DVDizzy Forum

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/4972972.stm

The report is the first to measure losses for internet piracy, which it said cost the industry $2.3bn.

"This study will help us better analyse and focus our efforts to fight movie theft," said MPAA's Dan Glickman.

Bootlegging, which the study defines as buying illegally copied films, DVDs or video CDs, was said to account for $2.4 billion in lost revenue. Illegal copying - which included viewers making copies for their own personal use - made up $1.4 billion of the estimated yearly loss.

Now I don't support or advocate piracy in any form, but I don't think this report is quite true. The issue is... would the people downloading/making the copies actually purchase a DVD or cinema ticket otherwise? Most of the time I would suspect not. We ourselves know that several Disney DVDs are next to impossible to actually purchase.

Which brings up another point. If DVD piracy is bad (which I'm sure we all agree with) why is Blockbuster and Ebay selling second-hand DVDs not bad? The studio looses money on every second-hand DVD sold, and again in the case of Disney DVDs, these sell for vastly inflated prices. Prices the studios don't see, and in theory will stop the purchaser from purchasing legal, brand new DVDs.

It's easy to look at copies and put a value on them, but harder to make the judgement of if a sale is lost or not because of it.

I don't know all the facts. But if this number has been arrived at based on the assumption that practically every pirated copy equals one lost sale, I'm sure that the number is VERY much off.

I'm not sure I agree with it simply because making a backup copy of something you own, provided its for archival, is legal. Unless they think that the backup will become the original if the original gets scratched or something, and then they make a copy of the copy...I would assume that's still legal.

2099net wrote:If DVD piracy is bad (which I'm sure we all agree with) why is Blockbuster and Ebay selling second-hand DVDs not bad? The studio looses money on every second-hand DVD sold, and again in the case of Disney DVDs, these sell for vastly inflated prices.

The people who buy 2nd hand DVD's probably wouldn't pay a full new price anyway. You could say this about anything though you buy 2nd hand. Doesn't car companies lose money on cars when someone buys a used one instead of a new one. Same with anything.

Lucylover1986 wrote:

2099net wrote:If DVD piracy is bad (which I'm sure we all agree with) why is Blockbuster and Ebay selling second-hand DVDs not bad? The studio looses money on every second-hand DVD sold, and again in the case of Disney DVDs, these sell for vastly inflated prices.

The people who buy 2nd hand DVD's probably wouldn't pay a full new price anyway. You could say this about anything though you buy 2nd hand. Doesn't car companies lose money on cars when someone buys a used one instead of a new one. Same with anything.

It's not quite the same, because movie studios don't sell "objects" as such. They sell concepts. A person doesn't actually "own" a film, the film studio still does, but a person owns a car. A DVD is only a licence view the film... the physical film elements and copyright is still with the studio.

As you say, its quite right a person buying a second hand car, TV or computer wouldn't probably buy one new for financial reasons, a person buying a second-hand DVD probably would rent it out, or pay for video on demand to see it for a cheaper price.

But its a moot argument in my opinion anyway. Think of all the billions of lost books sales because of libraries, but the book publishers don't moan about that do they?

I think this number is way below what the actual numbers are. I know a lot of people who copy movies including Disney and Sony. Also what about the movies on peoples DVR's and all the movies copied onto Video, but then alot of these movies would not be bought in the first place

I have no clue about anything. That's why I picked "I don't know."

memnv wrote:I think this number is way below what the actual numbers are. I know a lot of people who copy movies including Disney and Sony. Also what about the movies on peoples DVR's and all the movies copied onto Video,

I suppose the actual number of copies and number of Billion $s in "potential sales" would be very difficult to estimate for most people, and therefore I'd guess the numbers in "the report" are as good as anything anyone else could come up with.

memnv wrote:but then alot of these movies would not be bought in the first place

I think THAT's the important part, however.

2099net wrote:But its a moot argument in my opinion anyway. Think of all the billions of lost books sales because of libraries, but the book publishers don't moan about that do they?

I dunno...from what I've heard, the main reason that textbooks are released in "new" editions every couple of years is because if the publishers didn't do this, they'd eventually start losing a lot of sales once each edition hit the resale cycle. This is probably the most extreme example of this sort of thing happening (but what do the publishers expect poor students to do when new edition textbooks routinely cost over $100 each? Of COURSE they're going to buy a slightly beat up copy if they can save some money).

With movies, generally bootlegs come in one of two forms, I think:
- in-situ recording of new releases in the theater; if you've ever been to New York, you've no doubt seen the new movie pirates on the street hawking DVDs of films that are still in the theaters. These recordings also show up as divx files on file-sharing programs, and in either case are usually poor quality.

- DVDs that include material "ripped" from legitimate DVD releases. Ripping the files is not hard at all, and in fact, if you have a few dozen GB to spare, it's a good way of backing up your films or saving them to watch without having to run the motor in the disc drive. It's properly encoding them on new DVDs so that they will run properly that is the hard part, but of course some folks figured out how to do it.

I think there are a few ways that studios could alleviate their woes somewhat. First, make your popular materials easy for people to buy legitimately; if they really want it, they will buy it no matter how "exclusive" a release window you have (Disney, I'm looking at you). Second, look into direct download and possibly some new methods of file compression that could make downloading movies easier. And finally, improve encryption methods such that ripping movies for the purpose of burning them onto new discs is near impossible. I think a lot of people would rather have a legitimate copy than a bootleg that is of questionable quality anyway, and the easier it is to get one, the less likely they are to pirate, I think.

Roger Rabbit wrote:

I'm not sure I agree with it simply because making a backup copy of something you own, provided its for archival, is legal. Unless they think that the backup will become the original if the original gets scratched or something, and then they make a copy of the copy...I would assume that's still legal.

Contrary to what you may think.....read that FBI warning that is on the front or rear of every VHS or DVD that you own. Copying in any form is against the law. If you need a back-up.......go buy a used copy of the movie. Don't understand why a person wants a backup copy anyway. This seems to be avoiding spending another couple of bucks for a second copy of the movie.

Could be just me, but, not being the computer whiz that a lot of people are, I don't understand a lot of this. But that being said, a copy is a copy, and it is against the law, even if you are doing it for yourself.

There are those here on UD that will say I am being hypocritical because I have made copies of certain 'unavailable' titles for them, but I plead guilty as charged. If they would release everything they have, unedited, and unexpurgated, then we wouldn't have to worry about copies, would we?

The film industry earns enough money as it is espaically with DVD sales.
They dont actually help themselves much either, take Disney for example. A movie that alot of people want being Song Of The South hasnt been released yet and as far as we know it wont get a release. Therefore people are downloading it or are paying a fair bit of money for an illegal copy, wouldnt the studio sooner release it and gain the profits instead of profits going to people that are breaking the law?

I know this sounds silly but would bag checking and checking the theatre once the movie is playing that nobody has any form of video equipment on them not help the situation a little more? It sounds like a lot of hassle but really when you think about it it isnt. Theres so many things that could be done that would help to stop dvd piracy.

dvdjunkie wrote:Contrary to what you may think.....read that FBI warning that is on the front or rear of every VHS or DVD that you own. Copying in any form is against the law. If you need a back-up.......go buy a used copy of the movie. Don't understand why a person wants a backup copy anyway. This seems to be avoiding spending another couple of bucks for a second copy of the movie.

Could be just me, but, not being the computer whiz that a lot of people are, I don't understand a lot of this. But that being said, a copy is a copy, and it is against the law, even if you are doing it for yourself.

There are those here on UD that will say I am being hypocritical because I have made copies of certain 'unavailable' titles for them, but I plead guilty as charged. If they would release everything they have, unedited, and unexpurgated, then we wouldn't have to worry about copies, would we?

One reason I "rip" movies off of DVDs is for instances where I want to watch a movie but don't want to tax my laptop's battery too much by running a DVD in the disc drive. In such a case, I delete the movie right after I watch it, since files of movies take up a chunk of space. Ripping is also one way to make screenshots.

But really, despite what the ominous FBI warnings say, I think the movies studios really care the most when a copy gets into the hands of someone who never paid money for a legitimate copy in the first place. The studios don't lose money if you buy a DVD from them and make a copy for your own use.

I have a friend who routinely buys pirated DVD's of newly released films in theaters off the streets in Chicago.

It drives me crazy. I mean - if you're going to spend money on it at all, why not take the $5 you're paying for the pirated copy and save it for when the real DVD is released?

I think it's a prestige issue with him - he wants to feel special that he has something before anybody else does.

I'd rather have the real thing. An official case - a high quality DVD. I won't even watch the crap he buys.

2099net wrote:But its a moot argument in my opinion anyway. Think of all the billions of lost books sales because of libraries, but the book publishers don't moan about that do they?

If the US is anything like here, then there is a Public Lending Rights Scheme in which the authors receive a fee based on how many copies of their books are in circulation are in a library at any given time. I know this because I've worked on tallying up the figures for my library several years in a row (that and the whole studying law thing).

I think that the $6.1 billion is certainly based on a false assumption. It assumes, as was said above, that ever pirate means a lost sale. Chances are, people are seeing the film at the cinema and wanting to watch it 50 times before the DVD comes out. DVD sales are still healthy.

If box office figures are declining, it may be due partly to the rise of DVD and the swift rate at which they now come to the home.

Also, Hollywood - and the music industry - seems unwilling to accept that millions of dollars spent on a film or an artist contract is not the most sensible way of doing business. How many people lost their jobs as the result of Mariah Carey's massive record deal advance on an album that failed to return? The music and film industries are the only places you'll find that are willing to make a loss on 9 outof 10 products, hoping that their 'blockbuster' will make enough money to cover the rest.

I'm sure piracy accounts for at least some of the dip in figures, but chances are the public wants something new as well. These industries have been fighting AGAINST the digital medium from the start, and are only now starting to embrace it. Perhaps if they had been on board from the start, they would have realised that more people are wanting to view their entertainment in a different delivery system than box office or DVD. Offer those films at a vastly discounted rate through a digital medium and then you'll see a turn around in those numbers!

Now 6.1 billion may sound like alot when the number is alone, but when you put it up against how much they made, I'm sure it's nothing. I'm sure they still made a HUGE profit.

kbehm29 wrote:I have a friend who routinely buys pirated DVD's of newly released films in theaters off the streets in Chicago.

It drives me crazy. I mean - if you're going to spend money on it at all, why not take the $5 you're paying for the pirated copy and save it for when the real DVD is released?

I think it's a prestige issue with him - he wants to feel special that he has something before anybody else does.

I'd rather have the real thing. An official case - a high quality DVD. I won't even watch the crap he buys.

I agree, it just pains me though when the authentic DVD has crap bonus features or has the same picture quality at pirated films.

I think the report is inflated for shock value. I agree with DisneyPrincess, compared to what they made, this is trivial. Especially considering the amount of money they throw to actors/actresses, this ain't crippling them. I'd be generous and saying if piracy was nonexistant, that they'd make half of what they believe what they lost. I think the majority of people that pirate things wouldn't buy that product anyway. Considering how expensive it is just to go to the movies these days, most people don't want to throw their money away on something they don't think they'll enjoy. Movie studios, music companies have been going about all this the wrong way. Having ads before movies, sueing people (especially the wrongful suits) and demonizing people in piracy isn't helping them.

Sorry to bump this, but what about online streaming of movies and TV shows? I personally think that depends on the quality of the film in question. TV shows I suppose are okay, considering how rarely one finds them on the official site.

dvdjunkie wrote:There are those here on UD that will say I am being hypocritical because I have made copies of certain 'unavailable' titles for them, but I plead guilty as charged. If they would release everything they have, unedited, and unexpurgated, then we wouldn't have to worry about copies, would we?

Amen, brother. While I believe that piracy is wrong, and is illegal for a reason.... I think that buying bootleg copies of films made unavailable by the real owners should be considered civil disobedience!
Would I buy a bootleg copy of any of the DACs? No, never.
Would I buy a bootleg copy of SotS? I probably will do just that if they don't hurry up and announce a legitimate version pronto.

I have a bootleg version of SoTS. Its a very good copy. High quality VHS on a DVD.

I do pirate movies and music. However, I am not the stereotypical pirate.

I buy bootleg/download pirated movies...of movies NOT available on DVD officially ANYWHERE. For instance, I wanted Plague Dogs on DVD. At the time, no one sold it, but I found a good quality bootleg, I bought it. Few years later, England came out with the DVD, official. I bought that. Which brings me into my next thing....

I might pirate a download of a movie in the theater or in limbo between DVD and theater. For instance, I downloaded Avatar....I didn't plan to see it in the theater again, at all. So downloading it, wasn't technically losing money from me since I didn't plan to go see it in the theater again anyways. However, I cannot wait till it comes on DVD and BluRay. I WILL buy it. I replace ALL bootlegs with official DVDs when the official ones are released. This isn't a way to "save" myself legally, its simply a matter of preference. Its a bare bones bootleg in a crappy cover (usually). I rather all the special features, better quality audio/video, better cover, etc. Bootleg helps to wet my appetite and curb my impatience, but its not my final answer either.

So in the end, on a personal level, I have little to no effect on the studio's piracy problem. And frankly, I know many other people who do the same things I do. So yeah, I think its a bit overblown.