How Dare You Promote Our Promotional Materials!

from the please-don't-watch-our-ads dept

Mon, Jul 9th 2007 5:48pm — Carlo Longino

cannen writes "This is a yahoo! news story about a trailer to a new movie called "Cloverfield". This is one of those secretive movies. The interesting part isn't so much about the movie, as the fact that they put the trailer before Transformers to generate "buzz". Shortly after, the trailers from the movie were put on YouTube. The last paragraph in the article says: "Several copies of the trailer, seemingly shot in theaters with a camcorder, were posted on YouTube by Thursday morning. But by Thursday afternoon, some of those links had been taken down, replaced by an advisory saying, 'This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Paramount Pictures Corp.' Why is it that the studios wanna ruin their buzz?

Come on, cannen, it makes perfect sense -- when you let lawyers run your entertainment company. Perhaps we should just be thankful that Paramount hasn't tried to have the people who filmed the trailer arrested.

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

Filed Under: lawsuits
Companies: paramount, youtube

28 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

TheBiblioholic, 9 Jul 2007 @ 6:12pm

Perhaps they wanted the promotion to look professional rather than crappy pirated hamdheld camcorder in low light quality?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Stute, 9 Jul 2007 @ 6:39pm
  
  Re:
  I've seen that happen a few times, but it could just as easily be lawyers.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Frenchy Frog, 9 Jul 2007 @ 6:38pm

Who turns down free publicity?
Obviously the entertainment industry's left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing. Who in their right mind would want to refuse free publicity? All they needed to do was turn a blind eye and let the promo speak for itself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Chris Maresca, 9 Jul 2007 @ 6:41pm

Or it's just guerilla marketing
Music companies often release 'studio recordings' of yet-to-be released albums to music fan sites. This helps build buzz and sales, and is usually followed, some weeks later, with a takedown notice.

Perhaps movie studios are attempting to do the same thing.

Chris.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sanguine Dream, 9 Jul 2007 @ 6:43pm

Hook, line, and sinker...
This is nothing but an attempt at a viral publicity stunt. All they did was release the trailer in a limited capacity on purpose and when the other methods came into effect they cry foul.

The entertainment industry may be immoral and unethical but they are not stupid. It looks to me like someone has finally learned how to use the Streisand Effect to their advantage.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 9 Jul 2007 @ 7:13pm
  
  Re: Hook, line, and sinker...
  No, I'm pretty sure they're stupid.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Matt, 9 Jul 2007 @ 7:23pm

incorrect?
"Perhaps we should just be thankful that Paramount hasn't tried to have the people who filmed the trailer arrested."

umm... according to the article that you linked to, the guy recorded the whole film, not just a trailer".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 9 Jul 2007 @ 10:42pm
  
  Re: incorrect?
  no they didn't, RTFA
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 9 Jul 2007 @ 11:37pm
    
    Re: Re: incorrect?
    I did RTFA... here's the bold print at the beginning of it
    
    "A man has been arrested under tightened anti-piracy laws in New York after allegedly recording the sci-fi blockbuster Transformers."
    
    It doesn't say he recorded the Trailer for it...it says he recorded the "sci-fi blockbuster Transformers"...
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 10 Jul 2007 @ 7:00am
      
      Re: Re: Re: incorrect?
      jeez, moron. "Perhaps we should just be thankful that Paramount hasn't tried to have the people who filmed the trailer arrested."
      
      "people who filmed the trailer" are different people than the guy arrested for camcording the entire film.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- TravisO, 10 Jul 2007 @ 7:55am
  
  Re: incorrect?
  What article did you read? The movie isn't even finished filming yet! The ONLY thing that exists is a trailer.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mischa, 10 Jul 2007 @ 7:58pm
  
  Re: incorrect?
  You misunderstood. The first link is about someone filming the trailer. The last link is about someone else who was arrested.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bah who needs one, 9 Jul 2007 @ 7:34pm

Why hasn't there been any top-level post by Mike Masnick in a week?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Chris Maresca, 10 Jul 2007 @ 8:52am
  
  Re:
  Probably because it's been vacation week here in the US. Not everyone can work 365 days a year....
  
  Chris.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 9 Jul 2007 @ 8:41pm

Maybe Paramount doesn't want to be the first motion picture company to say it's ok to post our copy written matterial, even though they know it's helping generation buzz about the movie. On a side note it's going to be another godzilla movie. That or Mr.Stay Puft is getting his own movie.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
spydrlink, 10 Jul 2007 @ 2:21am

Trailer Pull
Honestly, I saw the YouTube version a day before I saw Transformers (so last Thursday). I went to the movie and didn't see the preview for "Cloverfield" at all. Needless to say, when I saw the version on YouTube it looked like it could be a great film and it definitely made me want to go see it when it comes out. But...I wouldn't have known about it unless it was put up on YouTube.

Some point in the future the movie studios will understand the benefit of reaching wider audiences and free publicity. That sounds like a good business model to me...more reach for less cost.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Jul 2007 @ 3:00am

I had never heard about Cloverfield before
you mention it. So i guess the buzz is working....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Jul 2007 @ 4:58am

Cloverfield trailer is now up Apple's Website
Looks like Paramount may have given in somewhat: The trailer can now be viewed via Quicktime on Apple's Movie Trailer site.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
swany, 10 Jul 2007 @ 5:30am

Trailer
Can someone tell me why Paramount would want a crappy looking version of their trailer on Youtube? Has anyone considered that they do not want to be represented by a low quality product?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The infamous Joe, 10 Jul 2007 @ 5:52am

Trailing.
Can someone tell me why Paramount would want a crappy looking version of their trailer on Youtube? Has anyone considered that they do not want to be represented by a low quality product?

1. I find it hard to believe that if Ladiesman217 puts up a trailer on youtube that is poor quality that anyone will think that means the *movie* is also going to be poor quality.

2. Instead of being asshats, Paramount could have simply uploaded a good quality trailer on youtube-- which would have certainly become more popular than the same trailer in poorer quality-- free hosting of your tailer *plus* you don't look like a control-hungry asshat. Bonus!

3. The more people that see a commercial (which is what a trailer is) the more people who are likely to become interested in the product-- regardless of the picture quality of said commercial. More exposure (especially free exposure) is better than less exposure when it comes to a commercial.

They *still* don't get it, it seems.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- swany, 11 Jul 2007 @ 8:36am
  
  Re: Trailing.
  1. I find it hard to believe that if Ladiesman217 puts up a trailer on youtube that is poor quality that anyone will think that means the *movie* is also going to be poor quality.
  
  It is all about image. If I spent millions on a product like this, I sure as heck do not want a second rate version of my product available for people to see.
  
  2. Instead of being asshats, Paramount could have simply uploaded a good quality trailer on youtube-- which would have certainly become more popular than the same trailer in poorer quality-- free hosting of your tailer *plus* you don't look like a control-hungry asshat. Bonus! They *still* don't get it, it seems.
  
  If they still don't get it, why is the trailer available on the Apple web site? And why are there still multiple trailers still on Youtube?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Jul 2007 @ 6:03am

So I guess this means that these people were also there to record "Transformers" while they were at it. Maybe that's what Paramount is pissed off about.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Jul 2007 @ 6:47am

Not that hard to figure out really. Remember Star Wars? Lord of the Rings? People went out of their way to see movies they wouldn't normally see just to get a glimpse at a trailer for a major blockbuster. Paramount (and whoever else) just wants the same thing to happen here, even though at $140 mil+ I don't think Transformers is in need of that kind of push.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gustavo, 10 Jul 2007 @ 8:10am

They must be thinking "Hey, these folks must be going to see Transformers because of the Cloverfield trailer, not the other way around."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Team Tutorials, 10 Jul 2007 @ 10:17am

It makes perfect sense. If I want to see the trailer I should have to pay $8.50 and sit through 40 minutes of them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 10 Jul 2007 @ 10:56am

trailers are a buffer for candy, snacks, a smoke or just being late...otherwise there annoying :P to pay 10 bucks and being forced to watch another hollywood BS movie commerical save it for the free tv :)

hey people, STOP advertising there movies, they dont want it so dont do it...its there loss realy. let them pay the money for a proper commerical lol....MPAA=retarted.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Enlightenment, 10 Jul 2007 @ 10:19pm

Thought about how the sole purpose of the lawsuit was to generate publicity? Thought about how I can still find the trailer on YouTube? Though about how the only reason I know about this movie is because of the lawsuit?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
PRMan, 6 Sep 2007 @ 3:15pm

Has anyone thought about...
Has anyone thought about the fact that Apple and Paramount probably have a deal that they are the only ones who are supposed to have the trailer exclusively online, to generate traffic for Apple.com?

Paramount is probably "sending takedown notices for free publicity" because of an exclusive contract with Apple.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]