Slashdot Mirror
Most Movies On P2P From Insiders?
An anonymous reader writes "AT&T Labs has determined that a significant majority of movies on P2P networks are the result of leaks from movie industry insiders (New York Times, free reg req'd). They not only point to the obvious cases (movies online before theatrical release, like The Hulk or Star Wars AOTC), but also examine other cases. The researchers examined 285 movies from P2P networks and used the quality of the file to determine whether it was some guy with a video camera or not. Choice quote: 'Our conclusion is that the distributors really need to take a hard look at their own internal processes and look at how they can stop the insider leaks of their movies before taking measures that might hamstring consumers' technologies and rights.'"
A major chanel for movies on P2P are copies sent to academy members by the studios.
Either don't pass them out, put a tighter reign on them, or don't complain when they get on p2p before the dvd release.
Or from the we know what you're up to dept.
Choice quote: 'Our conclusion is that the distributors really need to take a hard look at their own internal processes and look at how they can stop the insider leaks of their movies before taking measures that might hamstring consumers' technologies and rights.'"
They care about hamstringing consumers' rights and tech? If the result of "leaked" movies is more control for the industry, I would be suprised if they're not giving employees who "leak" films big fat bonuses.
Let's see. Get a few extra $million at the box office or leak a film and take another giant step towards total media domination. You know what they'll choose. It's not like they shy away from spending $millions lobbying to get similar results.
"When it rains, it pours." --Morton's Salt
Come on, that's an off-the-wall conspiracy theory....
The real problem is the old saying of of "Information wants to be free." Major movie releases are mega-hyped events where the content is something that is kept out of public view until the designated day, hour, minute of a moment, but within the process has to pass through the hands of thousands of people. It takes only one person to make an unauthorized copy at that level to get it onto the P2P networks.
Don't subscribe to NYTimes?
Yeah, It's not like they ever print stories of interest to /. readers so why should we try to support them in even a meager way.
What's stupidest about this is that not only is there free (as in beer) registration, but several nice slashdotters have set up logins over the years that everyone on slashdot could use (they published the login name and password). The coolest thing is no one ever changed the passwords on these accounts.
If you really want to karma whore, you could always create a new user and publish its name and password. Honestly, i do not know why submitters do not just link to the archive version of the nytimes story, whcih never requires a login to see.
Every time a nytimes story is used on /. I see the same 100 goddamn posts. Whining about registration, suggesting registration, suggesting archive urls, giving usernames to use to login... it's all a binch of malarky. Everyone who reads slashdot knows the deal with nytimes. Why they don't link the archive version to at least preempt the whining is beyond me.
The movie industry doesn't have to worry so much as the music industry for several reasons, mainly because they know not to gouge their customers.
Let's compare the two.
1) Movies come out in theaters for about 8 to 12 dollars, sometimes cheaper. This is as close to a live concert as your going to get. A live concert tickets for a major band is easily $30 dollars. Not to mention having to wait in a really long line, and deal with all the kids. Go to a movie on a Tuesday, sneak in a coke in your pockets or girlfriends purse and your cool.
2) Once out on DVD you get all kinds of extras, and a really high quaility piece of art. CDs are cds, they don't make them with surround sound or anything special. No video of live concerts or anything. And you usually have to pay 18 bucks for them, even when they have been out for 10 years! You can get all those marginally good movies for $10 bucks in those bins.
3) Movies can cast 10s of millions, while CDs could be made for near nothing. Yet they continue to sell for about the same and they just trust the user to want a collection.
I think the music industry could learn a thing or two. I don't really think we need multi-million a show tours. I don't want a million lights and gimics. I just want to see a live band for a decent price. I wish I liked phish, cause then I could get it. Why must I pay $100 bucks for a Radiohead concert. What ever happened to the arena concert?