Marvel Goes DMCA Crazy Over Leaked Avengers 2 Trailer, Then Puts It On Its Own YouTube Page

from the quick-stop-that-advertising! dept

Thu, Oct 23rd 2014 12:33pm — Timothy Geigner

As the saying goes, death and taxes are both certainties -- as is the fact that politicians lie. But another near universal certainty is that Marvel will totally freak out whenever it gets the slightest inkling that its intellectual property is threatened. The latest head-scratching example of this was yesterday's leak of a trailer for The Avengers 2, which Marvel promptly DMCA'd.

The first trailer for next year's sequel to Marvel's The Avengers leaked today, earlier than Marvel Studios was obviously planning. The mega studio originally planned to show the new trailer publicly next week during an episode of television show Agents of SHIELD...Update: The leaked version of the trailer's been pulled from host Tinypic. Looks like Marvel isn't too thrilled about the trailer's early leak.

And you can see the studio's point. After all, movie trailers are advertisements, and Marvel certainly wouldn't want people advertising the studio's product to unbelievably hungry-for-anything fans out there. That might, you know, build up excitement for the new movie. What use could Marvel possibly have for that? As we know, now that the trailer has been leaked early before being taken down, literally nobody will see it during the Agents of SHIELD broadcast. Marvel must be totally screwed now, man. Game over.

Oh, yeah, here's the trailer that leaked.

Now, I'm sure you're wondering, "But, Tim, how could you possibly show us the trailer after Marvel DMCA'd the pants off of the leak?" Well, the answer is that I'm embedding that video from Marvel's own YouTube page. Yup, after the leak, and after it DMCA'd the leak because of how awful it was, Marvel then released the leaked trailer, prior to its original intended release, on its own YouTube page.

Which brings me to several conclusions. First, Marvel has admitted that there is no point to issuing DMCA notices any longer; otherwise, the DMCA notice would have been enough and it would have continued to release the trailer at the originally intended time. Second, Marvel hates getting free advertising. That's all a trailer is, after all, and Marvel has decided that the same video shown on its YouTube page shouldn't be hosted elsewhere, by other parties, for free. Makes sense. After all, you wouldn't want people to know about your movie or anything.

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: advertisements, avengers 2, copyright, dmca, trailers
Companies: disney, marvel

47 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2014 @ 12:37pm

This website has a real problem with people having control over their intellectual property, doesn't it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- AJ, 23 Oct 2014 @ 12:41pm
  
  Re:
  "This website has a real problem with people having control over their intellectual property, doesn't it?"
  
  I don't think the problem is the control itself, it's the constant over reaction when the control is lost, or when technology renders the control irrelevant/impossible.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - MunkiLord (profile), 23 Oct 2014 @ 2:08pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Normally I agree, but so far it doesn't look like Marvel overreacted in any way. They took down the shit version and put up a better quality version for people to watch and link to. It's almost a perfect reaction. I really don't get the criticism this time.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - AJ, 23 Oct 2014 @ 3:12pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      I would disagree.. issuing a dmc takedown over a trailer is an over reaction. Had it been the actual movie then i would have agreed... but it's an advertisement.. by definition the object is to get as many views as possible. They should have just left the leaked trailer up and then posted their own. Who knows, maybe the whole think is a marketing ploy...
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2014 @ 12:56pm
  
  Re:
  No it doesn't have a problem with control over intellectual property were it proper property. The problem this site consistently points to is the asinine over reactions done through such controls.
  
  Then again, you have a problem with anyone that doesn't follow your maximalist viewpoints. So why are you hanging around a place where you obviously don't like?
  
  I suggest your paymasters want you here. Sad thing is you are wasting your time with false claims you never support, never answer, and never have the time to get off your acidic comments.
  
  So enjoy some more report votes. You earned them over a long period of time.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- michael, 23 Oct 2014 @ 1:10pm
  
  Re:
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Dark Helmet (profile), 23 Oct 2014 @ 1:14pm
  
  Re:
  Totally, dude. I just hate it when people enforce their copyrights. I'm also a pod-person bent on taking over the world. You totally found me out, yo!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2014 @ 2:11pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Dear Mr. Helmet,
    
    As a concerned IP consumer, I must take issue with your comment, inasmuch as your flagrant use of the following expressions of ideas without attribution is morally reprehensible. To wit:
    Item: "dude" Rightsholder: Slacker Nation. Good luck trying to find one of those fuckarounds to give a shit. But IT IS YOUR DUTY to find one.
    Item: "pod-people" Rightsholder: Confused and scared 1950's American citizens who conflated Russians with poorly-dressed aliens.
    Item: "yo" Rightsholder: Gangsters (or 'gangstas'?). Or, possibly, 'hip-hopsters' - being a wonderbread mofo, I'm not sure.
    I trust in the future you will remember this 'dressing-down' and give credit where credit is due.
    
    Sincerely Yours,
    
    I.P. Freely
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- michael, 23 Oct 2014 @ 1:15pm
  
  Re:
  "This website has a real problem with people having control over their intellectual property, doesn't it?"
  
  You can control your IP without being an imbecile.
  
  To expand: Notice that, despite thousands (tens of thousands?) of DMCA notices being sent out every single day, there's only a single article on TD about it. That's because Marvel did something monumentally idiotic: claimed harm due to the release, and then released the EXACT SAME THING, negating their claim of harm.
  
  So how exactly does Marvel's monopoly control over this trailer -- and their DMCA notice, which they themselves have told us is pointless -- promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - JEDIDIAH, 23 Oct 2014 @ 1:29pm
    
    Artistic Megalomania.
    It doesn't even promote their own financial self-interest.
    
    That's the point.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Marvelously Malevolent, 24 Oct 2014 @ 12:36am
      
      Re: Artistic Megalomania.
      What it really shows us is how people who rely on copyright are becoming increasingly hardwired to react (or overreact) first and then only later put some actual thought into it. It's (partly) human nature probably. After all, a lot of folks speak before they think, too, as I'm sure any comments section can attest to.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Pragmatic, 27 Oct 2014 @ 6:44am
        
        Re: Re: Artistic Megalomania.
        Am I the only one here who is reminded, every time this happens, of that Daffy Duck cartoon where he goes "Mine! Mine! Mine!" and gets over-protective of his "property," even when he's really tiny?
        
        It's either that or Gollum.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - PaulT (profile), 24 Oct 2014 @ 1:23am
    
    Re: Re:
    Funny thing - if they had done it the other way round (released the video to their own site, then DMCAed the leaked versions), there wouldn't have been an article here. In fact, if any article was written, it might well have pointed to it as the best way to deal with such things, rather than pointing out their abject failure.
    
    But, no, someone said something that questioned absolute authority from a corporation so we must all be pirates, blah, blah, blah...
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- JEDIDIAH, 23 Oct 2014 @ 1:27pm
  
  Modern Self-Flagellation
  > This website has a real problem with people having control over their intellectual property, doesn't it?
  
  You don't get "control". You get a limited monopoly on copying.
  
  The point of copyright is not to create new forms of property or encourage people to go on mindless power trips. In fact, the mindless power trips are besides the point.
  
  Even if you have an entirely CRASS view of the situation, acting like a spoiled child makes no sense. Your goal is to MAKE MONEY. If other people playing with your toys means that you MAKE MORE MONEY, then there's no reason for you to act like a spoiled child. Quite the contrary. You might want to consider the situation like an adult and realize that some mindless power trip is not really in your interests.
  
  The CRASS objective is to MAKE MONEY, not be a raging megalomaniac.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2014 @ 1:29pm
  
  Re:
  To bad that some people, with no intellect, come to this property ...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- John Fenderson (profile), 23 Oct 2014 @ 4:48pm
  
  Re:
  "This website has a real problem with people having control over their intellectual property, doesn't it?"
  
  No, it doesn't.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2014 @ 5:37pm
  
  Re:
  And poor people don't deserve healthcare, right?
  
  Sicko.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- PaulT (profile), 24 Oct 2014 @ 12:26am
  
  Re:
  No, it has a problem with people abusing that control to make things worse for the very customers they're trying to sell to, as well as causing collateral damage to others. It has no problem with exercise of that control that's fair, logical and doesn't negatively affect innocent bystanders.
  
  It's telling that you can't tell the difference.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
PRMan, 23 Oct 2014 @ 12:52pm

They are trying to redirect people
Agents of SHIELD was really lame last season but got better after everyone quit watching it (start with Disc 4 on Blu-Ray, the episode after TAHITI with Sif from Thor, if you care).

They are trying to find ways to get people to try it again because it is pretty good now and it's starting to set up some more movies like Captain America 3.

That's why they are so upset (and because they are Disney now). Can't blame them for trying.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mason Wheeler (profile), 23 Oct 2014 @ 1:20pm
  
  Re: They are trying to redirect people
  I actually liked the show from the beginning. Most of the criticism of the show that I've seen is obviously from people who didn't understand what it was supposed to be about.
  
  They always seemed to work in the ZOMG THIS IS A LAME SUPERHERO SHOW WITH NO SUPERHEROES!!! angle. Any such complaint can be ignored, because the entire point of Agents of SHIELD is that it's not about the superheroes; it's about the less glamorous ordinary folk who have to deal with the ramifications of the stuff that happens in the movies. And when you keep in mind that that's what you're supposed to be watching, it really is an interesting show.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - John85851 (profile), 23 Oct 2014 @ 3:32pm
    
    Re: Re: They are trying to redirect people
    My problem with the show wasn't that it wasn't a superhero show (which it wasn't- it was supposed to be more of a spy who), it's that the show turned into a "object/ relic/ monster of the week" show. Look- it's an alien weapon! Look- it's a leftover something from "Thor 2"! Look- it's a guy with super-powers! Look- it's a guy who wants to be a hero!
    
    This concept was done by the X-Files, Smallville, Friday the 13th, Warehouse 13, and so on.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Christopher Best (profile), 23 Oct 2014 @ 12:56pm

Actually, the leaked version was pretty crappy quality. Getting the leaked version offline and putting up the Official one in its place seems sensible to me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2014 @ 10:14pm
  
  Re:
  Exactly.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
CSMcDonald (profile), 23 Oct 2014 @ 12:56pm

You're looking at it the wrong way
The trailer being leaked didn't damage people wanting to watch the trailer, it damaged them from making it part of a show they want people to watch - namely Agents of SHIELD.

Having the first airing during the show was the way to get more people to tune intot he show, so yes, it did conceivably harm their interests to have it leaked early to the 'net.

Give them credit for realizing the genie was out of the bottle and putting the full HD trailer up for people quickly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2014 @ 1:01pm

So when is Content ID or something similar going to automatically DMCA the copy that Marvel posted?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2014 @ 1:09pm

Because Marvel is not a monolitic entity, at least some people there dealt with it well:
In response to the leaked trailer:

Dammit, Hydra.— Marvel Entertainment (@Marvel) October 22, 2014
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Captain DogPoo, 23 Oct 2014 @ 1:12pm

Publicity set up methinks
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2014 @ 1:13pm

false flag operations
The vast majority of "leaks" -- coming out of both Washington and Hollywood -- are authorized and strategic, as is the fake outrage and crocodile tears. Record labels have been regularly "leaking" one or two tracks from an about-to-be released album for more than a dozen years. It's one of the cheapest forms of advertising and publicity ever invented.

https://torrentfreak.com/tag/buckcherry/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Magical Mimi, 23 Oct 2014 @ 1:14pm

Marvel must of realized that with the way that the leaked version of the trailer was spreading and being copied and posted on other sites and with other links that it must of been like fighting a Hydra. After all, cut off one head and two more take its place.

Thus an early 'official' release was probably done as a form of 'damage control'.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
jupiterkansas (profile), 23 Oct 2014 @ 1:25pm

As if I needed another reason to avoid anything Marvel.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Trevor, 23 Oct 2014 @ 1:34pm

My Theory
Marvel initially freaked at the trailer being leaked a week early, and tried to squash it.

Once they realized squashing it would be tricky as it was spreading FAST, they didn't want the crappy version to be the only version, so they decided to release the HD version themselves.

The Marvel twitter account even tweeted "Dammit, Hydra" following the leak. To me, this ranks up there with Oreo's Superbowl Blackout tweet. Genius.

Now, everyone is watching the GOOD version and understandably losing their minds. Marvel gets the good will of releasing the true version, and avoided any criticisms of the movie based off of a poor quality version.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2014 @ 2:06pm
  
  Re: My Theory
  I think you are correct sir.
  Of course they would have wanted to wait till it could air on their show so that viewer numbers could go up but still made the best of the situation of an early release.
  
  Seems to me more like the author of this article was overreacting instead of just thinking of this theory and reporting on the facts.
  
  there is still use for the DMCA as in this case it was used on the unauthorized distribution of the trailer. Then just as Trevor pointed out realizing that the DMCA alone won't stop the spread of the trailer they released a good version earlier.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- PaulT (profile), 24 Oct 2014 @ 12:38am
  
  Re: My Theory
  "Once they realized squashing it would be tricky as it was spreading FAST"
  
  That's the problem - they didn't realise this in the first place. It should be obvious that when something this anticipated gets out, people will share it and the genie won't go back into the bottle. Freaking out and trying to block the marketing material just because your artificial window was bypassed makes absolutely no sense.
  
  Every company should have contingency plans as to what happens when something leaks. *Especially* marketing material, because you can harness a natural buzz over the leak far more easily than trying to create that buzz artificially. Plus, of course, nothing is lost or "stolen". People have watched the trailer - a piece of footage solely designed to try and get the viewer to go and pay full price for the completed movie - without your direct order to do so? So, by design, they will be looking forward to the movie and pay for it on release? That's... a good thing, surely?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
AJ, 23 Oct 2014 @ 1:45pm

Do you think they put the crappy vid up, then made a big deal overreacting and taking it down, just to put it back up in a marketing ploy? If they did, it worked.

How does it go? Bad press is still press?.. or something like that...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2014 @ 2:54pm

Frankly, I hope the company discovers who leaked the file. Much planning and expense goes into these releases, and pilfered copies should not be a pre-release worry.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2014 @ 3:06pm
  
  Re:
  "Frankly, I hope the company discovers who leaked the file. Much planning and expense goes into these releases, and pilfered copies should not be a pre-release worry."
  
  Hey, here is an idea. How about if you are going to freak out over a piece of advertising that you created - the EXPRESS purpose of which is to BE SEEN and used to create interest in your product - because it "leaked early" or was otherwise seen by the *exact audience* it was created for, just somehow at the "wrong time," then simply feel free to DON'T BOTHER TO FUCKING MAKE IT at all. Don't make it. Don't release it AT ALL. Just don't fucking bother. We, that exited audience, DO NOT CARE about your fucking assinine "windows" and region-specific and calendar BULL SHIT when it comes to ANY of your precious "IP." Please, we would rather you didn't even bother, than to go through this horseshit every single fucking time a new movie is eagerly anticipated and has high interest from the very target audience you are (supposedly) creating these "advertisements" for in the first place.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2014 @ 9:05pm
    
    Re: Re:
    you have to remember the advertisement window wasn't just to have it viewed by the target audience it was a ploy to try and bolster the number of viewers that constantly watch Agents by getting more people to see hopefully a good episode while waiting for the long anticipated trailer.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- PaulT (profile), 24 Oct 2014 @ 12:59am
  
  Re:
  Oh yes, the poor marketing drones had their neat plan all ruined by people watching, talking about and sharing their own marketing materials before their beautiful plan came to fruition. Now they have to deal with natural viral sharing and hype caused by the people they're selling to rather than their pre-determined artificially manufactured structure. However will they cope with such natural anticipation for the product they're selling?
  
  Do you realise how ridiculous this sounds? The movie itself, perhaps I'd have some sympathy, but the *marketing*?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 24 Oct 2014 @ 1:55am
    
    Re: Re:
    Not really surprising. It used to be that IP fanboys would rally for poor starving artists. Then they realised most of their poster boys were filthy rich, scuppering their argument in two, and now they're whining for all the poor food caterers and red carpet makers who contribute to the industry in some minuscule way, but aren't richer because the MPAA doesn't pay them more.
    
    IP fanboys will go to the ends of the earth to pull another reason to blame "piracy" out of their asses.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2014 @ 3:15pm

Headlines you'll never read: 'Ticket sales plummet after leaked release of Avengers 2 trailer.' What is the point, Marvel?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Kronomex, 23 Oct 2014 @ 3:33pm

Why is there no mention of the Marvel Studios owners? You know, that group who are probably one of the world's greediest and litigious corporation and own a certain mouse.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
John85851 (profile), 23 Oct 2014 @ 3:38pm

It's all about control
Obviously Disney/ Marvel was all set to make a huge, world-wide announcement about the trailer during an episode of "Agents of SHIELD"... and then someone beat them to it and stole their thunder.

I wonder if ABC (the network showing "Agents of SHIELD" and also owned by Disney) convinced advertisers that this episode would get a larger amount of viewers because of the trailer. And because there will be more viewers, they charged higher ad rates.

Of course Disney/ Marvel is pissed- they had a whole "event" built around the episode and trailer and now people may not watch the episode because of it. So the only course of action is to hit back hard and punish the person who did this.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2014 @ 4:08pm

I'm glad that I live in a split level head...
This website has a real problem with people having control over their intellectual property, doesn't it? -- Anonymous Coward (comment #1)

Then again, you have a problem with anyone that doesn't follow your maximalist viewpoints. So why are you hanging around a place where you obviously don't like? -- Anonymous Coward (comment #6)

I don't HAVE to have a consistent opinion. So there! -- Anonymous Coward (comment #this)

PS: I like pie. And Pi. -- A.C.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 23 Oct 2014 @ 9:06pm
  
  Re: I'm glad that I live in a split level head...
  as the only correct and true Anonymous Coward I approve this message.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Zonker, 24 Oct 2014 @ 11:20am

If Marvel/ABC/Disney still wants to use The Avengers 2 promotion to get more people to watch Agents of SHIELD (I love the show, both seasons, BTW and watch every week On Demand or Hulu) they could just arrange a live broadcast interview/sneak peak with the producer/cast of the movie during the show. Hard to leak a live broadcast prematurely on YouTube.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Todd, 24 Oct 2014 @ 5:19pm

Of course they hate free advertising
They don't get the ad revenue on their ads if somebody else advertizes for them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Lurker Keith, 25 Oct 2014 @ 3:28pm
  
  Re: Of course they hate free advertising
  This is one of the problems. Even the commercials have commercials online, now. *facepalm*
  
  Aside from that, your statement is a bit backwards. The intended ad revenue for the Age of Ultron trailer was going to be paid by Marvel Studios to ABC (assuming they had to pay, since both are Disney now).
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]