Slashdot Mirror
MPAA Calls for Ban on Screeners
neoThoth writes "The MPAA is calling for a ban on all screeners for awards ceremonies. They state piracy as the rationale for killing of this tradition of the industry. It's interesting how this is never mentioned in their cries for tougher piracy laws. It's own members are the main source of piracy. 'The Directors, Writers and Screen Actors Guild all get screeners, as does the Golden Globe-selecting Hollywood Foreign Press Association and various critics' groups.'" Remember, movie piracy doesn't just hurt actors, but also camera operators, key grips, makeup artists, and costumers.
Man, this is weak. I always look forward Academy screener time. I get to toss out my old, crappy telesync SVCDs and replace them with pristine DVD-Rs.
they should have the right to influence something like this at a private function like the Oscars. This doesn't strike me as provocative or unscrupulous in and of itself.
Remember, movie piracy doesn't just hurt actors, but also camera operators, key grips, makeup artists, and costumers.
Don't forget the Best Boy!
Eve Fairbanks says I drive a hybrid!LOL
You forgot the fluffers
I don't see why the MPAA just doesn't make slight, but easily noticeable differences between each screener. Maybe have a numeric code flash quickly onto the screen occasionally. Like what they do if there's a spy but they don't know who, they give out fake information and see which fake info the enemy acts on. If a certain coded screener gets pirated, then the MPAA knows who to send the lawsuit to.
I can't see David Letterman actually going and PAYING to see all the crap movies that his guests make!
And, while they're at it, why don't they just stop making movies all togather! That way, there'd be no piracy! Or not have awards! Or not release DVDs or VHS! Wouldn't that be great? And you can't trust theater bootlegs either, so no theaters!
Since when has this country used intellectual elite as a pejorative term?
Their fight against piracy should begin at home. You can't sue people randomly if your own members are copying the stuff you send them. When the start sueing people, I will feel ever so slightly less annoyed with them.
SAILING MISHAP
I for one welcome our MPAA non-screening overloards.
© 2004 The SCO Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Remember, movie piracy doesn't just hurt actors, but also camera operators, key grips, makeup artists, and costumers.
Whithout entering the merit of piracy itself, isn't this argument a fallacy? Aren't only high-profile actors/diretors/etc rewarded a percentage of the movie income, while all the others receive the same no matter what?
Don't want to enter the issue "but piracing will make movies spend less money" (which I doubt, based on current trend), but I got curious by this part.
--
No sig yet. Bear with it.
Remember, restricted the importation of controlled substances into this country not only hurt foreign growers, but also domestic transportation workers, retail level sales person, and the fine medical workers that help the O.D. victim recover to 50% of his mental capacity.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
Will this affect the screeners video stores recieve? The pirates will still get the movies in DVD quality format before they're released, it may just take a few more weeks.
Banaaaana!
It's foolish that they're even TALKING about this. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out that this means the movie industry's own people are the ones bootlegging movies. "If the people who make the movies are putting them out there, then how's it wrong for me to download?" (rhetorical, exampliary question) Bad, bad, BAD move.
Bush: He's Liberal in all the wrong ways.
Sorry, but what does IANAL stand for?
crappy leaked watermarked screeners add hype to a film making the desire and street buzz even greater with hundreds of kids promoting it and spreading good words making the film a "must see"
or
of course they might oppose it if the movie sucks as they need to rip off
This is not to condone piracy, but how dare the moguls drag in the very folks whom they the moguls abuse the most. Claiming that piracy hurts the crew is a cynical lie.
I never really got how piracy hurt X. There's a large segment of pirating acts that occur largely because the pirates aren't going to purchase something. If they aren't going to buy it, or they aren't going to buy it but still pirate it-- either way, the net income is exactly the same. If consumers can afford something, won't they typically go out of their way to own it? A DVD or CD album is always nicer to have on your shelf than a DVD-R or CD-R copy, after all.
I mean, does anyone really give a damn about the Oscars?
It's the industry celebrating itself in a annual act of masturbation on national TV.
If you disagree, please explain why Kevin Costner has a "Best Director" award but not Stanley Kubrick, Alfred Hitchcock or Akira Kurosawa?
It might give them some appreciation for jumping movie ticket prices. And don't even get me started on the $5 bucket beverage...
Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
>Remember, movie piracy doesn't just hurt actors, >but also camera operators, key grips, makeup >artists, and costumers.
Why be sarcastic about this? Its the truth, isn't it? I thought this is WHAT Slashdot wanted---instead of suing people the MPAA is educating them on why they should buy a DVD instead of copy their friend's.
First the general Slashdot position was "Don't shut down P2P, shut down the criminals." Then it was "Don't shut down the criminals, they don't know any better." Now it is "Don't educate people on WHY a movie costs 8 dollars".
Seems to me Slashdot is becoming more and more a piracy advocacy board. Movies and music cost money. Sorry, that's the way life works. Not everything can use the open-source software model. It takes a tremendous amount of people and resources to make a money.
Seems to me that educating people on why we need to contribute to movies is the best solution for everyone.
Brian
PS The Slashdot crowd is the FIRST ones to complain if a movie looks "cheap" or "fake".
Back in 1983 when my parents got me Return Of The Jedi off the bootleg dealers in NYC, the quality was garbage.
Those same people are still on the Broadway, Queens Blvd, FlatBush ave, etc... selling bootleg copies everyday.
Alls the MPAA is pissed off about is that now I can get really really good DVD quality bootlegs - without having to leave my house.
If the MPAA/RIAA is going to bitch, moan, cry, and then sue - it mind as well be equal opportunity. Just going after the file sharing folk is like me using nmap looking for netbus boxes and calling myself a hacker.
Its an easy kill, no different than a script kiddie.
The other screeners are the ones that work at the local movie theater.
Before every movie is played in the theater, the projectionist has to build it and *someone* has to watch every single movie before it's played to make sure the reels aren't put on backwards or in the wrong order or something like that. Anyone who's worked at the movie theater knows what late Thursday nights are like.
Someone needs to give these idiots a clue or two. With only a trivial effort in steganography they could "watermark" each copy uniquely. That way if if some reviewer leaked his copy they'd have evidence to nail him to the wall.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
I think the MPAA is totally overacting. How many geeks out there are actually going to substitute a DivX for the cinimatic experience of going to a movie theater?
Personally, I know people who had access to the LOTR DVD screener rip, and downloaded it, but waited to watch it until after the movie came out.
They then proceeded to watch the movie in theaters 3 or 4 times before ever playing the DivX file.
It wasn't until the period between the movie leaving theaters and coming out on DVD that the DivX file came in handy.
These friends not only purchased the regular version DVD when it came out, but also the extended version DVD.
IMO, if the MPAA want's to stop the popularity of DVD Screener rips, they should release the movie in DVD the same week it comes to theaters.
The problem is that many of the high quality pirated copies of movies have been pirated from Oscar and other screeners, not that the award shows themselves have anything to do with the pirating.
The auto industry doesn't just hurt the "Horse and Buggy" industry, it also hurts the wooden wheel maker.
Doesn't selling DVDs and videos contribute to piracy as well? I mean, if the pirates couldn't buy the DVDs or videos in the first place, it would be harder to copy them. I think they should ban the sale of DVDs ;) And while their at it, the practice of renting them contributes to a ton of piracy. Therefore, Blockbuster and it's smaller competitors should be banned from renting DVDs or videos to consumers.
----------
perl -e 'print(pack("H*","646176652e7761676e657240676d616
Screeners sux, the resulting movie usually looks (and sounds !) really bad. I prefear waiting some weeks/months for the DVD rip to be availiable.
No GNU has been Hurd during the making of this comment.
Remember, movie piracy doesn't just hurt actors, but also camera operators, key grips, makeup artists, and costumers. Actually based on how the movie industry operates...these people were all compensated before the release of the movie. They work in a union and most of them don't do anything on the set anyways....they are just the backup in case the head guy takes an extra coffee break. The only people really getting screwed are the ones that distribute and produce the movies. Distributors make a good percentage of theater profits, having to take care of the end of producing additional prints of the film and then securing contracts with theaters to show them. Producers also make a percentage of ticket sales, but also make a percentage on every DVD/VHS/Any-Future-Media purchase. Theaters make a very small percentage, if at all, and obviously make their money off the concessions. Distributors and Theaters will re-negotiate their deals based on how the movie does during the opening weekend. What is also BS is that typically more than half of the proceeds from movie tickets is made on opening weekend. So in the time it would take a person to video tape it and distribute it, if this person isn't an insider at the movie theater or at the studio/distribution house, it would only affect subsequent weekends which are much less important. Long story short, it doesn't affect any of those people, just the people who are taking a percentage of the profits from DVD sales, i.e. Production Company, Distribution Company, Investors, (sometimes actors).
It's about time the movie industry looked inward for the root of its problem. And while they're taking on awards screeners, how about the reviewers? Even before a movie hits the big screen, the movie companies send out DVD and VHS copies of the film to TV, radio, and newspaper critics around the country. A lot of the pirated films you see on the street are perfectly normal, except every 20 minutes or so a banner appears at the bottom of the screen, "This presentation intended for review purposes only" or some such.
Internet pirates? If you're looking for pirates, check your own back door.
World's tallest building rises in the desert
Perhaps this is a good use for those self-destructing DVDs that Hollywood seems so interested in deploying. It wouldn't really stop the piracy completely, but it'd make it a lot more difficult since they'd only have a couple of days to attempt the copy after viewing the movie.
Remember how the RIAA blamed critics for the commercial failure of some of the lastest wanna-bee-blockbusters ?
Well that the answer.
Instead of increasing the quality of the movies they just want to shut up all critics.
I predict in some years critics will get unfair competition and commercial damages lawsuits for writing negative reviews and the Oscar commitee will be forced to give Oscars to the most expensive movies just to promote them.
And all this just they want to milk out a maximum of money of the customers instead of concentrating of making good movies unlike the sucking Matrix sequel.
Owner of a Mensa membership card.
Where do they come up with these terms, anyway? "Screener"? I had to begin reading the article to understand that it meant a copy of a movie on DVD, like the common person calls, uh, a "movie".
"Pre-release" or "restricted print" would get the idea across to any layperson, without having to invent new language.
The phrase "to screen a film" has always bothered me too. It makes me envision a group of censors sitting around a table examining the flick for banned content.
I think I'm going to go and headphones some music now.
-ben
myselfmusic
Remember the MPAA not only hurts the constitution, but also common sense, research, education, the courts, and millions of trees.
Fight Spammers!
Remember, movie piracy doesn't just hurt actors, but also camera operators, key grips, makeup artists, and costumers. In the long run...okay maybe if they start making less movies but most of these people are paid their sum up front and don't earn any royalties off of the movie so piracy is not directly affecting them. Perhaps this is why they are quick to give a pre-released pirated copy away. ...and I really doubt less movies are going to be made. hollywood doesn't seem to be suffering.
20min of crappy dialog that even a TV serial company would laugh at
Worse yet, 20 minutes of crappy dialog that even the writers in a breakfast cereal company would laugh at. The writing in The Adventures of Uncle Toucan is better than the writing in some of the $#!+ that disgraces big screens in the U.S. nowadays.
Will I retire or break 10K?
I wonder if theyll ever create a kind of disc that the media breaks down as the laser passes over it. Aka, one time read or maybe two or three times read.
Whether a picture is a hit or a dog, it makes no difference; once the picture is in the can, that is the end of the crew's involvement.
But if more movies are distributed unlawfully, the major studios will invest in production of fewer movies, which means fewer "involvements" for the crew.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Remember, movie piracy doesn't just hurt actors, but also camera operators, key grips, makeup artists, and costumers.
Awww, the poor actors will make only $9.5 mil a movie instead of $10 mil next year. Awww, that breaks my heart.
The "camera operators, key grips, makeup artists" are on salary. They either fire them when the movie industry goes bust (yeah, right), or they are paid their salary. They don't make more money if the movie makes more money, they are not partners - they are replaceable employees. That's why Hollywood is full of ass-kissers - they know they are replaceable and don't have any dignity - they will do anything to keep their position (doggy-style).
And it hurts me, being part of the "and customers?" No it doesn't. Not even this move will. I'll stop wasting my time watching crap Hollywood fare with production values adjusted for the lowest common denominator.
Must-not-watch TV!
I for one support the MPAA on this totally - its bloody annoying downloading a whole divx and then watching it only to find text like "This film is property of (somestudio) and is for awards purposes only" popping up on screen every 5 mins! Anything that will reduce these and let the good quality rips prosper is ok by me.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
I thought this would be an appropriate article to mention that, before the movie Underworld there was an industry sponsored commercial that asked us all to stop pirating movies. They used a few clips of an interview with a set designer, and he responded to the question of piracy by saying (I'm paraphrasing) "This doesn't really affect me, I get paid either way. Piracy only hurts the people at the top." Maybe they should have gotten someone else to comment. . .
---Psilosopher
Remember, movie piracy doesn't just hurt actors, but also camera operators, key grips, makeup artists, and costumers.
.... and fluffers.
I'm not paranoid, everyone IS out to get me!
There is no spoon or sig.
I'll care when the MPAA signature companies start to make making original films again, not rehashing stuff that's 20+ years old....
Sometimes people just have to learn and adapt to change, it is one of the requirements of being a living thing.
Damn near every channel on TV has one of those stupid logos in the bottom corner. Seems like it would be no problem at all to put a serial number down there. If all of the movies had their screeners numbered this way, then there'd be no way for the judges to 'punish' an individual film for doing it. The pirates would have to black out that corner (and maybe that number could move around from place to place). At best, it would discourage insiders from giving away copies, and at worst it would make the pirated editions look more obvious.
Ok, maybe I'm being dense here, but does piracy of in-theater movies _really_ hurt the industry? I mean, are there really people out there who are downloading movies INSTEAD of going to theaters?
I can certainly understand anti-piracy efforts aimed at curbing DVD-ripping -- that's combatting people who don't want to pay $15 or whatever to buy a DVD -- same kind of people who pirate software, me thinks.
But are there really that many people who will download a current-run movie INSTEAD of going to see it in a theater? Again, I certainly understand the allure of "having" one of those movies on your home PC (I mean, it's so 3r33t), but the experience of seeing a movie on the big-screen -- in true quality, with real sound, etc. -- isn't replacable. And if people think it is, well, then they're idiots AND cheapskates.
Ferrari and other exotic car rentals in New York
I've got a friend who's family works in Hollywood... if you were to look at a shelf in their home near the TV you will see hundreds of DVD's, all studio screeners, the thing that has always amazed me is that they get these DVD's a week or two BEFORE the theatrical release of the film.
It amazes me that the powers that be have not tried to crack down on the distribution of these movies.
Help Brendan pay off his student loans
But didn't Johnny Depp makes tons of money and critical accliam for portraying piracy?
The MPAA is supposed to be protecting the interests of the film makers... Shouldn't the individual movie houses that produce the movies have the right to decide how their films get distributed, and furthermore, whether the risk of it showing up on Kazaa or on a street corner is in their best interst? This seems like a pretty clear cut instance of the tail waving the dog.
Isn't this what everyone (mostly Slashdot keyboard pundits) has been saying they should do for months now? Namely making an effort to stop the flow of movies into the P2P channels. If they pull this off, there might actually be a noticeable drop in the number of high quality rips appearing before a movie is in the theaters. And the seems to be the biggest of the MPAA's pet peeves. At least with the video camera copies, one person had to actually buy a ticket.
And it might even work.
Once the movie is available for sale on DVD, it's gonna be pirated anyway. i dont' see what's the big deal about screeners. I admit that i downlaod screeners for movies that don't have a DVD yet. But it it's a good movie i still buy the dvd. Remember, DVD movies are better than rips. This isn't music after all.
A few solutions:
1. Give out the screener in some mass-produced player thats all encrypted and erases itself after a week. Open it or try anything funny and it wipes itself.
2. Have actual screeners, you know, rent a theater.
3. Watermark the crap out of them.
I like the idea of a special DRM player. The MPAA can weigh the benefits of courting the vote of the academy members with the cost of the devices.
I mean lets get real here.. a movie most times is over a gig in size and not many people can acheive the full download speed anyways. (I'm speaking from a p2p perspective and not 2 buddies with t3's at work passing them on)
But I know many people who have bootlegs of movies and considering the 8 dollar plus snacks and quality/crowding issues at theatres nowdays it's a wonder nobody makes returns to the movie no matter how good it is..
I've avoided opening nights on fridays and just have gone on a sunday or monday when it's not crowded and I can sit comfortably with the wife.
Also they might want to look at these movies that they release that the preview was better than the movie. Such as the latest woody allen movie with christina ricci and the kid from american pie.. it was worthless.. I would of paid to see a slightly longer preview and been done with it instead of wasting 2 hours of my life watching what I thought was a boring movie.
The actor with the English accent playing the retard will still win the Oscar, whether the MPAA actually watches the movie or not.
At the same time, theaters owners have taken a stance against the long-held practice of providing free admittance to members of these guilds and associations.
So until they stop that practice, viewers can go to the movies and still not pay. Although I guess they do have to pony up for popcorn.
The article also mentions that studios will set up screenings sometimes too, which I'm sure are free
I have blog like everyone else
Why doesnt the MPAA buy out ALL "entertainment outlets" and need NOT screeners. employees have to take an oath against piracy.
I'm not sure that it hurts anyone but the movie companies. The movies that are pirated are being made, and therefore, the people who help to make them are still getting paid for their work.
The MPAA isn't going to say "we aren't going to make movies anymore because a few people pirate them." The majority of people are still going to go to the theater or buy the DVD if they want to see a movie. Nobody loses but the companies that make the movies. And even if, say, 50,000 people download a pirated movie instead of going to the theater, at $7 a ticket only $35,000 is lost, some of which goes to the theater. Movie pirating is not mainstream enough to be a major concern at the moment.
Otherwise, you might have a hard time convincing the judge that someone dumb enough to take your legal advice is smart enough to know what the acronym stands for.
Also, I prefer the contraction-modified version of this acronym: "IMNAL" because it doesn't sound as much like "I take it up the ass."
I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
Many actors, directors, and other talent have contracts that require the studios to send out screeners -- so that they have a chance in the Oscar competition. Not to cast aspersions on particular movies, but I don't think we would have gotten some of these films if it weren't for contractual obligations. I don't think the MPAA can abrogate these contracts post hoc, although they may not get written in the future.
The other issue is that the Awards show has been moved up this year, to the point where screeners will probably have to be sent out well in advance of the theatrical release of films -- especially of films released in December targeted at the Academy nominating process.
The biggest problem with the MPAA's proposal is that it won't work -- perhaps the quality of the pirated movies will go down somewhat without screeners, but there are so many ways of pirating films that it will still happen.
There aren't all that many Academy members -- burning 6000 individually customized DVDs wouldn't be too hard. The other award-granting bodies are significantly smaller, still. And what could be more rewarding to somebody to get a customized DVD -- "This movie is for the private screening of Joe Member only". It sounds like a good business model to me, the business of making customized screeners.
thad
I love Mondays. On a Monday, anything is possible.
Don't forget the Best Boy!
And the gaffer!
My personnal favourite:
One entry found for gaffe.
Main Entry: gaffe
Pronunciation: 'gaf
Function: noun
Etymology: French, gaff, gaffe
Date: 1909
: a social or diplomatic blunder
Oh, to be paid to make diplomatic blunders...
: )
You can't take the sky from me...
I've seen a few screeners in my time (legally) and they always had big flashing titles all over the screen saying it was a screener, etc. If anyone duplicates it and distributes it then its pretty obvious where it came from. And its pretty painful to try to sit through a long tape with all that stuff on the screen. So I don't see what the issue is...perhaps they are trying ot make an issue out of nothing?
//m
If I pirate, it is because it is a way to have way more stuff than I would ever concievably purchase. There's no way I EVER purchase 800 albums or 150 movies. Thanks to the fact that the movie industry is NOT reacting completely like the RIAA (except for that whole DeCSS mess, which pisses me off), I actually go to see movies at the theater. And thanks to the lack of quality control amongst many divx encodings combined with the huge file size, I go to video stores and rent movies. Oh wait, this was about the whole "screener" thing. If they want to cut out the screeners, that's their right. It would certainly eliminate all the DVD rips that come out before the movie is released. I'm not that shameless of a pirate that I'm going to comlain that the movie industry can't deprive me of my right to have a dvd-quality illegal pre-release of whatever movie is out. I think they're just afriad that these pirated screeners cuts into movie theater profits. Which, I guess, is a perfectly valid worry. I just hope it results in lower theater prices; I'm tired of paying $7.50 to see a movie. And as far as I can tell, that's kind of at the low end of the spectrum.. Which would be why I wait until a movie comes out on DVD and is no longer a new release. Then I can watch it for $1/5 days thanks to my local video store, which is sorta back to my original point.
Remember, movie piracy doesn't just hurt actors, but also camera operators, key grips, makeup artists, and costumers.
You know what else hurts them more than piracy? Bad movies that no one wants to see! It's been several months since I've even had the desire to go see a movie.
-----
---- "Excuse me. Where's the children's gun section?"
It's okay for them to rip consumers off, but it's not okay for consumers to rip them off?! How does THAT work?
They complain about piracy, yadda yadda yadda, but then they have the nerve to re-release the same movie every year or so under a Specila Ultra Deluxe Edition or whatever.
We have secretly replaced these Slashdot mods' sense of humor with a rusty nail. Let's see if they notice!!
Why be sarcastic about this?
I believe that you are mixing things up. The sarcasm was centered on the commercial, not on the idea of what the MPAA is trying to teach. I, for one, appreciate the sarcasm. These commercials are stupid and treat the movie going audience as ignorant. I don't need to be reminded that thousands of people went into make the Lord of the Rings series and that these same people might have their bottom line hurt by movie piracy.
First the general Slashdot position was "Don't shut down P2P, shut down the criminals." Then it was "Don't shut down the criminals, they don't know any better." Now it is "Don't educate people on WHY a movie costs 8 dollars".
--snip--
Seems to me Slashdot is becoming more and more a piracy advocacy board.
Give me a break. If you would, please site articles that back up this ludicrous statement. I agree that Slashdot and its admins have an agenda, but your statement is definately not even close.
Seems to me that educating people on why we need to contribute to movies is the best solution for everyone.
Seems to me that treating people as if they were intelligent is the best solution for everyone.
PS The Slashdot crowd is the FIRST ones to complain if a movie looks "cheap" or "fake".
I take it, then, that Slashdot is your only source for news? I find that reviewers in the national papers are more likely to be critical like that in the days before a movie is release, well before the "Slashdot crowd" gets their hands on it. Your statement here makes absolutely no sense.
Bryan R.
The price of freedom is eternal vigilance, or $12.50 as seen on eBay.....
1. The problem is not people who are legitimate receivers of screeners who are pirating, it's what happens to the disc after that person watches it. They are borrowed, stolen, and some are pirated. Once the disc is in circulation, it's hard to control it. 2. You can't easily serialize these screeners. There are maybe 1500 to 2000 screeners of each movie. Do the math. 3.The problem with camcorders in theatres is not just the P2P channel, but the fact that pirated copy gets FTP'd out of the country where it shows up on VCDs in Asia or Europe. Especially in Europe this can destroy the legitimate opening week for the movie, since they get the movie a bit later than the US. And don't argue that they should open the movie simultaneously around the world. Not going to happen for a whole slew of reasons that frankly many of you wouldn't understand, like striking localized release prints, and localizing the marketing, doing the PR (actors can only give one interview at a time), honoring territorial commitments, etc. 4. The MPAA is a trade group that represents the studios' interest. Get it straight. 5. It is the sworn duty of entities like the MPAA and RIAA to protect their copyrights. That is one of the main reasons they exist. They will never knowingly relinquish copyright control. THAT"S WHY THEY EXIST!
You know what...I actually have no problems with this move.
/. crowd been telling the RIAA??? "change your business model"...which isn't much more than "learn to deal with it"...well, they ARE doing something...and it's not pissing off/suing their customers.
What has the
The way I see it, they've decided that the release of the early screener is hurting DeeVeeDee sales.
So, they've went to the source...they are taking a hit in potential ratings/awards.
I would personally rather see this than to see the MPAA start going after file sharing/end users like the RIAA has been.
As for my movie purchasing, I'll still go see movies at the theater and I'll still buy DVDs.
DVDs can generally be found for $10-$15 on the week of release (about the same price as new albums)...which have tons of extra content. And not only that, they are gradually putting all of their back catalog onto DVD (for cheap prices).
- Daredevil (another installment of the crappy comic book movies--but I'm a comic junkie, what can I say?)
- Hulk (same)
- T3 (sequel several years after the fact -- obviously just to make money)
- Bad Boys 2 (same)
Living in New York City, movies cost $10 and I'll be damned if I'm going to pay that much for prepackaged junk.Just as I continue to buy CDs which I think are worth the price charged for them, I still continue to go see movies I think will be worth my $10, but few movies fall into this category. It's simple market economics. The reason I don't go to the movies is that I don't want to shell out all that cash. The fact that I can still get ahold of these movies by other means is pretty irrelevant.
So many things wrong with this. First of all, just becasue screeners are a source of piracy, does not mean they are the main source of piracy. Nowhere in the article does it say this, and having seen many "pirated" movies, I can say that very few of them have been screeners. Most seem to be ripped from DVDs or, to a lesser extent, VHS tapes.
Second, the people who receive screeners are not really members of the MPAA. The MPAA is an industry group of major movie studios. The people who get screeners are members of the Academy and Writers, Directors, and Screen Actors Guilds. Yes, the people who leak screeners are technically part of the industry, but they are not members of the MPAA.
Third, what does it matter if these people are in the movie industry? The MPAA has noticed a source of pirated movies over which it potentially has control and has attempted to close up this hole. Would you rather they went after you?
I'm not for pirating, but I'm certainly against going to the theater and being subject to watching some guy tell me how pirating won't hurt the stars and producers (much) but really hurts "Joe Blow".
I half expect Sally Struthers to pop up and say, "Save the children!"
I don't watch Hollywood movies anyway.
Big Brother Bush is doubleplus ungood.
So what if it hurts camera operators, key grips, makeup artists, and costumers? They're not going to get any sympathy from someone doing merchandizing after having been a programmer for 20 years.
Let the whole of Big Media rot.
Big Brother Bush is doubleplus ungood.
I have to agree with the MPAA on the claim that screeners lead to piracy. Back in June, I picked up a nice quality Two Towers DVD in China (for about $2). The only flaws were:
(1) The English subtitles had nothing at all to do with the Two Towers or any other movie, I think. Though, they did repeat the words "sword" and "princess" regularly, they were utterly incoherent.
(2) The navigation menu is from Lord of the Rings. The chapter titles and pictures give no clue where on the DVD the link takes you (which is never the beginning of a scene).
(3) Every so often, you see a subtitle that this is a release for Oscar judges only and not intended for public viewing.
This is considerably less annoying than that other DVD I have, which helpfully runs a subtitle every so often reading:
"Sale or rental of this disc is ILLEGAL. If you have rented or
purchased this disc, please call the MPAA at 1-800-NO-COPYS."
Very effective, that. I'm sure I would've called, too, but 1-800 numbers don't work from the Netherlands.
Phiwum's law: anyone that names an obvious law after himself and then puts it in his own sig is just pathetic.
"Remember, movie piracy doesn't just hurt actors, but also camera operators, key grips, makeup artists, and costumers."
The MPAA themselves are hurting them with heavy-handed tactics that make me boycott their products. Or am I somehow now a "bad person" because I'm not parting with my MPAA tax?
...arive. The problem is, the alternative is going to screenings paid for by the studios and these are almost invariably in LA. I hope they don't stop. And I certainly don't want them reverting to VHS. IMHO Anyone who judges the quality of a movie based on a VHS is wasting their vote.
Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
I can tell you that piracy isn't so much hurting the trade, as is shooting gigs in Canada, Austrailia, and other bum fuck places where they get their crew for peanuts. That's the main threat for American cinema workers. Not Kazaa
What I wish is that they would let geeks serve community service time (if being punished criminally) by assisting officers at Flea Markets around the country stopping these piracy rings which are physical goods.
To continue; I think a techie could also assist with knowing what electronics might be stolen as well.
To top it off, I'd like to see some Latinos with food liscenses and visa checks from these markets too.
Yell & scream & rant & rave... it's no use... you need a shaaaave ~ Bugs Bunny
They need to do this. I live in LA, and every friend I know in the MP Industry has loads of free movies they get from screeners. They often have them before it's released in theatres. You can't bitch about people bootlegging your material when you send out a buttload of copies before it's even released just to get votes for an awards show.
It's good discipline on the part of the MPAA. They need a little.
"Curiosity killed the cat, but for a while I was a suspect."- Steven Wright
I had a freind who worked a circuit city when the whole DivX thing had a chance to be hot. and it worked like this the DivX (not Divx which is a rather nice codec) was a normal DVD with a unique code imprented in its first few bytes. The DivX player would upon having a new DivX Dvd inserted call a central server to see if :
A: This disk had never been viewed before.
B: You had sent a certain amount of money to the company to make this disk permenatly available to you.
If either of these were true it let you watch the disk. If not it brought up billing options to watch the disk.
It was a clever system and if it could have gotten support from say blockbuster video could have been successful. Annoying and not supported by me but still success could have been had
I used to have a cool sig, back when I cared
They could just require a movie to be released on DVD before it qualifies for an Oscar. The delay between theatrical release and DVD release is about six months average now, right? And some go virtually straight to DVD.
Does E! Online not have any proofreaders? That article is nearly impossible to read. Jeez!
Jory
Already being done with dots on a few frames of the movie.
http://www.vcdquality.com/nfo.php?id=18919&show=te xt
A screenshot is availible on the site too.
This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
If there's anything Hollywood fears more than piracy, it's the possibility that their audience might develop the ability to delay gratification.
In the decades since the collapse of the studio system, moviemaking costs have been driven higher and higher for bad reasons - namely, sky-high star salaries and the desperate emphasis on blockbusters.
What can also be measured is how the majors make fewer movies involving fewer actors, and take fewer risks. Monoculture, thy name is Hollywood.
This would be OK if it worked, but it works less and less: other media like the Net and gaming are overtaking movies, and many megabucks stars (e.g., the unusually bland Costner) can't make a profitable movie to save their lives. The frantic, eggs-in-one-basket hunt for opening weekend success - think of all the screeching hype that has replaced honest movie reviewing - also grows from this narrow-minded approach.
But it's not only the movie industry's fortunes that are affected by this model. One of the great means for transmission of ideas and values in society is film. Unlike films of even 30 or 40 years ago, Hollywood's navel-gazing product today rarely has much to say to anybody older than 13 (and when it does, the message is inevitably, "You should be 13 again!"). Independent film, which can sometimes do much more, isn't distributed because all the screens at the gigaplex are showing the corporate product. The festival circuit is literally teeming with hundreds of cool films you'll never see because they are crowded out of contention by, say, a single Gigli, which is one Gigli too many.
Thus do a few unimaginative men make a less interesting world for all of us. Excuse me if I'm not too worried about them.
I love that bit:
the Motion Picture Association of America is trying to get the major studios to stop mailing out DVD and video screeners, claiming the practice leads to piracy.
The MPAA was supposedly formed by the major studios! I see now it took the life of its own and started ordering the studios around... Soon they will probably try to stop studios from making new movies, because this leads to piracy as well. RIAA, reportedly have been very successful with this practice - greately reducing the number of newly released CDs and supposedly reducing the piracy with that...
Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
As usual, MPAA ignores the benefits of the technology (this time a business practice) and concentrates on its flaws. Screeners help promote films, supposedly leading to greater box office revenues (for good movies) and DVD sales. But increasing sales is not a concern for MPAA, decreasing piracy is.
Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
I've worked with a media company, so I know their solution:
They are starting to use a faint watermark, across the entire picture. The watermark is individual to the tape itself (a number, letter, symbol or combo).
This way, if the tape is pirated... it's easy to trace back.
Each tape is signed out to a particular person. That person previously signed NDA's. Now they have to sign NDA's... and there is something to ensure they don't forget about it.
If the tape is leaked.... they know exactly who to go after. The tape's watermark will lead to the person responsible.
Why don't the just put some logo or icon in the corner of the screen on the screener version? (like we see on ALL of the TV channels now)
On another note in the same chord, I wonder when producers will think of putting scenes in the box office version that will NOT be included in the DVD release, in an effort to raise box office sales. Something to the effect of, 'Only see {star-x}'s ASS in the theater!'
Slashdot Eds Link Anonymous Posts With Logged Posts
They Are Vermin Feeding On Each Other's Feces.
I Hate \.
A perfect example of that was Gladiator... with the sound effects and background music..s It was 10 fold better than when I bought the DVD and watched it at home on surround sound. And the stuff I watch on screeners... I would never go to the movies to see in the first place. But after watching it, I may want to buy the DVD for my massive collection. So they aren't losing money in my case... Can't lose what you never had.
following the path of the piracy-ravaged recording industry
Oh pity the music industry. They're out there, in rags, begging for anyone to help them.
CDE open sourced! https://sourceforge.net/projects/cdesktopenv/
In theory. Nobody cares (or at least, they shouldn't) if you record a song off the radio because it's far from a perfect copy. In the same token, I don't see how a fuzzy, downloaded, ultra-compressed screener with all sorts of "THIS IS THE PROPERTY OF MGM STUDIOS" warnings popping up all over it (I do realize some screeners are better than others but they're all far from a DVD you'd buy in the store) can be said to hurt DVD sales. If the movie is good you'll buy the $14 DVD (for less than the price of the movie's soundtrack on CD, but that's another issue). If the leaked screener causes people to realize that the movie sucks and they don't go pay to see it in the theater, that's a good thing because it encourages studios (at least it should) to make better films. Thus, pirated screeners not only do not hurt legitimate sales of the equivalent product (the DVD form of the movie) but they help to act as a muse for the industry as a whole. This is why people in the industry probably share their screeners. It keeps them on their creative toes.
Stupid people make stupid things profitable.
The MPAA filed suit against Universal Studios and its parent company Vivendi Entertainment today for film piracy. The details of the suit allege that Universal illegally copied the Universal film "Lord of the Rings: The Return of The King" and distributed it to members of the Acadamy of Motion Pictures as a promotional tool. The MPAA has repeatedly claimed that the distribution of promotional copies of Oscar-eligible feature films is a major source of piracy. "Distributing these films is morally equivalent to selling the ingredients for crystal meth.", said an MPAA spokesman, "The studios know the films will be copied illegally, and they don't care what happens as long as they get their Oscar votes."
In other news, the online humor magazine "The Onion" ceased production today. Editor-in-Chief Carol Kolb said "We just can't come up with anything weird enough anymore. Reality keeps beating us."
Interociter
-=What do I want? I'm an American. I want more.
Lock the doors at the Oscars after everyone is in. Then, each film that has received a nomination will be played in it's entirety. After all films in a category are played, the audience can vote using their remote keypads. Port-a-potties and hot dog carts can be set up in the back of the theater.
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
Now maybe my sample is biased because I work in the film industry, but literally 100% of the movie rips I have seen people play on their computers have had the "Property of 20th Century Fox" (or whatever) logo on the bottom. From what I have seen getting rid of screeners will literally get rid of all piracy.
If you disagree, please explain why Kevin Costner has a "Best Director" award but not Stanley Kubrick, Alfred Hitchcock or Akira Kurosawa?
;-)
The Oscars aren't fair.
The fact that it depends a lot on your fellow nominees in a particular year (tough / weak competition) was already mentioned in this thread.
However, one of the main reasons for the lack of fairness - look who's picking nominees, and who's picking the winners. Directors who are members of the AMPAS pick the nominees, all AMPAS members (~6,000) vote for the winner.
So if directors like or dislike a particular fellow (competitor) director, he may be nominated although he doesn't deserve it (or the other way around, may not be nominated although he deserves it).
Even if a worthy director gets nominated, all 6,000 AMPAS members vote on the award. Every sound engineer, actor, producer who may know nothing about directing has a vote. It's a miracle that sometimes the right people do get the award.
And for those who never get a real Oscar, there's still the life time achievement award.
1. IF Some downloads result in some sales losses, and some don't (a reasonable assumption admittedly). 2 AND Some piracy functions as word of mouth advertising (even if that's far from its only function). 3. THEN Piracy will do more damage to the bottom line of a film if all forms of 'word of mouth' and corporate ad campaigns are seriously out of sinc, AND in particular if word of mouth is much more negative than the official ad campaign. 4. How much more depends on how big the 'somes' and"much mores" in the first 3 lines are. 5. If the above ideas are actually logical, then Ben and J-Lo's latest effort bombed, but a heck of a lot of people have pirated copies of it.
Who is John Cabal?
It is not possible, legally or physically, to "steal" data. It is not possible to "pirate" data.
It is guerilla antitrust.
Nothing more, nothing less.
It may be illegal, but it isn't theft.
The MPAA is taking a legally defensible and appropriate action to control the dissemination of data.
"If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature, when she made them, like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density in any point, and like the air in which we breathe, move, and have our physical being, incapable of confinement or exclusive appropriation. Inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property."
Quotes from Thomas Jefferson To Isaac McPherson; Monticello, August 13, 1813.
A leaked screener may or may not be the reason that I didn't see LotR:TTT at the cinema. That it's a purile, badly-told, pointless story also may or may not have been the reason.
-------
---- "Excuse me. Where's the children's gun section?"
-----clip Remember, movie piracy doesn't just hurt actors, but also camera operators, key grips, makeup artists, and costumers. -----clip guess it does'nt hurt IT people.
Gotta read more carefully, as you said, cut the credits. And if it's an insider, making a little extra by releasing the screener, it would be impossible to catch them. I think there's a perception that it really isn't making much difference to movie sales, as Spider-Man et al don't seem to have suffered.
Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
If they don't get hired because the studio can't afford to make a movie then those guys get nothing.
Hollow words will burn and hollow men will burn.
The studios already show about a million movies between November and perhaps March to members of the Academy. The reason they send out movies is that a lot of these people are lazy fucks. I've met people in the Academy who you'd swear hated the fact that movies even existed. Driving to Westwood to see a screening is way to much effort so they'd rather be fucking hethens and watch them on their TV.
Hollow words will burn and hollow men will burn.
In fact, distribute a couple of different endings just to confuse the living crap out of everybody. Hell, they do it already with Video and DVD's. (For the love of God, where can I get a NON director's cut of Blade Runner and Das Boot! The fluffing toy sub shots ruined the entire mood of the film.)
At the same time, folks would HAVE to go to the movies to find out how the movie actually end. They would also drain far more resources having to download multiple version of the film, and watch them all the way through, never sure what will change.
Muhahahaha. I'm earning my Evil points tonight...
"Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
--Dr.W.Edwards Deming
Remember, movie piracy doesn't just hurt actors, but also camera operators, key grips, makeup artists, and costumers.
... (hurts) ... customers". I really got too accustomed (or accostumed?) to reading these kinds of arguments pro or against movie copying, especially the parts where they say it will hurt consumers/customers (difference?) in the end, so I kind-of automatically read the closest word I usually see in this context. :)
On first reading I misread this as "movie piracy