US Chamber Of Commerce: Bollywood Is So Successful Without Strong Copyrights That It Will Fail Unless India Strengthens Its Copyrights

from the wtf? dept

Tue, Jun 18th 2013 1:00pm — Mike Masnick

The US Chamber of Commerce, the giant lobbying organization who led the fight for SOPA/PIPA, is apparently so invested in "must have stronger copyright laws" that it doesn't even bother making sense any more. It's released a bizarre statement claiming that India needs stronger copyright laws, because Bollywood is so successful. Right upfront, it notes how successful things have been:

Boasting the largest film industry in the world, the creative sector lies at the heart of the Indian culture and economy. As one of India’s largest employment sectors, an endless array of local professionals from technical, theatrical, and creative backgrounds are helping churn out 1,000 films in more than 20 languages annually.

You'd think those are signs that copyright law was working (largest film industry in the world, largest employment sectors, over 1,000 films produced annually -- about double Hollywood) and that this would imply that whatever level of copyright there is in India -- which is supposed to be an incentive to creativity -- was doing a decent job. But, no, apparently it's all broken.

The government, however, must improve national intellectual property (IP) laws and enforcement if it is going to seize on this opportunity and gain recognition in the global market and further empower local creators.

Hmm. Wait, you just said that it's the world's largest film industry and an unqualified success. So, why does it need to improve those laws and enforcement?

Specifically, Indian copyright law is unclear with the 2012 Copyright Act amendments further complicating and contradicting previous rule of law. Furthermore, the 2012 Act provides for broad exceptions that are incompatible with international norms. Also measuring relatively loware enforcement efforts, which are weak in application and don’t provide widely available civil and procedural remedies for copyright infringement.

And, yet, this laxity incentivized the creation of nearly double the films that Hollywood produces. Perhaps -- and I'm just suggesting things here -- the "international norms" and the higher levels of enforcement are holding back the industries elsewhere. If anything, this report seems to suggest that other countries should move towards broad exceptions, since it appears to have been quite successful in India.

Furthermore, much of the paper seems to suggest that India needs to fix its copyright laws to embrace the international opportunity for its films -- but that (again) makes no sense. India's IP laws don't apply outside of India, so they have no impact on the international opportunities, which are governed by other IP laws. And, again, if the industry is doing great in India (with little enforcement and greater exceptions), doesn't this indicate that India should push for the same elsewhere to better embrace that international opportunity?

It's quite a world in which the US Chamber of Commerce seems to be arguing that an example of a success story should lead to that successful model emulating less successful markets. I don't know how much money the MPAA pays the US Chamber of Commerce for these kinds of pieces, but it's not getting its money's worth.

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: bollywood, copyright, india, success
Companies: chamber of commerce

63 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

That One Guy (profile), 18 Jun 2013 @ 1:03pm

And of course if they did adopt 'international norms' as far as copyright went, and in turn saw sales and creation take a dive, they would, without a doubt, blame piracy, rather than the stifling effects of those same IP laws they cherish so much.

Personally I'm guessing they are either trying to get rid of a competitor by bringing it down to hollywood levels, and/or get rid of a perfect example that proves that more copyright enforcement with stricter laws isn't the way to more creation and sales, and instead it's the direct opposite.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jun 2013 @ 1:08pm

nor is anyone else, the public in particular, but no one cares anyway. as long as the US entertainment industries get their own way, fucking up as much as possible for as many as possible, it doesn't care either! one of these days someone is actually going to realise exactly what a disaster the USCoC is for everyone everywhere, including the USA, that someone is going to dismember it!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Zakida Paul (profile), 18 Jun 2013 @ 1:09pm

Bollywood is successful precisely because they do NOT have strong copyright protections.

I don't know where the US Chamber of Commerce pulls their logic (or lack thereof) from.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Zakida Paul (profile), 18 Jun 2013 @ 1:09pm

I think it may be jealousy. Bollywood on the rise, Hollywood (apparently) on the decline.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That One Guy (profile), 18 Jun 2013 @ 1:11pm

Re:
That would be their bank accounts and the people paying them to act as PR men.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jun 2013 @ 1:13pm

It's pure jealousy, and nothing more. Hollywood is jealous that they aren't involved in the filming of "Breakin' II: Electric Vindaloo".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Zakida Paul (profile), 18 Jun 2013 @ 1:13pm

Re: Re:
I was thinking "their arses"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

out_of_the_blue, 18 Jun 2013 @ 1:17pm

Hey, Mike: India has 1,210,193,422 people! Should be FOUR times Hollywood!
If Hollywood produces half the products, then it's actually TWICE as productive as India!

Basic economics is that larger numbers of people produce more, but it's not necessarily linear, and that figure is called "productivity". What the hell did you DO in college, anyway, that missed elementary knowledge?

Therefore your argument falls flat as usual.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 18 Jun 2013 @ 1:18pm

Re: Re: Re:
Same thing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jun 2013 @ 1:21pm

More than just jealousy
It's also Hollywood's genuine anger that there's a market that's succeeding without their control. Their globalist agenda feels incomplete when even one segment operates in a way they don't like, whether it's an irrelevant country in the middle of Africa or one of Asia's largest and most prosperous countries.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lord Binky, 18 Jun 2013 @ 1:26pm

Re: Hey, Mike: India has 1,210,193,422 people! Should be FOUR times Hollywood!
By that logic, if one person produces 5 one hour films (that happen to be complete crap, but hey there was an explosion scene) every day is he more productive than all of hollywood. That might not seem right, because it's a stupid way to quantify things.

Just because you produce a turd every day doesn't make you productive or mean you produced anything of value. *sigh* I got caught in another troll trap didn't I?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

out_of_the_blue, 18 Jun 2013 @ 1:27pm

Also, compare amounts of money, particularly international.
You won't of course, just vaporizes your assertions.

Perhaps Chamber of Commerce is tactfully alluding to Bollywood's low productivity and low rates of return on investment and showing how those can be brought UP. -- I'm sure to be talking over your head with that last item, since you believe that "sunk (or fixed) costs" for making movies can be totally ignored.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

out_of_the_blue, 18 Jun 2013 @ 1:31pm

Re: Re: Hey, Mike: India has 1,210,193,422 people! Should be FOUR times Hollywood!
@ "Binky": "Just because you produce a turd every day doesn't make you productive or mean you produced anything of value. *sigh* I got caught in another troll trap didn't I?"

No, you just made an ass of yourself by trying to argue against sheer fact. Four times the population should -- if the simplistic measure that Mike makes is valid -- mean four times the production. It's not. Hollwood produces TWICE as much per person, roughly.

Myopic Mike bamboozled you again. You guys are pretty feeble to continue to fall for his line, when it's EASILY disproved.

And see my later. I didn't even bother getting to money value.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
David Muir (profile), 18 Jun 2013 @ 1:34pm

Read the comments on this Reddit piece: http://www.reddit.com/r/Screenwriting/comments/1gj3fv/hollywoods_completely_broken/

The ones I found especially telling: those comments that describe firsthand how top heavy the wealth concentration is in Hollywood. Clinging to what they have and trying to get more is what drives the "leaders". In fact, they are not leading anywhere but down.

I would love to know more about the wealth and revenue distribution in Bollywood. My guess is that it is less lucrative on a per production basis, but more evenly distributed. Again a guess: since the pie is much bigger, smaller slices are just fine.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Zakida Paul (profile), 18 Jun 2013 @ 1:38pm

Re:
"how top heavy the wealth concentration is in Hollywood"

Just like the rest of society
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jun 2013 @ 1:39pm

Re: Hey, Mike: India has 1,210,193,422 people! Should be FOUR times Hollywood!
Basic economics is that larger numbers of people produce more, but it's not necessarily linear

Yet you insist on using a linear calculation in declaring what the situation "should" be.Basic economics is that larger numbers of people produce more, but it's not necessarily linear
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jun 2013 @ 1:43pm

Success is Failure, Failure is Success
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jun 2013 @ 1:52pm

HUH? SAY WHAT?.... It's either I'm getting dumber and dumber for whatever reason the US Chamber of Commerce thinks it's getting wiser and wiser....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jun 2013 @ 1:55pm

Great post, you really reveal the hypocrisy and illogic in this one.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jun 2013 @ 2:01pm

OK, someone help me out here...
This is a report by the US Chamber of Commerce, about laws that India needs.

Can someone help me out here... shouldn't the US Chamber of Commerce be talking about - oh I don't know - laws the US needs?

What business do they have telling another country, in another contintent, what laws they need?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
TheLastCzarnian (profile), 18 Jun 2013 @ 2:03pm

Re:
Is that a Red Dwarf reference?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jun 2013 @ 2:04pm

Can we just make pro-copyright lunacy illegal? That would be greeeeeeeeeat.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That One Guy (profile), 18 Jun 2013 @ 2:15pm

Re: OK, someone help me out here...
You forget, US government/corporate(not that there's much of a difference these days) thinking is that every country should do what the US tells them, with two of those 'suggestions' being 'never compete with US interests', and 'never make US law look bad by providing counter-examples', something that Bollywood is currently doing quite well.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Keroberos (profile), 18 Jun 2013 @ 2:23pm

Re: Re: Re: Hey, Mike: India has 1,210,193,422 people! Should be FOUR times Hollywood!
Four times the population should -- if the simplistic measure that Mike makes is valid -- mean four times the production.
No, Population size has very little to do with market size. Anyone that understands even the most basic of economic principles knows that production of goods in a market is tied the the ability of that market to consume it. Excessive overproduction leads to market crashes. I don't see anywhere in the article where Mike measured India's film industry against anything. He used the only valid measure in economics; India's film industry seems to be successful and profitable at its current production levels. He used a comparison of the numbers of films produced in India vs. the number made in the US to help illustrate that point.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jun 2013 @ 2:23pm

Re: OK, someone help me out here...
The US corporations and government think that they should rule the world.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jun 2013 @ 2:31pm

Re: OK, someone help me out here...
The Chamber of Commerce is not the Department of Commerce.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Anonymous Coward, 18 Jun 2013 @ 2:45pm

Don't miss the post that Mike is desperate to censor: http://is.gd/5gjxqa

Why's he so scared of dissenting views? Hmm...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jun 2013 @ 3:11pm

Re:
Hey Less than average Joe, why wrong you show proof that you do not cheat on your exams?

You can use your weasel words, but you still have not shown any proof that you do not cheat on all of your exams. What are you scared of, what have you got to hide?

Went wont you answer my simple questions?

I Guess this means that I win.

You are to gutless to show proof.

Go back to your Mommies basement and try to find a life you loser.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ECA (profile), 18 Jun 2013 @ 3:22pm

Question
"copyright law is unclear with the 2012 Copyright Act amendments further complicating and contradicting previous rule of law. Furthermore, the 2012 Act provides for broad exceptions that are incompatible with international norms."

WHAT NORMS?? THERE WERE/ARE no normality between most of the countries..NOT even RUSSIA acknowledges the USA copy rights..
Where is that 301 list?? THAT is the list that says WHAt countries do not accept our LAWS..
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jun 2013 @ 3:32pm

Re: Re:
"Wrong" should have been won't

Typing on a smartphone
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jun 2013 @ 3:32pm

Re: Re:
"Wrong" should have been won't

Typing on a smartphone
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Anonymous Coward, 18 Jun 2013 @ 3:35pm

It's so cute how the sockpuppets come out to refute it, but no one can actually address the merits. Don't miss the link that Mike so desperately wants you not to see: http://rdd.me/e9cd9hqe
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jun 2013 @ 3:42pm

Re:
Where is your proof that you do not cheat on your exams less-than-average-Joe?

To scared of me to show proof?

Go on, run away again. Coward
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Automatic Grammatizator, 18 Jun 2013 @ 3:49pm

Re:
Isn't it illegal to stalk people to the degree you do?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
IDAR, 18 Jun 2013 @ 4:09pm

At first read, I did not to find any issues with your piece, Mike, if I may call you by your first name. However, on second read, I noticed the words "this opportunity" in the quote you pulled out of Chamber's statement. This phrase seemed unconnected with anything you quoted. So I reluctantly opened their statement myself, and lo and behold, in context, this phrase actually makes sense. This is what was omitted from your quote:

With a young population where over half a billion people are under 25 years old, Bollywood as well as Hollywood are experiencing growth that may be far outpacing the Indian economy. With an eager and growing workforce and multiplying diaspora overseas, creative content may edge its way up to be India�s greatest export.

The government, however, must improve national intellectual property (IP) laws and enforcement if it is going to seize on this opportunity and gain recognition in the global market and further empower local creators.

The opportunity is expansion into international markets. Also, the push for adoption of international norms makes sense now. Of course their statement could have absolutely no merit. This statement could be mistaken as well for some reason I can't figure out because I lack the required knowledge in the relevant laws and past precedents.

That being said, I don't think you can allow yourself to take the easy path here and simply label what they said as making no sense. So far I have read with delight your posts and your analyses generally seemed perfectly reasonable to me. I can't wait for your discussion of their actual message, and not the surely-inadvertent straw man you erected instead.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
wombaroo, 18 Jun 2013 @ 4:42pm

Re:
Pirating is so rampant in Australia that film and TV shows production is going gangbusters. Info is half way down the page.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-06-18/majority-of-locally-made-australian-television-content- is-news/4763810
So we had better stop all this free advertising for these shows and kill the industry. The entertainment industry needs more censorship of their products, that way less people will see them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jun 2013 @ 5:09pm

Would someone PLEASE think of the popcorn farmers ?!!!!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Zem, 18 Jun 2013 @ 5:16pm

Re: OK, someone help me out here...
shouldn't the US Chamber of Commerce be talking about - oh I don't know - laws the US needs?

Actually they should be talking about laws the US DOESN'T NEED.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Real Michael, 18 Jun 2013 @ 6:01pm

Re:
Bollywood is successful WITHOUT lobbying for a brutally excessive copyright laws. Their film industry is effectively DOUBLE the size of Hollywood.

Obviously they're doing things all wrong.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The Groove Tiger (profile), 18 Jun 2013 @ 6:22pm

Re:
"Don't miss the post that Mike is desperate to censor"

Woman is 53 but looks 27!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jun 2013 @ 6:34pm

Re: Hey, Mike: India has 1,210,193,422 people! Should be FOUR times Hollywood!
Once again you prove to have your priorities mixed up. Not everyone in India is dedicated to cocksucking the local entertainment industries unlike you.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jun 2013 @ 7:09pm

Re: Re: Re: Hey, Mike: India has 1,210,193,422 people! Should be FOUR times Hollywood!
"No, you just made an ass of yourself by trying to argue against sheer fact."

Sheer fact, Blinky, Sheer Fact. [citation needed]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Anonymous Coward, 18 Jun 2013 @ 7:33pm

See the post that over 200 people on TD have seen. See the post that mike desperately doesn't want anyone to see. He's so desperate to hide this that he's blocking IPs, keywords, titles, and links.

Mike hates this post so much that he's going out of his way to censor it: http://tr.im/44w44

the next edition will be out very soon.

How hard will he work to hide that from you too?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Rekrul, 18 Jun 2013 @ 9:17pm

What this report needs is a blatant Kali reference and several musical numbers.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 18 Jun 2013 @ 11:04pm

Re:
How exactly are you defining successful? Numbers? Are you aware of what the population of India is?

Go try watching a random current movie that's made there. They're comically horrid.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
PaulT (profile), 19 Jun 2013 @ 12:03am

Re: Re:
"How exactly are you defining successful? Numbers?"

Yes, isn't that how you define success for American movies? Are you now moving the goalposts because the results don't match your agenda, or are you going to finally give us an objective means to measure whether something is successful?

"They're comically horrid."

Sorry, your personal tastes don't matter when assessing the output of a foreign culture. Let me guess, you're one of those people who think that your personal taste dictates everything that should be made?

They're certainly lower budget than American movies, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. Most American output is crap, and there's enough people watching these things outside of India to demonstrate that there's a market even if you don't like them (e.g. Bollywood movies regularly break the top 10 in the UK, despite never being press screened or even shown outside of certain cities).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Niall (profile), 19 Jun 2013 @ 4:03am

Re: Re:
The same could be said of a lot of US output.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Niall (profile), 19 Jun 2013 @ 4:04am

Re: Re:
Yes, but when you compare the average income in India with the US, plus what percentage of the population have access to movies, I suspect that Bollywood can only do better in its current format.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Niall (profile), 19 Jun 2013 @ 4:15am

Re:
I hadn't noticed Bollywood having any issues getting into international markets where there is a strong Indian sub-continental presence - Bollywood films aren't too hard to find here in the UK, for instance, albeit I'm sure that's only a fraction of the output.

And any country producing such gems as 'Jersey Shore' cannot possibly complain about the local output of any other country!

Disclaimer: I know the UK has 'The Only Way Is Essex' (TOWIE).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Niall (profile), 19 Jun 2013 @ 4:16am

Re:
And a Temple of Doom and a bullwhip!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Howard (profile), 19 Jun 2013 @ 4:21am

Re: Re:
Because the latest hollywood "masterpieces" aren't comically horrid, propagandist, simplistic eyecandy movies. /s

Also, larger population do not necessary mean larger market for movies, at least not in a linear relationship like ootb suggested below.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Howard (profile), 19 Jun 2013 @ 4:26am

Re: OK, someone help me out here...
I was thinking of the same question. But then it occurred to me that the US is doing this all the time.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Jun 2013 @ 5:07am

Re: Also, compare amounts of money, particularly international.
Perhaps the purpose of copyright is not maximize rates of return on investment and laws should be analyzed with eye towards benefiting the public by promoting the arts and sciences. -- I'm sure to be talking over your head with that last item, since you believe copyright is some kind of inalienable natural right and the public benefits can be totally ignored.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
jupiterkansas (profile), 19 Jun 2013 @ 9:58am

Re: Re:
We're getting regular theatrical runs of Indian films here in Kansas City.

The idea that an industry is growing rapidly and that they need to change their laws to help that growth are at odds with each other. Obviously if there is rapid growth, the laws are working just fine.

I guess US Chamber's idea is that their growth would be even bigger. Considering it has long been the biggest film market in the world, whatever it's doing, it's doing it right and we should be changing our laws to match their norms.

Of course, we would never let other countries set the example for us.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
nasch (profile), 19 Jun 2013 @ 5:21pm

Re:
The opportunity is expansion into international markets.

If you read a little further...

"Furthermore, much of the paper seems to suggest that India needs to fix its copyright laws to embrace the international opportunity for its films -- but that (again) makes no sense. India's IP laws don't apply outside of India, so they have no impact on the international opportunities, which are governed by other IP laws. And, again, if the industry is doing great in India (with little enforcement and greater exceptions), doesn't this indicate that India should push for the same elsewhere to better embrace that international opportunity? "
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Nishant Srivastava, 5 Sep 2013 @ 6:57am

Copyrights in Bollywood
Bollywood is such a large industry and if you include whole Indian cinema you will find it like a sea never ending film making process every week many film releases it need a huge committee which works only in copyrights, and that is not possible for such large industries and if you include small film makers like short film makers then it it will cross the limits.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
nasch (profile), 29 Jan 2014 @ 5:20pm

Re:
Bollywood Do need strong copyright laws.

Based on what evidence?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ayush dixit, 30 Jul 2018 @ 8:41pm

Bollywood is successful precisely because they do NOT have strong copyright protections. Bollywood is successful WITHOUT lobbying for brutally excessive copyright laws. Their film industry is effectively DOUBLE the size of Hollywood.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ECA (profile), 31 Jul 2018 @ 11:52am

Re:
Bolly dont do allot of STUPID things Hollywood does..

They dont OVER CHARGE/over pay, TO MAKE AND BUILD EVERYTHING.

they dont Control the WHOLe process, which means they dont Own the WHOLE distribution system, Theaters, and OVER CHARGE ITSELF to show there is no profit.

Their sales and profits are based on THERE LOCAL area, not world wide, and that Every human has to PAY to see it 1 time.

their people probably get paid 1 time, and NOT every time a movie is shown.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
PaulT (profile), 31 Jul 2018 @ 11:32pm

Re: Re:
Usually it's just your writing style that's annoying, but you're actually full of shit here.

"Bolly dont do allot of STUPID things Hollywood does.."

Define "stupid". I'll bet that they make a lot of things according to whichever definition you choose that are as dumb as you random capitalisations.

They do make a lot of 3 hour movies with 40 minute plots that are dragged out by musical sequences rather than action sequences, but even then they seem to be making more action stuff now. I'm no expert, but it's movies from the subcontinent that have had most of the silliest gifs/memes I've seen in recent years (though they may be technically Tamil / whatever sometimes rather than "Bollwood", depending on how you define it).

"Their sales and profits are based on THERE LOCAL area, not world wide, and that Every human has to PAY to see it 1 time."

Some random links from very quick Google searches: Not worldwide?

https://www.odeon.co.uk/bollywood/
https://www.amctheatres.com/indian
https://www.finder.com .au/bollywood-movies-on-netflix-australia

Every human has to pay?

https://en.softonic.com/solutions/what-are-the-best-torrent-sites-for-downloading-bollywood-movi es

"their people probably get paid 1 time, and NOT every time a movie is shown."

Based on what, since you're clearly wrong about everything else?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ECA (profile), 1 Aug 2018 @ 4:24pm

Re: Re: Re:
So.
consider a movie industry that controls every thing, from the Creation of the movie, even with changes so they DONT copy a Book directly, making changes.. To the Audio engendering, sipping, handling, ALL distribution(if they dont have a contract with the corp, they WONT get the film, until its out of Circulation).. Then over charging for everything from beginning to END, avg salary for a Hair care person is about $1000 per day.(Iv had friends work for the industry)
KNow how they ship the movies around, BEFORE digital?? LIBRARY CLASS MAIL..REALLY CHEAP.. but its a great write off.

The movie corps got a big WIN, in WWII with our gov. To produce Propaganda films, and OTHER things since. Some MAJOR IRS savings...and they are abusing it, ALLOT..

Corps int he USA have a strange concept that Profit and loss based on Estimates WORK when talking to the IRS. And Movie figures are based on World wide distribution..
Then showing that they have contracts to pay out to the actors PER showing, gives them leeway to keep ALLOT of the profits..

I hope you know that the IRS has major problems tracking ANY corporations taxes..There computers are history, and no REAL updates have been done in over 20 years for the software.
(one reason why they go after Citizens before the corps, and when they DO go after the corps, its YEARS after.)

Good luck have fun..

And your references are for Bollywood..but understand...THAT'S LOCAL DISTRIBUTION.. They wont make anything in the USA unless they hook up with the Distribution system in the USA...MPAA/RIAA...there is NO international trademark system..
[ link to this | view in thread ]
PaulT (profile), 2 Aug 2018 @ 1:00am

Re: Re: Re: Re:
I have no idea what rambling shit you're going on about again, but the last paragraph show you're really lost it this time.

"And your references are for Bollywood..but understand...THAT'S LOCAL DISTRIBUTION"

The links I posting to show theatrical distribution in the UK, US and Australia are local to Indian producers?

"They wont make anything in the USA "

That's production, not distribution.

"unless they hook up with the Distribution system in the USA"

Like the one example I linked to of them doing exactly that? There's more if you like.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
abhi, 7 Apr 2020 @ 11:57am

hey this is an amazing website you would love to see my <a href="https://downloadhatke.blogspot.com">Ragnikanth movie in Tamil </a> site as well as
Thanks
[ link to this | view in thread ]