New Zealand Media Claiming That Huge Local Film Success Story Is Being Harmed... By 200 Downloaders?

from the say-what-now? dept

Thu, Jun 24th 2010 10:54am — Mike Masnick

Reader Matt Perryman points us to a bizarre story down in New Zealand, which he claims is all over the news. Apparently, a local movie, called Boy, has been a huge success -- having the third most successful box office of a New Zealand film ever. Not bad, right? But, months after the film has been out in the theaters, it's now been leaked to the internet, and suddenly the media frenzy is about just how much this is "costing" the filmmakers. No evidence (at all), is presented. They just claim that a leak like this will cost a million dollars. Even more amusing, at the time these reports came out, they said that the movie had only been downloaded 200 times. But, if you look at the comments on that article, a ton of them are thanking the publications for letting everyone know the movie was available for download. Of course, many of the commenters are also pointing out that they don't live in New Zealand, and there was no way for them to see the movie otherwise... meaning that those downloads aren't losses at all. But, it seems the reporters never bothered to mention that rather important fact.

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: copyright, downloads, losses, movies, new zealand

46 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2010 @ 11:20am

"No evidence (at all), is presented"

Just like your post about an expired patent holding back research. Pot meet Kettle.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2010 @ 11:24am

Re:
"Just like your post about an expired patent holding back research. Pot meet Kettle."

Douche meet Bag.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Just Another Moron in a Hurry (profile), 24 Jun 2010 @ 11:38am

Re:
Evidence that Patents hold back research? Alright.

What about Myriad using patents to hold back breast cancer research?
What about the Patents on Oil Eating Bacteria, holding back research on ways to utilize them?
What about the company StemCells using patents to stop a Children's Hospital from researching Brain Cancer for 3 years?
How about the concerns about Craig Vetner's pantent for sythetic biology, and the delays it will cause for research?
Or take a look at MPEG-LA's use of patents to hold back an open standard for Video?
Take a look at the Smartphone patent thicket, and see how fast research can be done for improving that industry?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
chris (profile), 24 Jun 2010 @ 12:01pm

best comment on the article:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
chris (profile), 24 Jun 2010 @ 12:01pm

Re: best comment on the article:
oops.

here's the comment:

Thanx, A 9, V 10 will seed till 1:1 ratio
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2010 @ 12:05pm

Notice how the cited story has finally disabled comments... XD
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Keven Sutton, 24 Jun 2010 @ 12:08pm

Choice of story....
Yes, the impact of the downloads is much less than the author of the story has made of it.

Yes, many of the downloads are outside of New Zealand and are therefore only going to increase the demand for the movie.

Yes, it had only been downloaded 200 times.

But that doesn't drive site hits. The author of the article is most likely trying to get as many eyes on the story as possible. Going to the extremes of what the facts can support is what a lot of journalists do in an attempt to drive more traffic (not even an attempt to drive an agenda). Lots of news sites do this with even more mundane things like sports, where the emotions are already charged. Ignoring these facts is probably bad journalism, but in a world where people want bad journalism, journalists write poorly supported pieces.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2010 @ 12:09pm

in the end, what this story reveals is how nasty and vengeful file traders are if they think people are trying to stop them. it is nasty, it is ugly.

just for clarity, there is no indication that 200 file downloads cost 1 million, only that previous movie leaks have caused that type of damage. considering the movie might have a future overseas, that future might be hurt or lost if the movie ends up widely distributed online for free. distributors might not be interested in putting up the time and money to promote or distribute a film that is already widely available for free.

thanks to piracy, those of us who might have enjoyed this movie some time in the future are unlikely to get the chance, unless we too choose to "borrow" a copy from the internet. perhaps more than anything, this is perfect example of the damages done, especially to smaller movie makers.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2010 @ 12:11pm

Re:
I blame the internet.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
duffmeister (profile), 24 Jun 2010 @ 12:15pm

Re:
So 200 downloads can stop an international release? Maybe we should all start pirating Ewe Boll movies so he will not get distributed? {/sarcasm}

Please site a case that stands to scientific standards and reason (not one the GAO has said uses no solid science) that shows even a causal effect of this magnitude for any movie. I am unaware of any at all and I'd love to see them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Devonavar (profile), 24 Jun 2010 @ 12:17pm

Can you say publicity leak?
Move along folks, nothing to see here.

I think the only chance they would find out so promptly and announce it so loudly is if they posted it themselves. 200 downloads at the time of printing? It just stinks of a publicity plant.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Nzer, 24 Jun 2010 @ 12:19pm

they feel left out..
..and want to feel like they are part of the big bad world.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2010 @ 12:21pm

Re:
4, count em, 4 "mights" in your response. Bottom line, 200 people owe the rights holder $10 for the movie. Nothing else can be proven or matters.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Drew (profile), 24 Jun 2010 @ 12:27pm

Re:
"... only that previous movie leaks have caused that type of damage."

Where your evidence?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
:Lobo Santo (profile), 24 Jun 2010 @ 12:33pm

Re: Re:
...minus the number who wouldn't have seen the movie to being with, and those who may have requested a refund from the movie theatre.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jeremy7600 (profile), 24 Jun 2010 @ 12:44pm

Re:
in the end, you should know that file traders have been around since the beginning of the internet, and they will always be there. it is fact. it is truth.

just for clarity, a lot of movies made in the last 5 years have leaked to the internet even before they hit the theater. that hasn't stopped any one movie from going to the theater or from being put out on dvd. studios will get money from the release no matter what happens on the file sharing sites.

thanks to piracy, those of us who had never heard of this movie have definitely heard of it now. the publicity the movie gets from this will make sure it gets seen by a wider audience. perhaps more than anything, this is a perfect example of the promotional value of file sharing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
chris (profile), 24 Jun 2010 @ 12:54pm

Re: Re: Re:
uhh, 200 downloads X $10 = $1,000,000

you really can't argue with the math. it's mathematical.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Thomas (profile), 24 Jun 2010 @ 12:57pm

Two Things -
1. A reporter repeats something somebody said - a guy from the so-called "New Zealand Federation Against Copyright Theft" (no agenda there) estimated that some other film that was leaked "lost" a million dollars. And they toss this number around like it's a fact. Prove it. Publish your financial statements. Let's see the facts that prove you were going to make $X from your movie, and that because of it being available on the internet you made $X - 1,000,000. Bring on the data that differentiates between the people who downloaded it and didn't buy it because they thought it was crap, and the people who downloaded it and then went to the theatre or bought the DVD because they thought it was good. Surely you must have this data handy or you wouldn't glibly toss around million dollar estimates of losses, would you? 2. This movie is one of the highest grossing New Zealand films of all time, has been released for three months, and it still is not available internationally or on DVD?? What are they waiting for - all interest in the film to completely die off? The internet is doing their promotion for them - getting the film to people who can't see it in the theatre or buy the DVD. And those people want to see it; they want to buy the DVD and they can't. If this movie loses anything, it will be because of they have under-served their audience. A potentially world-wide audience wants to see it, and they put all their effort into making that difficult, and complaining when a few people take the initiative and seek out their locked-up movie.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2010 @ 1:02pm

Re: Re:
I think you meant TAM meet Pon
[ link to this | view in thread ]
chris (profile), 24 Jun 2010 @ 1:08pm

Re: Two Things -

not making a million dollars is the same as losing a million dollars, just like standing still is the same thing as walking backwards.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chosen Reject, 24 Jun 2010 @ 1:09pm

Re:
You mean like how the leak of Wolverine before release caused all distributors to walk away from it? And like the Dark Knight's leak 5 days before UK release caused no one in the UK to see it because no distributor would pick it up?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
lucas, 24 Jun 2010 @ 1:48pm

Here in Brazil the same happened.

The biggest success of the local movies was leaked 2 months before the theaters showed. It was a huge success (and was a cheap movie, actually).

But the media blamed the 'piracy' to some reason that no one really understands. The movie was the biggest success in the brazilian history and, problably, if nobody downloaded the movie, would be a giant fiasco - since there wasn't a big producer or a big budget for ads.

(sorry about the english.)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
JC Carter, 24 Jun 2010 @ 1:49pm

they aint hte only ones
The NZFAT.... oops, misspelt, have been spamming their garbage around NZ for ages. Like any industry linked body, they make many claims that would be laughable if they didnt have the ears of the empty headed politicians attempting to force US style IP garbage onto NZ via ACTA or their own three strikes bollocks.

The fat heads interview on Cambell made him look like the bad guy from Alvin and the Chipmunks, without hte talent or the fuzzy animals.

that just leaves a retarded scammer

oh, and Perryman is a drunken mexican
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Matt P (profile), 24 Jun 2010 @ 2:23pm

The worst part is that the link above is just part of it. It was on every evening news broadcast, in the papers, etc.

One of the local news shows did interview the director, and he was actually moderate about the whole thing. He said he expected it would happen and in some ways was flattered that people wanted to see the film.

It's NZFACT making the usual garbage claims, and we have few if any public outlets down here to rebuke them, so the "millions of dollars in losses" are just thrown out like an absolute truth.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Blatant Coward (profile), 24 Jun 2010 @ 2:50pm

Hey, there's a movie I never made, who can I sue for my lost revenue of trillions of dollars?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2010 @ 2:52pm

Re: Re: Two Things -
not making a million dollars is the same as losing a million dollars, just like standing still is the same thing as walking backwards.

Let me fix that for you Hollywood style:

making a 500 million dollars is the same as losing 500 million dollars, just like standing still is the same thing as walking backwards and this movie lost 500 million dollars and funded the following:

terrorist
organised crime
prostitution
paedophiles
communists
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2010 @ 2:52pm

Re: Re: Two Things -
not making a million dollars is the same as losing a million dollars, just like standing still is the same thing as walking backwards.

Let me fix that for you Hollywood style:

making a 500 million dollars is the same as losing 500 million dollars, just like standing still is the same thing as walking backwards and this movie lost 500 million dollars and funded the following:

terrorist
organised crime
prostitution
paedophiles
communists
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2010 @ 3:09pm

Re: Re:
"Take a look at the Smartphone patent thicket, and see how fast research can be done for improving that industry?"

But smartphones make incredible progress quarter to quarter, with the patent system alive and kicking? Phones from November 2009 are quite outdated already.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2010 @ 3:37pm

Re: Re:
"What about the Patents on Oil Eating Bacteria, holding back research on ways to utilize them?"

This is exactly what I'm talking about. Where is the evidence (other than on techdirt, which is not evidence but opinion)?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ltlw0lf (profile), 24 Jun 2010 @ 3:38pm

Re: Re: best comment on the article:
My favorite was "Pathetic downloading scum, Idiots with no thought foR the poor movie mAkers Trying to makE an honest Buck dont AnY.body Care anymOre M.akes me sick to the stomach
V10 A10 needs subtitles"

PIRATEBAY.COM. for the win.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Matt P (profile), 24 Jun 2010 @ 3:45pm

If you want evidence of patents limiting innovation, all the research you could ever want is right here:

http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/general/intellectual/againstfinal.htm

That's what it looks like when you cite real evidence, instead of making up numbers.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2010 @ 4:28pm

Re:
That's the thing. You can argue that there won't be an international release due to this, but at the same time filmmakers won't have to worry about distributors' costs or any other middleman issues. The release is happening regardless of the middlemen or lack thereof.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2010 @ 5:56pm

Re: Re:
no, 200 downloads wont change anything. but those 200 sharing with their friends, putting it online, pushing it out, etc, could lead to (cue the techdirt theme music) an infinite distribution. once something is out in the wild, what is the chance of it getting put back away? none.

as for the use of the word "might" in my post, unlike mike i am not going to claim to be all seeing and all knowing, and i am surely not going to state as fact the complex things that go on with a download. there continues to be no causal evidence linking downloads of a movie and increased sales of that particular movie. if anything, ever download is removing a potential customer from the pool.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2010 @ 5:59pm

Re: Re:
you are making a classic mistake here, one mike makes all the time. there is no indication that the people who got these downloads then went to see the movie. if the downloads had not happened, would even more people have paid to see the movie, or bought a dvd? that is something that is not easy to prove either way, but there is little positive that can be found by putting your product in the market early.

if the movies had tanked in the market as a result, the distributor probably had a way out, because a short time before a movie is released, the distributor is already contractually bound. here we are talking about a movie with a small market potential, and no signed distributors outside of their home country. sort of a different situation, no?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2010 @ 6:00pm

Re: Re:
and the income from it isnt happening either.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
PaulT (profile), 24 Jun 2010 @ 7:27pm

Re: Re: Re:
"if the downloads had not happened, would even more people have paid to see the movie, or bought a dvd"

Similarly, if people had not been able to preview the movie, would less people had paid to see it in IMAX or bought a DVD?

Morons like yourself only consider one part of the equation. The rest of us recognise that it's more complicated and that people actually buy things after seeing, say, a TV broadcast or a borrowed DVD.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2010 @ 8:05pm

Re: Re: Re:
No evidence of that either.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2010 @ 8:07pm

Re: Re: Re:
[citation needed]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 24 Jun 2010 @ 8:55pm

Re: Re: Re:
"once something is out in the wild, what is the chance of it getting put back away? none."

Yeah. Good thought. Except...you constantly support the industry's wasteful and misguided attempts to "put it back away."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Marcel de Jong (profile), 25 Jun 2010 @ 3:53am

Re: Choice of story....
"Going to the extremes of what the facts can support is what a lot of journalists do"
What facts?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Marcel de Jong (profile), 25 Jun 2010 @ 3:57am

Re: Re: Re:
if a movie is already a top-grossing film at the box office (like Wolverine was) how can you expect that MORE people would've gone there? There is a limit.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Marcel de Jong (profile), 25 Jun 2010 @ 4:07am

Re: Re: Re:
Open a paypal or local equivalent account. Comment on the torrent sites with a link to said account and ask for donations if people like the movies.

Yes, it's akin to busking on a street corner, but it can net you some income. And 1 donated dollar is better than nothing.

But free publicity is also worth something I'd say. I could say that I would like a buck from the movie company for pirating their movie, as I help promote their wares by downloading it. Any idea how expensive an ad-campaign would be?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Drew (profile), 25 Jun 2010 @ 6:58am

Re: Re: Re: Re:
I mean how many people buy boxed DVD sets of shows that were on TV, I bet that market is really small...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
chris (profile), 25 Jun 2010 @ 11:00am

Re: Re: Re: Re:
Open a paypal or local equivalent account...

nah, that sounds like work and might require the use of the internet.

bawwwwing about piracy is much easier.

Yes, it's akin to busking on a street corner...

which is something that "unknowns" do before they become big time producers.

when you are a big time producer you don't ask for money, people just give it to you, because you deserve it for being a big time producer.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
PaulT (profile), 25 Jun 2010 @ 1:31pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I didn't mean just TV shows, but movies as well. There are many times I've watched a movie for the first time on TV and later bought it on DVD. If it was a free-to-air channel, I didn't pay for it, but if I wasn't "freeloading" the studio would not have seen my money. Ditto with borrowing a DVD from a friend or people who "pirate" a movie they would never have paid for if the freebie wasn't available.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Drew (profile), 28 Jun 2010 @ 7:04pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Forgot the '/sarcasm' on the end of my above...my bad.

I routinely have either watched movies in the theater or on T.V. and later purchased them because I like owning them. To me, trying to wade through all the crap illegal content out there to find a decent copy of something isn't not a good use of my time so I tend to buy what i'm looking for instead. I look at it more in a my time equals 'x' and if trying to find stuff online or in a digital medium takes greater than 'y' i've essentially wasted my talents.
[ link to this | view in thread ]