Movie industry buries report proving pirates are great consumers

[phyzik]

http://www.geek.com/articles/geek-cetera/movie-industry-bins-report-proving-pirates-are-great-consumers-20110720/

The movie and music industry seem hell bent on portraying pirates as criminals and parasites who cost both industries billions of dollars in lost sales. In order to prove this fact a number of studies are commissioned to help demonstrate the effect a pirate has on sales of entertainment.

The problem with this approach is that it has been found to be biased towards portraying pirates as the movie industry wants them to be seen, rather than presenting the facts. A great example of this has been discovered by the German-language politics and media website Telepolis.

GfK Group is one of the largest market research companies in the world and is often used by the movie industry to carry out research and studies into piracy. Talking to a source within GfK who wished to remain anonymous, Telepolis found that a recent study looking at pirates and their purchasing activities found them to be almost the complete opposite of the criminal parasites the entertainment industry want them to be.

The study states that it is much more typical for a pirate to download an illegal copy of a movie to try it before purchasing. They are also found to purchase more DVDs than the average consumer, and they visit the movie theater more, especially for opening weekend releases which typically cost more to attend.

The conclusion of the study is that movie pirates are generally more interested in film and therefore spend more money and invest more time in it. In other words, they make up some of the movie industries best customers.

Unfortunately, we will never get to read the official version of the study as the unnamed client who paid for it to be created has decided it should not see a release. The reason given for shelving it was that the contents proved “unpleasant.”

The revelation that this study exists has come following a big raid on European video streaming site Kino.to last month. 250 police raided data centers and homes across Germany, Spain, France, and the Netherlands managing to arrest 12 people in the process. Those 12, plus the 4 million visitors a day to the site could now be thought of as core consumers the movie industry needs, but I assume the pararsite criminal tag will be used instead.

This is by no means the only evidence that piracy isn’t as detrimental as those lobbying against it portray it to be. Independent research reported early this year found anime piracy and streaming in Japan increased DVD sales.

Read more at Torrent Freak (http://api.viglink.com/api/click?format=go&key=30ef1ea9e238bd28136c3386ad55f955&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.geek.com%2Farticles%2Fgeek-cetera%2Fmovie-industry-bins-report-proving-pirates-are-great-consumers-20110720%2F&v=1&libid=1311258867604&out=http%3A%2F%2Ftorrentfreak.com%2Fsuppressed-report-found-busted-pirate-site-users-were-good-consumers-110719%2F&title=Movie%20industry%20buries%20report%20proving %20pirates%20are%20great%20consumers%20%7C%20Geek. com&txt=TorrentFreak)

[baseline bum]

The report isn't all that surprising. Someone who downloads movies is much more likely to be a bigger fan than someone who doesn't, so it's not surprising to hear downloaders spend more money on films than typical people. However, you have to think they're not spending as much as they would without the piracy. Certainly the case that someone downloads Goodfellas, watches it, and then goes and buys the DVD after seeing how great of a movie it was is common, but the studio isn't getting any money on that first viewing since the user isn't getting it off Netflix or from Redbox. Now consider that almost all movies someone watches they'll only see once. That's a huge market to lose. This just seems like a correlation argument in trying to imply piracy is good for media companies.

[MannyIsGod]

Downloads =/= lost sales though. I've downloaded shit I would never have paid to see just because I could download it. They didn't lose any sales. However, I have gone out and bought things after downloading it because I enjoyed it enough to justify that purchase. The problem is that the studios want to portray this situation as one sided. They want to act as if every download is a sale they missed out on and there's no way thats the case. They refuse to take a more honest approach to viewing the situation. Over a decade after Napster the music industry is reaping the benefits but hey had to be dragged kicking and screaming. The film industry is no different.

Its idiotic.

[hater]

fuck paying $25 a movie, $20 a cd, or $60 a game to these greedy bastards. Piracy is common sense IMO.

[Cane]

2009 article:


Stephen Fry, the popular actor, author and current gadget blogger has spoken out about piracy this week, defending non-commercial piracy and berating the media watchdog groups, who he claims are going about it all wrong.
The lashing, made at the iTunes festival, started with Fry giving a history of music copyright.

Fry started by saying, according to the BBC, "that my business - the film business, the television business, the music business - is doing the wrong thing," in regards to arresting and criminalizing file sharers.

He then mocked the "preposterous" MPAA ads that claim "You wouldn't steal a car" by saying he can't believe the industry would be "so blind... as to think that someone who bit-torrents an episode of 24 is the same as someone who steals somebody's handbag (or car)".

Fry himself admitted to downloading an episode of the popular series House, which stars his old friend Hugh Laurie and admitted as well to downloading a few episodes of 24.

The actor also acknowledged that commercial use of pirated material should lead to prosecution, as profiting off the thievery of others work is unjustifiable.

Finally, he added that he truly believed that if prices of digital downloads fell to "fair levels," most people would pay for their music, and piracy would no longer be the "problem" it currently is.

http://www.afterdawn.com/news/article.cfm/2009/07/14/stephen_fry_defends_non_commercial_piracy


:toast

[baseline bum]

Downloads =/= lost sales though. I've downloaded shit I would never have paid to see just because I could download it. They didn't lose any sales.


They lost the revenue from the rental or stream licensing fees. You're telling me as a working full-time student you waste 2 hours watching something you wouldn't normally be interested in just because it's free and it's there? Kind of reminds me of George Costanza's line when he's pitching the sit-com to NBC and they ask him why they're watching a show about nothing, to which he screams "Because it's on TV!" :lol



However, I have gone out and bought things after downloading it because I enjoyed it enough to justify that purchase. The problem is that the studios want to portray this situation as one sided.


No argument there.



They want to act as if every download is a sale they missed out on and there's no way thats the case. They refuse to take a more honest approach to viewing the situation.


I think that argument is much stronger with regards to music in the past than with films now, since there wasn't a major rental chain for CDs and there wasn't licensed on-demand streaming until Napster was reborn and Real put out their service. I think most adults would order a film they wanted to see through NetFlix if it's old, or RedBox if new though.



Over a decade after Napster the music industry is reaping the benefits but hey had to be dragged kicking and screaming. The film industry is no different.


I think the kicking and screaming there was mostly about 2 things: (1) the buyer not being forced to buy a full album anymore and (2) the buyer owning the actual data in a compact and easily copyable format so that he could put the song on his computer, on his ipod, on the hard drive in his car, give it to his brother, girlfriend, etc. The studios are completely screwed on #1, but doesn't DRM address the second of these concerns?

[baseline bum]

He then mocked the "preposterous" MPAA ads that claim "You wouldn't steal a car" by saying he can't believe the industry would be "so blind... as to think that someone who bit-torrents an episode of 24 is the same as someone who steals somebody's handbag (or car)".


What an asinine claim. If I could go clone my friend's Mercedes for free, you're goddamned right I would do it. :lol



Finally, he added that he truly believed that if prices of digital downloads fell to "fair levels," most people would pay for their music, and piracy would no longer be the "problem" it currently is.


I like the solution Richard Stallman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Stallman) proposes: you would have a media player that allowed you to download music and then at any time you could click something to send a payment of your choice directly to the artists. I bet they would make way more money this way; at least artists putting out their first (and usually best) work.

[baseline bum]

fuck paying $25 a movie, $20 a cd, or $60 a game to these greedy bastards. Piracy is common sense IMO.

$60 for a game isn't a bad deal IMO. Games are many orders of magnitude more sophisticated than they were in the 80s when you'd pay $30 a pop for them. Factoring in inflation, game prices have been pretty steady despite the quality going way way up over the years. Now if the gaming industry started bending their customers over like say, the healthcare industry, then I could see your point more.

[MannyIsGod]

I don't think games are too expensive either. 60 bucks for some games that literally give you 100s of hours of gameplay is a pretty damn good deal.

[Nathan Explosion]

First and foremost, let me state off the bat that I think it's complete bullshit that the studios are claiming to lose tons of money on pirates when they just recently had two movies open and make hundreds of millions in one weekend (Harry Potter and Transformers). Those two movies make more than enough to offset any flop(s) that their respective studios put out.

Now, having said that, let me play devils advocate for a second. There have been numerous times where I wanted to see a movie and was willing to pay for it, but didn't really have the time to go see it. I've found that movie online and watched it. If the picture was of good quality, then I'd save the link and watch it again. That is now 2 viewings that I didn't pay for. I'd imagine that my example is not an uncommon occurrence. So the studios ARE losing money. I just don't think the losses are hurting them as much as they say.

However, what Manny said about watching a movie that he normally wouldn't see isn't without merit. The first movie that comes to mind in this case is Black Swan. Sure, I wanted to see Natalie Portman and Mila Kunis together, but I wouldn't pay money to see it. I found a great stream and watched the movie and it turned out to be a great movie. But, without someone pirating the movie in the first place, I would have never paid to see the movie, so the studio didn't lose any money because I never would have gone to the theater, rented or bought the movie in any case.

[z0sa]

Pretty obvious study. No doubt the biggest pirates are also some of the biggest movie buffs, and some of the most interested in film in general.

There's still an assload of money being lost because they "rent for free."

[leemajors]

Tangential, but Trent Reznor was really pissed when Oink got busted. He thought it was a great torrent site. And it was the best.

[ElNono]

You're telling me as a working full-time student you waste 2 hours watching something you wouldn't normally be interested in just because it's free and it's there?

I've done it...

[ElNono]

And I still play some shitty games here and there because I have a few hours to waste and I have nothing better to play.

[Heath Ledger]

The more those Hollywood fucks continously raise ticket prices the more Piracy is justified.
These fucks raise prices year after year, they arent losing out on shit. It now costs about 40 ish bucks for a couple to see a movie god only knows what it costs a family of 4.

I say fuck the MPAA. I believe you will see Netflix evolving very soon where they will have a humongous catalog of current movies based upon them raising their dvd plans. They want the consumer to switch over to their stream only plans for a reason.

[phyzik]

The more those Hollywood fucks continously raise ticket prices the more Piracy is justified.
These fucks raise prices year after year, they arent losing out on shit. It now costs about 40 ish bucks for a couple to see a movie god only knows what it costs a family of 4.

I say fuck the MPAA. I believe you will see Netflix evolving very soon where they will have a humongous catalog of current movies based upon them raising their dvd plans. They want the consumer to switch over to their stream only plans for a reason.

Yeah, Netflix is going to be the next ballte ground for the MPAA. They will try and charge $16 to $40 for a streaming movie just because.... And then they get all bitchy when people pirate the shit.

My opinion is I'd like to see movie theatres stick around but they need to adjust their prices. I really think the big money will eventually be the big companies that decide to conform with todays reality and release brand new movies for streaming over the net. I'd spend $30 to have a brand new, just released movie, streamed to my home TV.

Hell, I actually think Hollywood would make MORE money if they streamed their shit on a backend program like iTunes. People dont want to leave their house and spend $40 on concessions alone, nevermind the ticket cost.

To me, its borderline insanity NOT to embrace the technology of today... If it kills theatres, so be it, sign of the times and all that. Look at drive-in theatres... They are cool but no one really misses them THAT much.

Weather Hollywood wants to accept it or not, streaming is the future, they should embrace it.

[Nathan Explosion]

Plus, some people's home theater set ups are so good, it beats the theater experience. Sure it's nice seeing movies at the IMAX, but if you have a 55" LED with a Bose surround sound and Blu Ray, why go to the theater when you can have a better experience at home.

I think sports teams are suffering from the same thing, although a true sports fan will recognize that nothing beats good seats to a game. But casual fans would rather stay home and watch in hi def from their living rooms with a 12 pack.