sales they're looking for
Those philosophical grounds should prove interesting. Personally I like the director’s comments
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Your Projectionist, 24 Jul 2006 @ 11:55am

MPAA Sycophantic Morons
Yeah, all you that said that the movie would be doing even better, if their was no one downloading it off the net.

PROVE IT MORONSSSSSSSSSS!

That's right you can't, because it is likely that anyone willing to spend time downloading a downgraded cam copy and vie it in their bedroom is likely to spend money to watch it with a theatre full of strangers.

And since there is no DVD of the movie, any piracy now cannot affect a non-existent product.

Effin' Morons!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
IDownload, 24 Jul 2006 @ 11:55am

Report from an admitted downloader
I probably see about 5 to 7 movies a year nowadays in the theater, averaged over the last three or four years, because there just aren't many films made that appeal to me. I *do* download films from time to time, and I can tell you, not only do I not keep them, I usually don't finish watching them. And this is not because the quality of the file is bad (though of course it usually is), but because the "blockbuster film" is just not a good movie.

I readily and unashamedly admit to doing this. I'll also make the statement that when there are movies I know I want to see (Superman, Monster House, Cars - though I was disappointed with that one) I'll go to the theater despite the lines, cell phones, and talking, because the theater experience is the perfect place to view them. If I want to find out if, for example, "Click" is good, I'll download it because it's not my kind of movie. If I *do* end up liking it, that will influence my future theater/download choices, and may even sway me to purchase a DVD of the movie. Without the option to "try before I buy" I wouldn't do that at all for films I have doubts about.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Michael Long, 24 Jul 2006 @ 11:56am

Pirates, yes, but...
Pirates, yes, but one example does not a proof make, especially when your "proof" is one of the most anticipated and profitable movies of the summer.

What's the impact on the non-summer-blockbuster? For many films, the margin between being in the black and being in the red is paper-thin. How many people not paying to see the film, or buying or renting the DVD, does it take before it fails?

And as such, how many good films will not be made, simply because they're not mass-market, least-common-denominator crap, and would never be profitable in a "okay-to-steal-whatever-you-want" environment?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
JM, 24 Jul 2006 @ 11:58am

Re:
I see this as yet another failed argument.

First, there is a difference between stealing and Intellectual Property infringement.

Stealing inherently means I have taken something away from you; the act of taking something from someone unlawfully. I have gained and you have lost something and can only get it back if I give it back. I don’t buy into the propaganda argument that downloading a zero-cost mass-distributable copy is the same thing.

If I could make a 1-to-1 duplicate your car you couldn't claim I stole it because you STILL HAVE IT. Pretty sure the police would laugh at you for reporting it as stolen property when it’s sitting in your driveway.

So, if an individual never intended to pay to see a movie and instead downloaded a COPY from the internet - you can't claim you've LOST anything. It certainly isn't stealing.

I have no quarrels with anyone that Intellectual Property infringement is illegal, but I personally don't have any sympathy for Hollywood millionaire's complaining they aren't making enough. And you’re particular pro-Hollywood argument doesn’t hold much weight under careful scrutiny.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2006 @ 12:01pm

And here's the real statistic I want to see: how much piracy is due wholly to it being impossible to click and buy media without DRM bullshit and laughable 128kbps mp3 quality? I reject any analysis of how much money is being lost until this has been tried on a widespread basis so we have a comparison point. 90+% of my piracy is just because I can't pay anyone for flacs of what I want, no matter how badly I want to.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2006 @ 12:04pm

Re: Tit for Tat
Neither.

You are buying a license to view / listen to the content in the format provided on the media provided.

If the media expires, so does your license.

They didn't scratch it, you did.

I'm not a fan of the RIAA or the MPAA, but this kind of "I'm entitled to it because I *want* to be" attitude is hurting us more than the **AA's ever could.

Please spare us your lame excuses.

It may be a double-standard, but your're the one buying it 4 times over...

Perhaps it might have been in your financial interests to stick with that cassette walkman for a while longer than you did.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sohrab, 24 Jul 2006 @ 12:06pm

Re: Report from an admitted downloader
so with this, its ok to steal, try something out. Again, I stole a Camry today to see how I liked it. Not usually my car but upon stealing it, I saw that I liked it and it might help me further by a Lexus in the future? Im not here to agree or disagree on the film content, some like you watch 3-4 movies a year, others like me go once a week. The point is, stealing is stealing, just because you dont like the content or would normally have never paid for it, dosent make it right.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
drew, 24 Jul 2006 @ 12:07pm

Pirates
The majority of people do not know how to download or are a afraid of the consequences. That is why it did well. I am the only person in my office who knows what a torrent is.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
JM, 24 Jul 2006 @ 12:08pm

Re: Pirates, yes, but...
Interesting. All the people I know that download movies off the internet actually go out and buy the *good* ones.

When Hollywood starts making more good movies than bad ones maybe they will see better profits.

Internet-downloaded screeners cannot compete with high-quality DVD. The problem is in the content - it's not worth the price so what do you expect?

This is a no-brainer.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2006 @ 12:08pm

I saw Pirates on the opening weekend as well as Clerks 2. These are both movies that I would have been perfectly content with waiting for them to come to dvd and watching them on my 50 inch HD set. Not bragging, but I get a perfectly good movie experience at home. I saw them in the movies because a group of my friends got together and it became more about the social experience than going to pay bloated ticket and food prices to take a risk on a crappy movie.

If the movie theatres provided a more reasonably priced experience, more people would take risks seeing sketchy movies. Frankly, I'd rather fill my tank and drive to work for a week as opposed to spending $40 for some fast food and two tickets for a POSSIBLE 2 hrs of entertainment. Going to the movies has almost become a luxury experience...often ruined by some little kid kicking the back of my chair for the entire flick.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2006 @ 12:12pm

Re: Those aren't the sales they're looking for.
"Personally, I refuse to buy dvds until they make them without menus or extras or FBI warnings or trailers. If they waste a single bit on pointless non-movie content, I object to it on philosophical grounds."

Are you freaking kidding? The ONLY reason to buy a DVD (and consequently go through the trouble of ripping it for storage) is for the extras. Of course, I don't define an FBI warning as an "extra". But movie-related extras are an added value and sometimes justify the high price of buying a movie you already saw in the theater. How about allowing customers to use movie theater stubs as coupons for $ off the DVD? That might encourage more sales.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Omirta, 24 Jul 2006 @ 12:15pm

"Doing pretty well is not doing as well as it should"

yes if it wasn't for p2p, I would have ran out to the store and bound 1,000's of dollars on crappy software I would have used once!!!! Same goes for movies,

Do you really think people who download the movies would have gone to the theatre and pay 10 bucks to see it? maybe a select few would.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
joe, 24 Jul 2006 @ 12:29pm

the reason that we will always go to see the move in theaters is because you aren't gonna get ten friends all dressed up as pirates at midnight sitting down and watching a cheap pirate copy of the movie on a computer! therefore, the only way to secure the future of movie theaters is to push dressing up and "cosplaying." as for people stealing software on p2p networks, shame, just go to open source stuff!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Steve Jones, 24 Jul 2006 @ 12:32pm

Retards.
It amazes me that anyone can't understand, that if a pirate has $100 a month to spend on entertainment, they can't steal $500 from the movie studios by downloading 10 movies and watching them with their family.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
jsnbase, 24 Jul 2006 @ 12:42pm

Re: Re: Tit for Tat
"You are buying a license to view / listen to the content in the format provided on the media provided.

If the media expires, so does your license. "

Really? I have enough doubts about how much of a standard shrinkwrap EULA would hold up in a serious court challenge, but it least they actually exist. You seem to have invented a contract out of whole cloth.

Are you a lawyer? Please don't ever represent me or anything I love, like gravity. With arguments like that they'll just shut it off.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
randy, 24 Jul 2006 @ 12:42pm

Pirates
The movie sucked and still did 300 mil my heart bleeds for them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Xcetron, 24 Jul 2006 @ 12:47pm

If I like something that I downloaded, I'm definitely going to buy it but if I dont like it then its deleted right away. Its completely illegal but at least the people who make good stuff that I like will profit due to me buying the stuff anyways. And I usually buy things to collect and more often than not watch the ripped versions and try to preserve the original copies.

Its a dumb philosophy but I like it, lol.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
joey, 24 Jul 2006 @ 12:49pm

Pointless?
so, lets say i have a copy of... oh, i dunno... Stealth, or, The Island.... and i like it a lot. I put it in my DVD player, and for some "act of god" the DVD player scratches the DVD up. it is hopeless--you can see light, through the layers and all that good stuff.

So, is it "legal" to RENT that movie, Copy it, keep the trashed DVD in a folder and put the copy in the Original package?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2006 @ 12:50pm

Movie Exec's point to pirating as being the main cause of why they are losing money instead of pointing at themselves for producing crappy movies. The summer block busters used to be something I looked forward to but now I'd rather not spend the money at all. What the movie exec's fail to see is people like me who don't go to the movies or download some pirate copy simply because I don't want to see their crap. Period! Come up with something mildly entertaining Movie exec's then I might ...just might spend my money on your crap.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2006 @ 12:50pm

Re: Re: Report from an admitted downloader
I don't think anyone here is arguing that piracy of movies is right. The point of the article is to show that, at least in this case, the movie studios argument that piracy is costing them loads of possible box-office revenue, is false. The movie studios use excuses such as piracy as a reason to raise prices at the theater and explain low revenues, when in reality, the amount of money they are losing due to piracy is neglible and most of their losses are due to the quality of the product and their inability to provide it in an atmosphere that the consumer wants.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2006 @ 12:53pm

Re: Re: Those aren't the sales they're looking for
Well, then they have to choose their market. People who are wanting to enrich the original experience of watching the movie in the theater, or people like myself who want to have that experience for the first time in their living room. In this case, you can't have both. Without putting the extras on another disk. In which case you don't need a menu. Why is this so complicated?????? arghh
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Shakes, 24 Jul 2006 @ 12:59pm

All this talk about piracy in the music and movie business, and yet the movie studios have created not only one, but soon to be 3 movies that not not only endorses but encourages piracy. Now that's what I call funny. Long live Captain Jack Sparrow.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
kweeket, 24 Jul 2006 @ 1:03pm

Re: Re: Report from an admitted downloader
As has been said, over and over and OVER, there is a difference between stealing and copyright infringement. When you compare downloading a movie to "stealing a Camry to see how I liked it", a better metaphor would be "making a lower-quality duplicate of a Camry to see how I liked it".

But, if you actually read IDownload's post before putting forth your flawed car analogy, you would have replaced the word "stealing" with "test-driving". See, his whole point was that he is MORE likely to buy a product if he can try it out first. And this "try before you buy" business model works great for a lot of products. Supermarkets have in-store samples; record stores have listening stations; car dealerships allow test-driving. Money-back guarantees work similarly for electronics products.

Carlos's original post seems to suggest that this model could also work for movies. Presumably many of the people who downloaded Pirates either saw it in the theater first (and wanted a copy to watch until the DVD comes out) or went to see it on the big screen afterwards.

If anything, this model promotes accountabilily on the part of movie-makers, since consumers are less likely to be suckered into seeing crappy movies on the basis of misleading promos.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sohrab, 24 Jul 2006 @ 1:11pm

Re: Pointless?
So if you buy yourself a new cell phone and drop and break it, its ok for you to go take a cell phone from a store. I mean you just got yours and you happened to break it. Again, stealing is stealing
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Wizard Prang, 24 Jul 2006 @ 1:14pm

It only takes one
It is the exception that proves the rule. Not "exceptions".

MPAA: "Movie attendance is dropping! IT MUST BE THE PIRATES!" (Panic, panic)

The rest of us: "Naw.. it's cos you're putting out crap."

Then PoTC/DMC comes along and breaks all records. Hmmm...

Moral: A good story, well told, will being put bums on seats and dollars in the bank.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mikester, 24 Jul 2006 @ 1:19pm

Re: Pirates
And I don't know about you but most ppl want see a movie like that in all it's glory and not on pixely, wabbly 17" monitor at home.

Actually, with the proliferation of DivX and XviD compatible DVD players, I'd say more and more people are viewing their pirated material on their TV sets. And if you own home theater equipment, all the better.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
rijit (profile), 24 Jul 2006 @ 1:37pm

Here's Hollywood's fix...
Why not release the trailers with some of the extra DVD content and maybe longer teasers. After all, more than half the movies I have seen I can tell within that time whether or not I like it. I do not mean 15 minutes of the best scenes from the movie either, one continuous scene, say within the first half hour of the movie. I hate seeing a movie and never seeing the cut scene they used in the movie trailer, drives me nuts.
I do not really see a point to this article really, it is comparing apples to oranges. If movie execs are talking about the "filmed in theater" pirate movies competing with the silver screen, I gotta ask, just how stupid do you have to be to be a part of one of the **AAs?? No camcorder can compete with the silver screen, ever.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
brad, 24 Jul 2006 @ 1:39pm

As with any business, when the quality of the product decreases, so do the sales. Let's face it folks, hollywood isn't exactly putting out the greatest material these days - even the so-called "blockbusters" arn't good most of the time! (War of the Worlds, Day After Tommorow etc)

Kind of like that sandwich shop down the street who changed the bread they use, or stopped carrying the menu item you liked most, you naturally would go less. That's how i see the movie industry. Add in high ticket prices, completely rediculous food prices, never-know-what-you-are-going-to get-movie selection and you've got an activity that people are going to be doing less NATURALLY.

If hollywood really wanted to fix things, they would stop hordeing all the money and give more to movie theaters so they could actually have like dollar bags of popcorn and stuff like that. The sad thing is that I think hollywood would rather see 1 million people pay 10 dollars than 10 million people pay 1. I don't know why.
You want a blockbuster? Stop ripping us off.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
brad, 24 Jul 2006 @ 1:41pm

better yet, how about this:

"Stop ripping us off and we'll stop ripping you off." :)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
2shay, 24 Jul 2006 @ 1:43pm

"Why not release the trailers with some of the extra DVD content and maybe longer teasers. After all, more than half the movies I have seen I can tell within that time whether or not I like it."

Uhhm, it's very simple. if they did that they wouldn't be able to trick people into viewing crappy movies. That would be very bad for them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Greg, 24 Jul 2006 @ 1:52pm

Re:
Sohrb, it's not an valid argument for piracy, but it is a very valid argument against RIAA/MPAA calculations of piracy's costs. i.e. 3 million people downloaded this movie/song, therefore we lost $X times 3 million in revenue...

Totally bogus.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Cheap-Assed Hippies, 24 Jul 2006 @ 1:59pm

Pay up and shut up!
Nobody rides for free ya shiftless, cheap-assed hippies. Get out of your parent's basements, get a job, then you can buy a ticket and see the movie. Movie companies are in the business of making money, don't tell them how to make money and they won't come to your parent's house and tell you how to be a total waste of space.

Besides, you're never going to get a date to the movie anyway, so $10 back in your pocket right out the gate moneybags!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Glen, 24 Jul 2006 @ 2:01pm

RE: Shorb/Sohrab
Sohrb, Sohrab - however you're going to spell it: It's not stealing, it's copyright infringement. Stop with the bad analogies. Try this one on instead: Let's say the new Harry Potter book has just been released. Instead of buying it, I check it out of my local library. Where are the news stories about the publisher being denied revenue from all those copies being loaned out, week after week, in public libraries throughout the world? How is this any worse than P2P? Because we MAY retain a copy of the film after viewing it? A crappy cam copy with audience noises, people walking in front of the screen, muddy audio? It's likely that the people happy with that level of quality are the ones that would wait for the movie to show up on cable or broadcast TV. Conversely, it's also likely that people watching the pirated copy will enjoy the movie, want to watch it in better resolution, and either pay to see it on a big screen or will buy the DVD.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2006 @ 2:05pm

Re:
I have no idea where you were going with this, but I think you completely failed.

Yes, there are politics involved with those OTHER "business models" you spoke of...but if you pulled your head out of your ass for half a second, you would probably find that the core of those models is giving the "content" away.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
wolff000, 24 Jul 2006 @ 2:11pm

To All Those Opposed To P2P
You can kiss may ass. Downloading movies, music or software hurts no one but the greedy. People that are smart enough to price stuff what its worth will make money the others will wither and die. That is way of the future you can argue all you like but facts are facts. I "steal" all digital content unless I find something worth the price the store is asking. Very few product live up to this so I buy very few. Whoever the ass hat is that used the car analogy bad choice because a car is not information which is all a movie is.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Moneybags, 24 Jul 2006 @ 2:15pm

Re: Pay up and shut up!
I make a mid-six-figure yearly income yet I still download. Why? Because I'm not quick to piss away my cash to an industry that knowingly produces crap and tries to then market it as more than crap.

I don't live in my parent's basement. No, I own an entire apartment complex. But not knowing if a movie is worth MY TIME AND MONEY doesn't mean I'll mindlessly drop my cash on the counter hoping I walk away pleased with the experience. That's right, you don't become rich by wasting money, something Hollywood has NOT figured out.

So, they claim they want to make cash off these pieces of crap. Then how about you reinvent yourself just like any other industry has to when change is introduced. Otherwise you can sink to the bottom of the toilet with the rest of the useless turds out there, specifically, anyone who generalizes that a downloader MUST live in thier parent's basement.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
OfUnknownOrigins, 24 Jul 2006 @ 2:24pm

Get over it!
Pirating is not a bad thing. geesh people. You think that everyone has to share your views on this rock? pfft!
I am quite content downloading the latest release in shoddy quality and watching it. Would I of hit the theaters had it not been available? nope. Would I of bought the DVD? not a chance. I dont see much sense in spending $ ever on these items. Much like i rarely ever hit a fast food restaurant. AND I HAVE 4 kids! I dont own a TV but I do have one in each of my childrens rooms. I can live without TV and its items. I am fine on my 19" CRT watching videos and playing games on my PCs.. Once I purchase a game, its only usually after I have tried it out for free. Then I have made my decision to purchase and will do so. Not so with movies as I dont care about 2 hrs of entertainment. I can get 200 out of a $20 game.

People have lost focus wanting to fight about stupid subjects they may have no relevance in at all..

As long as there are geeks, there will be pirates. Until you produce something and feel that you should get paid without anyone else trying it out first, then you can say something.. I can code and I would never expect people to buy my software unless there was at the very least a functional demo they could try.

Same should go with the movies. Sure more people would go watch them if they offered a 20 min trailer.. or heck.. let everyone see the first 20-30 min of a movie. .if it hasnt hooked ya by then, it probably wont.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Bobby, 24 Jul 2006 @ 2:39pm

Mamma always said dat piracy is da debil.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Bill, 24 Jul 2006 @ 2:46pm

Your self-righteousness makes me giggle
oh the champions of online virtue. I watch downloaded movies. I watch them, I don't pay for them, and I enjoy them. Do I justify it? Of course. I could rattle off the litany of "reasons" that I'm making a statement by watching pirated movies; poor theatre experiences, commercials, overpriced food, sub-par-over-commercialized-wates-of-time, it could go on. Bottom line, I'm saving money. Am I rotten person? I never saw myself that way, but I still have an absolute lack of guilt when I watch movies that I wouldn't even otherwise pay to see. "Should" make? How about, they never would have gotten money from me either way!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jeremy, 24 Jul 2006 @ 3:07pm

What about the kids ;)
Actually I've know people to download movies from P2P so that they can pre-sceen the movie before they take their kids. The PG-13 rating is so ambiguous that I (I mean these other people) would freely take their 9 year-old to Star Wars III but wouldn't dream of it for something like The Brothers Grimm.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
IDownload, 24 Jul 2006 @ 3:20pm

Re: Pointless?
Excellent point. Further, for those of us old enough to have had many cassette tapes to convert to CD: if we're buying the right to enjoy the media, then by that logic we should have been able to turn in the 100's or 1000's of tapes we had and, for a *small* and *reasonable* shipping fee had them converted. You didn't buy the format, you bought the right to enjoy the intellectual property.

This is simply a license transfer -- I agree that you should be able to copy a rented movie if you've damaged the one you bought.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2006 @ 3:28pm

some people are collectors they have to have every movie and mp3 out there on the internet and will go to great lengths to get them. I knew a guy who had like 5000 songs on his computer and he hadn't listened to half of them. I don't believe that downloading has a significant impact on movie sales (although it might have a small impact on music). Simply because the comcorder in the theater can't compete with the quality of video and sound that you get from the theater or the DVD. Some people just download to download its almost an addiction for them. But most of them still shell out the money to see it at the movies if they really want to see it in the first place.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Missing, 24 Jul 2006 @ 3:31pm

Yo-Ho, Yo-Ho- A pirate's life for me!
I skipped the 2nd half of the posts, so I'm not sure if anyone here did the same thing I did, but I downloaded a crappy DV_camera copy of the film the night it came out, and watched it with 7 friends, then the next night, we got all dressed up and (with a little forescripting) watched the movie in the local theater. we interacted with the characters dialog and situations on screen, we (and I"m sure the audience) had an incredible time. the theater management came into the theater, saw that people were enjoying our improv and left us alone.

I plan on doing the same thing when the 3rd one comes out... I also plan on buying the DVD and probably the "collectors edition trilogy" when that comes out. I support both camps, the downloaders and the MPAA. In fact, I would not be so supportive of the MPAA if I had not been able to download it.

If I download something that I do not like, I rarely finish it and I destroy the DL regardless of my liking it. If I like it, I will buy the DVD without question. So for me at least, my DL habits line the MPAA's pockets.

Missing, The Honest Pirate.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
IDownload, 24 Jul 2006 @ 3:34pm

Re: Re: Report from an admitted downloader
No, no, no. I haven't deprived anyone else their ability to view the movie if I download it; if you steal a car, you've deprived someone of their personal property. Further, the car dealerships allow me to test drive. My call if I want to give them my money.

Think of this, too. Do you agree that libraries are good things? I do, but I know of several authors who don't like them because they know that some people only read a book one time, and won't buy a copy of their works if they can access them for free. Although the library does buy a copy, how many further sales are lost? No, this isn't a one-to-one comparison, but I think a point can be made that a "try before you buy" system does work better than corporate types give credit.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jul 2006 @ 3:48pm

Re: Yo-Ho, Yo-Ho- A pirate's life for me!
I appreciate your artform, and Im sure I would have recognized your skill, but I would have kicked your asses and dragged you out of the theater so I could appreciate the artform I went there meaning to appreciate.

Oh by the way, for every person that cheers you there are 10 more that are hating you. Expressing loathing is aggressive and people are less likely to do it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ralph, 24 Jul 2006 @ 3:50pm

Re:
Stating that going after file sharrers is pointless because they werent going to pay regardless for the movie is the worst argument ive ever heard. Its like saying, well its ok for me steal that car, I was never going to buy it anyways.

WRONG.

Downloadable movies are immaterial and infinite. A car is an object, that you'd have to steal directly from entity.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Taylor, 24 Jul 2006 @ 7:11pm

Missing The Point
The issue is NOTwhether pirated versions hurt the movie biz or not. It is about intellectual property rights. IF YOU MAKE A MOVIE, YOU should have the right to control when and how it is viewed, no matter how ridiculous your business model is. SO what if the producers are selfish and thick headed... It is their right to be that way.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Argh Matey Argh, 25 Jul 2006 @ 4:04am

Theatres suck...
The whole movie-going experience sucks. Why not release the movie DVD style on the same day of theatre release? I wish they would get away from this. Hell they'd make more money if you think about it. I hate the whole movie going experience because it costs almost the same as simply buying the film on DVD. Not to mention you get to watch in the privacy of your own home/apartment/dumpster. Besides, why bother paying $7.00+ for tickets and then another $10-15 for popcorn and drinks. On top of that you have to deal with annoying ass kids and a boatload of previews and now commercials. Fuck the theatres. Until Hollywood changes their poor business models and ways, Im downloading...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
You should be shot, 25 Jul 2006 @ 5:43am

Re: Re: Those aren't the sales they're looking for
You are a complete idiot. A Moron. I am amazed you can even wipe your own butt. You should be shot. Then kicked a few times. Or at least have your fingers lopped off so you cannot create any more stupid posts.
MORON.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jul 2006 @ 7:43am

Re: Re: Re: Those aren't the sales they're looking
I'm a moron because I have no use for anything but the movie and get pissed when I have to wade through other crap to get to it?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jul 2006 @ 8:58am

Shame, shame, shame. I hear a lot of justifications, but yes, when you download a movie, you are commiting a crime. You are stealing. You are stealing someone else's property. I know you come up with these nice justifications, but in fact you are nothing more than a criminal. You are depriving someone else of the rewards that they should be able to expect.

I know that studios make a lot of money, that movie execs make a lot of money, that actors make a lot of money, that musicians make a lot of money, and poor you, you just can't afford it, poor you, the crap they put out isn't worth the price they charge (and if its crap, why would you watch it anyway?) and that the fucking popcorn is too expensive (which has nothing to do the the movie studio since they don't sell popcorn) but the fact is, if you download movies, you are a criminal and you are stealing.

Justify it anyway you want, but those are the facts.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jul 2006 @ 9:16am

Re:
I'm sorry, but those aren't the facts. The chief characteristic of theft that makes it unethical is that it deprives someone else of the use of their property. Downloading a movie does not do that. This means that it is cast into a much greyer area where something is criminal or not depending upon social and legal traditions, such as sodomy or drug laws, rather then whether or not anyone is actually deprived of their life, liberty, or pursuit of happiness.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Jul 2006 @ 9:47am

Use of their property? So I guess if there was a car sitting in someone's yard (pretend we are all in Alabama) that they were never ever going to use again, it would be ok for me to take it?

You are denying them the right to benefit from their property. Its theft.

Keep trying to justify it though. If everyone just downloaded movies, there would be little need for movie theaters. Just because something isn't widespread doesn't make it right.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
gsel55, 25 Jul 2006 @ 2:10pm

Re: Same as stealing a car?
I would like to argue that there is a difference between "stealing" code and stealing a car. If you steal a car, the owner of the car is minus a car. If you download a movie through P2P that you would not have purchased in the first place, what is the owner missing? For that matter, what is the provider of the illegal file missing? Everyone still has what they had originally, right?
If you then watch the stolen movie and decide to go see it at the theater for a better experience, the owner is plus one ticket sale, and is still not missing anything.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Louis., 25 Jul 2006 @ 2:51pm

Re:

...often ruined by some little kid kicking the back of my chair for the entire flick.

Goddamnit! I hate that kid! What exactly are you supposed to do? Demand that he stop, give him a slap across the face and spend the rest of the movie in the security office with the little troll's truck of a mother? Or do you just sit there and take it and ignore him when he calls you fatty-fat-farts?

Yeah, that's what I thought. We should all be ashamed of ourselves.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Louis, 25 Jul 2006 @ 2:58pm

Re:

Use of their property? So I guess if there was a car sitting in someone's yard (pretend we are all in Alabama) that they were never ever going to use again, it would be ok for me to take it?

You are denying them the right to benefit from their property. Its theft.

Keep trying to justify it though. If everyone just downloaded movies, there would be little need for movie theaters. Just because something isn't widespread doesn't make it right.

Ah yes, mister moral high and mighty. Mister, the world is built on the vices of theft and lies. There is not one among us who can claim he is not guilty of crime when you draw such a line between black and white as you do, and I believe least of all yourself. No, mister moral high and mighty, when it comes down to it, you're probably as guilty as the rest of us.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Newob, 25 Jul 2006 @ 6:09pm

crime shmime
"When you download, you are committing a crime." Yeah well when you jaywalk you are committing a crime too! You are stealing valuable highway space that nobody was using to drive on, assuming you got across the road safely. I suppose that jaywalkers ought to be charged thousands of dollars for using the roads for "free," i.e. without paying for gas or buying a car. Bike riders and pedestrians, freeloaders all!

I like all this talk about how much money we are missing when people don't go to see our movies. Should we count starving children in Uganda amongst the numbers of lost ticket sales too? They didn't, after all, see our movie. And why not? Filthy freeloaders.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
TechNoFear, 26 Jul 2006 @ 1:55am

Copy v Actual Item
gsel55 >> If you download a movie through P2P that you would not have purchased in the first place, what is the owner missing? For that matter, what is the provider of the illegal file missing?

What if I 'download' your identity?

You are still you, I can't take that away, so have you been deprived of or lost anything?

Or if I make a copy of your credit card (just the important bits), if you still have the real card, have you lost anything?

Any money I take will be covered by the bank so whats the issue?
[ link to this | view in thread ]