How Warner Bros. Should Have Responded To Harry Potter Leak

from the seriously? dept

Wed, Nov 17th 2010 10:17am — Mike Masnick

Not this again. With the news that the the first 36 minutes of the new Harry Potter movie have leaked online, Warner Bros. has gone the traditionally braindead, clueless path of demanding the heads of the leakers:

"Last night a portion of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 was stolen and illegally posted on the internet," Warner Bros. said in a statement Tuesday afternoon. "This constitutes a serious breach of copyright violation and theft of Warner Bros. property. We are working actively to restrict and/or remove copies that may be available. Also, we are vigorously investigating this matter and will prosecute those involved to the full extent of the law."

This is, of course, reminiscent to the leak of Wolverine last year -- except even more ridiculous on the part of Warner Bros. As we noted when Wolverine leaked, there were plenty of ways that the studio could have responded to this that didn't involve acting like overprotective children, but instead got fans excited. I came up with a "suggested" response at the time, and I'll do the same for Warner Bros here (no charge!):

Hey Harry Potter fans! We know how excited you all are for the next installment of the Harry Potter movie series this weekend. We're pretty excited too. Obviously someone here was so excited that they went and leaked the first 36 minutes of the film online. We didn't authorize this, and really wished it didn't happen, but it's out there. We're sure many of you will probably want to check it out, but we think that the full movie experience in the theater is really something quite special. If you really must watch the leaked clip, be forewarned: you're going to have to wait until the end of the week to find out what actually happens, and you're going to be dying in suspense, so we'd suggest you hang on and see the whole thing in the theater this Friday...

Or something like that. Once again, can you imagine how much better fans would respond to that sort of thing than to the chest-thumping silly threats? Besides, this is only 36 minutes of the movie. A bunch of movie studios have already released the beginnings of various movies to try to get people interested. If I remember correctly, all the way back in 2000 or so, the movie Chicken Run released the first 30 minutes or so to get people to go to the theater and other films have done that as well. So I'm having a really hard time figuring out exactly how this could possibly be bad for Warner Bros.

Well, unless the first 36 minutes absolutely sucks... But if that's the case, it shouldn't be about running to the authorities, but to the folks who made the bad movie.

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: harry potter, leak, movies
Companies: warner bros.

44 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 17 Nov 2010 @ 10:31am

thaaaats right... there yea go... aaaaaand see, toldya so ;-)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Nov 2010 @ 10:34am

A lot of commenters on other sites seem to believe this is a publicity stunt...and to be honest, I wouldn't be too surprised.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Killer_Tofu (profile), 17 Nov 2010 @ 12:24pm
  
  Re:
  That is exactly what this is. Purposefully leaked. Who only gets 36 minutes of film? If they were going to leak something, it would have been the whole thing. This is promotion they would never admit to because that would be admitting that piracy doesn't hurt them, and that it can only help. But they cannot admit to that otherwise they lose their false leg they have been standing on when they go crying to congress repeatedly.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
btr1701 (profile), 17 Nov 2010 @ 10:42am

Dawn of the Dead
I remember when the remake of Dawn of the Dead was coming out and the studio released the first 10 minutes of the film as a promotional move. I was skeptical of how good it was going to be and was planning on skipping it, but after watching those 10 minutes, I was impressed enough that it got me into the theater, fast zombies and all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- techflaws.org (profile), 18 Nov 2010 @ 2:20am
  
  Re: Dawn of the Dead 2004
  Same here. The Zombies waiting before rushing up the stairs to attac them though was a blunder.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Nov 2010 @ 10:47am

I dont believe any of it
no dumbass would leak only the first 36 minutes unless they worked in advertising.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
:Lobo Santo (profile), 17 Nov 2010 @ 10:58am

Agreement
I must agree with the commenters before me, 36 minutes is an extended trailer, nothing more.

A 'controversy' due to its theft though, that's advertising gold.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dirk Belligerent (profile), 17 Nov 2010 @ 11:04am

Anyone else surprised....
...that this wasn't yet another screed from Mike about how studios need to release movies on DVD at the same time as their theatrical release? I'm genuinely surprised that it wasn't.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Joe Average, 17 Nov 2010 @ 11:11am
  
  Re: Anyone else surprised....
  That's actually a pretty good idea though, I mean what's really lost if the consumer gets to pick how they watch a movie? A vast majority of the time I already know if I want to watch a movie at the theater before it comes out, so giving me a chance to rent and watch at home would be a great incentive to me to buy a ticket or a copy of the movie outright.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jessica, 17 Nov 2010 @ 11:12am

I have been shamelessly scouring the internet for any tidbit of info on the film for the past month so when I saw this story last night i did not hesitate to download and watched it several times. Also those 36 minutes end right after they apparate from the wedding so all the really good stuff is yet to be seen. i cannot comprehend how this could possibly hurt the film and prevent anyone from not seeing it. i showed it to my boyfriend who doesnt even follow the films and he now wants to see it in the theaters. so there you go. im not sure if it was intentional or not, but either way it made me want to see the rest of the movie ASAP! i was going to wait until a few days later when the crowds died down, but now i'm desperate to see it on Friday.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jessica, 17 Nov 2010 @ 11:12am

I have been shamelessly scouring the internet for any tidbit of info on the film for the past month so when I saw this story last night i did not hesitate to download and watched it several times. Also those 36 minutes end right after they apparate from the wedding so all the really good stuff is yet to be seen. i cannot comprehend how this could possibly hurt the film and prevent anyone from not seeing it. i showed it to my boyfriend who doesnt even follow the films and he now wants to see it in the theaters. so there you go. im not sure if it was intentional or not, but either way it made me want to see the rest of the movie ASAP! i was going to wait until a few days later when the crowds died down, but now i'm desperate to see it on Friday.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ed, 17 Nov 2010 @ 11:13am

Ummm no they should protect their IP from dirtbag thieves
What they wrote was exactly what they should do. This is grand theft to the nth degree. It's almost impossible to calculate the damage financially that piracy is causing to the industry and even to the entire economy. So I hope the thieves who get caught get massive fines and jail time depending on that they've done. Screw them. Usually the ones who defend or minimize piracy are those that do it and benefit from it because they're too cheap to buy a ticket or too lazy to get a job.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Evil Ed, 17 Nov 2010 @ 11:22am
  
  Re: Ummm no they should protect their IP from dirtbag thieves
  crappy troll is crappy
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 17 Nov 2010 @ 11:56am
  
  Re: Ummm no they should protect their IP from dirtbag thieves
  Seriously? Really? I see this as promo gold. I am not a Harry Potter fan but I know many rabid fans that will eat this up and us it as fodder to be first in line at the midnight showing.
  It's an extended trailer that will get people excited and buying up all of the Harry Potter stuff they can get.
  Even if you and the movie studios are not smart enough to know how to manipulate the fanbase, you really should learn how to take advantage of these situation's. Instead of killing off the fanbase that funds the industry.
  Sheesh. Get a clue please!!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 17 Nov 2010 @ 1:04pm
  
  Re: Ummm no they should protect their IP from dirtbag thieves
  Too cheap to buy a ticket or too lazy to get a job?
  
  Do you live in the US? Have you seen the unemployment rate?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Karl (profile), 17 Nov 2010 @ 4:17pm
  
  Re: Ummm no they should protect their IP from dirtbag thieves
  What they wrote was exactly what they should do.
  
  Are you some sort of agent provacateur? 'Cause everything you said was so wrong, you're just making "your" side look bad.
  
  Either way, I LOL'ed.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- PaulT (profile), 18 Nov 2010 @ 12:26am
  
  Re: Ummm no they should protect their IP from dirtbag thieves
  "It's almost impossible to calculate the damage financially that piracy is causing to the industry"
  
  It certainly is. However, that doesn't make it infinite. It could in fact be very little in real terms if you bother to weigh in all the factors. Glad to see one of you people admitting that we can't really know, however.
  
  As for "too cheap to buy a ticket or too lazy to get a job", you have such a ridiculously faulty premise it's not surprising that your industry's "solutions" to the problem as so harmful to themselves. At least, I assume you're paid by the industry - nobody's honestly this clueless, right?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ccomp5950 (profile), 17 Nov 2010 @ 11:15am

You are also genuinely off topic. The idea of "Windows" is silly in it's current incarnation simultaneous release has some benefits to it and may overcome the downsides, but having to wait 90 days to a year to see a movie I deemed not worth seeing in theaters but maybe worth queuing up on Netflix is ridiculous.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Ccomp5950 (profile), 17 Nov 2010 @ 11:16am
  
  Re:
  This should have been a reply to
  Dirk Belligerent
  Re: Anyone else surprised...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Prashanth (profile), 17 Nov 2010 @ 11:26am

For that matter, even if the movie really did suck, Warner Brothers would still be demanding protection from the government and somehow throttling customers by their necks for money because of course `filmmakers have a divine right to make money from their movies`.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Nov 2010 @ 11:26am

Look, I hate Harry Potter with a burning passion deep inside my soul. I view the people who watch or read that sort of tripe with mild disdain...especially the most rabid of fans (sorry Jessica). I feel superior to them in every way. I keep wishing something would happen to destroy the franchise. This is not that something. This will make the little girls who support this excrement even louder due to the excitement this will end up creating. The person who leaked this should be put in jail.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 17 Nov 2010 @ 12:10pm
  
  Re:
  I'm torn. I want to mark AC's comment both Insightful and Report at the same time.
  I too hate Harry but jail? I say make them pay for and sit through the entire movie 5 times in a row instead.
  I'm betting they beg to be forgiven before the 2nd showing is over.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jessica, 17 Nov 2010 @ 11:26am

If it was the entire movie that was leaked I would agree that it could damage the industry financially. But...it was only 36 minutes in which about 3 or 4 scenes within those 36 minutes have been released to us already. so really anything "new" was only filler between those scenes. Legally I am sure it should not have been leaked and the person should have consequence, but massive fines and jail time?? I defend it because I dont feel there was any harm done. Seeing this leak will absolutely not make someone NOT buy a ticket. Assuming that anyone who counter argues is cheap or lazy is a cop out to prevent anyone from doing so.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jessica, 17 Nov 2010 @ 11:38am

While I resent the word "rabid" I have to agree with you. this will only help the film and those of us who are genuinely excited for the movie to come out. i just think its sad whenever someone tries to cut down another person on purpose just because they dont share in same interests. but whatever makes you feel better right? i also find that those who despise the franchise have never read the books. They far outweigh all of the movies altogether. But im not trying to convert anyone. I am merely commenting on the fact that Warner Bros. will not take a hit from this leak. I have a feeling their statement was made only to defend themselves to please the press. I doubt anyone will get prosecuted to the "full extent of the law". Please.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 18 Nov 2010 @ 2:54pm
  
  Re:
  Honey, I did read the first book. It was just dreadful. The writing was ridiculous, the storyline was idiotic, and the fake Latin made me cringe. Anyone who enjoys this is an uneducated boob.
  
  I cannot wait until the day that all of these movies are out and this craze is over and done with.
  
  Thank you for agreeing with me on the word "rabid", even though you resent it.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
sivad (profile), 17 Nov 2010 @ 11:46am

Basically the reason they are so upset is this. Imagine someone watching the 36 minute clip online. They decide that it fairly boring and not something they are interested in. That person will not be paying for a ticket when the movie comes out. Warner Bros would much rather you pay your money and THEN decide thew movie sucks. Not the other way around.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- RikuoAmero (profile), 17 Nov 2010 @ 1:03pm
  
  Re:
  That was just what I was planning to write. This could be the only real reason that would make any kind of sense as to why WB are against this.
  Sure normal trailers are all well and good, but I for one never watch them, having learned not to trust them to accurately say whether the movie is any good or not. Should I waste my money on a bad product/service, or should I be an informed consumer and find out as much as I can, before laying my money on the table?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
sivad (profile), 17 Nov 2010 @ 11:48am

Jessica I have to say that people like you that really like Harry Potter, will see the movie even without this 36 minutes of the film. I'm not sure how that "helps" WB.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mojo, 17 Nov 2010 @ 11:49am

I doubt this is a publicity stunt, only because WB doesn't NEED to resort to something like this to fill the theaters for a Harry Potter movie. Every magazine on the stands right now has a HP story, buzz is already in the air, "it's the last movie-itis" is in full swing... They just wouldn't need to do this.

Someone got ahold of it and leaked it, pure and simple. Even if it was the whole movie, it's not like it's going to affect the bottom line - it will still gross at least $500 million worldwide even if a bootleg DVD was dropped on the doorstep of every home in America.

The amount of money WB will lose because of this leak is far less than they will spend in legal costs fighting it.

THAT is usually the irony of these situations.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Karl (profile), 17 Nov 2010 @ 3:50pm
  
  Re:
  The amount of money WB will lose because of this leak is far less than they will spend in legal costs fighting it.
  
  Unfortunately, as of 2008, pre-release of movies is now a federal crime. WB will not pay a dime in legal costs.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Karl (profile), 17 Nov 2010 @ 4:14pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Oops, sorry, the "pre-release = criminal" law was enacted in 2005, not 2008. It was called the "Family Entertainment and Copyright Act," making it all but impossible to vote against ("Wassa matter? You hate families?").
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Brandon, 17 Nov 2010 @ 11:50am

Good point! I agree absolutely 100%.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ervserver (profile), 17 Nov 2010 @ 12:09pm

Harry
maybe Warner Bros is more concerned with people seeing this leaked snippet, thinking how bad the movie is and won't go to the theaters
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- interval (profile), 17 Nov 2010 @ 12:55pm
  
  Re: Harry
  Yeah, the film COULD just plain suck. Doubtful though, I mean unless they blew it this time and hired a useless new pack of morons to produce it... sitting here as a jaded middle-aged man who has little interest in such things as magic wands and flying broom sticks, in general the series isn't that bad. Of course, its not hard when you have an original story to work from and not the usual schlocky nonsense Hollywood writers crap out.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
marak (profile), 17 Nov 2010 @ 12:56pm

Yup ill put my 5 cents in the "Advertising stunt" basket. Ive never seen a "first 36 minutes!" on a tracker yet haha.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Nov 2010 @ 1:11pm

Who are those people who go to a theater to see a censored version of the DVD?

You people know there is a theatrical version and DVD versions right?

All those bad jokes, cussing, gore, nudity and etc get in the DVD but not in the theaters.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 18 Nov 2010 @ 8:27am
  
  Re:
  All those bad jokes, cussing, gore, nudity and etc get in the DVD but not in the theaters.
  
  In a harry potter film ??????????
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
JTW, 17 Nov 2010 @ 1:15pm

Stupify!
I think WB is getting some pretty good guffaws over the free publicity. And if this was a real leak from a nefarious source... it would only seem to work in WB's favor. I concur with those claiming this is a publicity stunt... unless there's an actual police report filed. That would bolster the authenticity of the claim since it's a felony to file a bogus police report.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Vic, 17 Nov 2010 @ 1:47pm

Let's see:
"This constitutes a serious breach of copyright violation ..."

So.... It must be good then, right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TPBer, 17 Nov 2010 @ 3:23pm

Just saw it
Just saw a full copy on one of my private trackers, but it was 4.x GB, looked to be the whole thing. I will follow up with the result. It should take approx 30-40 min, thx to Uverse and it's blazin speed. I was such a big fan of cable until I saw the light from having dedicated bandwidth.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Alter ego, 17 Nov 2010 @ 7:21pm

"Last night a portion of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 was stolen and illegally posted on the internet," Warner Bros. said in a statement Tuesday afternoon. "Due to the theft, the first 36 minutes of the movie are now missing. Cinema-goers are encouraged to hum the Harry Potter theme-music and engage in righteous indignation while they sit out a dark, silent first half-hour."

Seriously people, can we stop using the word "stolen" when referring to copyright infringement!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
bsullivan, 18 Nov 2010 @ 12:40am

Harry
I been a fans ever sense the book came on and then the movies. I own of of thems and I plan on buying the rest. It really doesn't bollow me if someone put some of it outr, Ill and my wife and grandchildren will still go and see the movie at least once if not twice.

Bif Fan Here
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Josh Taylor, 19 Nov 2010 @ 3:39am

My guess that theater pirates are still at it by hiding a digital camcorder in their jacket and sneaking them into the theater so that they can tape the whole movie.

Why can't there be a security check at movie theaters (just like in airports) to prevent people from bringing the digital camcorders, search and confiscate them?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous1, 7 Mar 2011 @ 9:37am

Harry Potter SUCKS!
He's the most useless & stupid (shit) character created.
Harry Potter is scum, dumb moron & arrogant asshole.(His brainless fans, actors & actresses, JK Rowling, etc are weak-minded, sore losers with low IQ)
All of his storybooks, movies, etc are all shit, all dump, garbage, & rubbish.
He must be removed from this face of this planet.
Harry Potter (forever) SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS, SUCKS & SUCKS!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]