Slashdot Mirror
Besieged Movie Industry Suffers Record Takings
nagora writes "The BBC is reporting that the movie industry, in yet another illustration of just how much damage the Internet is doing to the long-suffering members of the MPAA, has just endured a record breaking $1Billion dollar takings for the single month of June. Clearly there is a desperate need to tighten up copyright laws in the face of this huge mountain of cash that is literally being metaphorically syphoned into the studios' pockets. How will they survive? "
The third Harry Potter film topped the North American box office for the month by a wide margin, taking $217.2m (118m).
I have said before that if they stop making movies that suck that people will go and see them. While Harry Potter III didn't exactly make me jump up and down it was certainly better than the critically acclaimed "Gigli" or the various other fantastic movies that go straight to DVD.
I have recently seen Harry Potter 3, F 9/11, and Dodgeball in the theatres on their release weekend. I have rented over 10 DVDs in the same time period because decent movies have been released that deserved my money.
I downloaded Gigli because the MPAA needed to suck wind on that one for daring to put in the theatres and wasting both MY money and the theatre's money.
We wonder why they overcharge? It's because they have to make up for all the bullshit movies they show that suck and no one goes to. Perhaps they should try and make blockbuster months EVERY month instead of just June (6/2003 was their previous single month record according to the article). Put two good movies out every month of every year and you'll make a shitload. Put four good movies out every year and you'll suck wind for the rest.
Here's some infomration to put that figure into perspective:
The box office tally for June 2004 is 37% higher than the same period in 2001.
...where they get these "statistics" from. I mean do they know for a fact how many movies were downloaded? And do they know for a fact that for every movie downloaded means they lost money for that? I'm sure some people download movies they wouldn't have spent money on anyway.
I downloaded The Return of the King before it came out on DVD. But I also saw the movie in the theater opening day and three other times after that, plus bought the DVD the day it came out, plus I will buy the Extended Edition DVD the day it comes out as well. But I bet their statistics say they lost money from me downloading it when in fact they have gotten more money from me than the average-joe movie goer who doesn't even know how to click a mouse.
It's just a bunch of bullshit to make the uninformed brainwashed public that laughs at every idiotic joke in their movies believe this is all worse than it really is. The MPAA just needs to jump on the boat like the RIAA finally did and offer a good service for a decent price over the internet. Ever since Rhapsody came out I've stopped downloading mp3's and haven't even listened to the 10 gigs of them sitting on my hard drive.
But I guess leeching more money from hard working individuals is a better alternative than actually finding a solution to the problem.
Wait, does this mean you thought Dodgeball was good?!?
...how do they sleep at night?
The answer however is to easy to come up with.
Very comfortably, on a big pile of money.
(/local/home/curiosity)-#who -u|grep thecat|cut -c 44-49|xargs kill -9
If you release movies that people WANT to see (Harry Potter, Spiderman, Shrek); than people will pay to see a movie? No F***ING WAY! What a concept.
Someone should report this new marking strategy of producing a quality product to the RIAA; maybe they can learn something.
Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. Lois, this isn't my Batman glass. - Peter
"literally being metaphorically syphoned"
What the heck does that even mean???
Maybe I'm going out on a limb here, but I'm guessing movie studio executives don't get together around the boardroom table and have conversations like, "gentlemen, our fare has been too highly reviewed of late. It's time to make a real stinker. One for the record books. Instant flop."
Sometimes they swing and miss.
trustedworlds.net - gaming, security, and the gunk that lives in between
I can't believe you admitted publicly to downloading Gigli! I would never tarnish the pristine surface of my hard drive platter with that piece of shite ;)
The big story in the media last week, was that DVDs actually supply over 50% of the movie industry income.
The average american home purchase ~15 DVDs per year.
That's huge- and it is ON TOP of record-setting box office receipts. They make a lot of money from them.
But somehow, they still manage to claim that they are bleeding money out the ass.
I'd like to say that I will be boycotting them, and not supporting their industry. But looking at the top 100 films in the past 2 years, I've seen all but two. So whether or not we like their business, we do like their product.
No reason to lie.
More here.
The Army reading list
But there's that commercial with the guy whose the stuntman and... and... he goes through all that work and you can watch his movie with just a single click... and... P2P rapes 3rd world children...
I hate all these people trying to guilt trip me into thinking I'm a criminal because I download movies, even though I pay to see them in theatre, buy them if I think they are excellent, and then they turn around and make more money then i will ever see off of something like chronicles of riddik. I think for every Van Helsing (arguably the worst movie EVER) a person watches, they should be entitled to download 2 movies.
Not many people have watched teh Clerks cartoon, but it's worth it jsut for the scene where Randall brings every shitty movie director into court and demands, under oath, that they admit that 'star wars 1 sucked' or something to that effect.
The Neo-Bohemian Techno-Socialist
From the Sunday Herald (link at end of article):
Controversial film-maker Michael Moore has welcomed the appearance on the internet of pirated copies of his anti-Bush documentary Fahrenheit 9/11 and claimed he is happy for anybody to download it free of charge. The activist, author and director told the Sunday Herald that, as long as pirated copies of his film were not being sold, he had no problem with it being downloaded.
"I don't agree with the copyright laws and I don't have a problem with people downloading the movie and sharing it with people as long as they're not trying to make a profit off my labour. I would oppose that," he said.
Sunday Herald
90% Professional Slacker
I should point out that a healthy industry is not an excuse for stealing intellectual property. Cop: "You're under arrest for stealing TV's from Sears!" Crook: "What? But Sears posted a 13% profit increase in the 3rd quarter! They can afford this!" That doesn't work.
Maybe I'm going out on a limb here, but I'm guessing movie studio executives don't get together around the boardroom table and have conversations like, "gentlemen, our fare has been too highly reviewed of late. It's time to make a real stinker. One for the record books. Instant flop."
They sit around their boardroom trying to create recycled star vehicles with no soul because they think it will bring them safe revenue, rather than try to make something original.
It's scare tactics.
They want to scare people before there is actually a full on problem for them. MPAA is no better or worse than any lobbying group.
AND just like the RIAA, they won't admit to having a rotten egg if something isn't selling right. It must be downloading that got Gigli canned. Fuck them, and fuck their money system. Unless of course it's Spiderman 2.
The internet is to blame, not because of downloading. It's to blme because I can log onto Trillian and tell 20 of my friends the movie I just shelled out 9 bucks to see, sucked and they shouldn't see it.
Thier tactics aren't working.
They caught ONE kid in the theatre shooting the movie with a cam. How many kids sneak cams into movies? In just new york?! They "caught" less than a couple thousand people with HUGE caches of music shared. How many people are doing the same NOT getting caught.
I've said this before and I'll say it again. The mainstream media plays us for fools, whether it's music, movies, or our own gubment. I ain't eatin' the cheese, I hate yellow.
_g
"It'll destroy you if you try to make it mean anything to anyone but yourself." - Henry Rollins
Say, what if they should've earned $10 billion, but only took in $1 billion.
A potential sale is not an actual sale, and cannot be accounted for as such.
It's often argued that those who DL movies would never have purchased tickets in the first place. Whether that's the case or not is up to you to decide.
I downloaded Gigli
Wait... someone took the time to rip Gigli AND POST it somewhere?
What a waste of bandwidth (both personal and network).
-- You can't idiot-proof anything, because they're always coming out with better idiots.
No, but some top executive did sit in a room, read the script to Hidalgo, and think it was a tremendous idea worth financing for millions of dollars. That movie made me want to kill horses and I'm no horse killer.
You have to remember that most of the /. crowd are the reason dodgeball has disappeared from schools these days. They were on the receiving end of those vicious headshots, and took their revenge on the world by creating spam, computer virii, and distributing copyrighted material for free over the net...
Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
I go to the movies and I see a commercial that shows all the people that "lose" money when I pirate movies.
I hate those ads -- preaching to the choir. I mean, I'm in the theatre, with a ticket in my hand, and they're telling me to buy tickets and go to the theatre. Nice.
Plus, I get that wonderful experience of sitting through 15-20 minutes of beverage/car/cell phone commercials prior to my 3 hour movie...
"I'm guessing movie studio executives don't get together around the boardroom table and have conversations like, "gentlemen, our fare has been too highly reviewed of late. It's time to make a real stinker. One for the record books. Instant flop."
Perhaps not, but I am guessing that they have said "ah screw it, the licensed character is all we need, write a script over the weekend."
"Derp de derp."
...it was certainly better than the critically acclaimed "Gigli" or the various other fantastic movies that go straight to DVD.
Do you understand what sarcasm is? See, me saying "critically acclaimed", "Gigli", "and other fantastic movies that go straight to DVD" was supposed to clue you in to the HUMOR.
I don't think the MPAA's profits make it right or wrong to download movies over the internet.
It would me feel better to know that the entity I am stealing from isn't going to be destroyed by my theft, but it still doesn't make it right.
I really,really hate the RIAA, MPAA, and Fraunhofer (mp3 people), but I make my stance by boycotting their products (I try my best in any case) and by telling people the things I find wrong with these organizations. And if you are going to pirate, when in public don't just point out that they have lotsa money anyway, but give your other reasons (inflated prices, price fixing, artist exploitation, etc). I really want things to change. Having illegal foundation arguments hinders, not helps.
Greets to RBK, VOD, RAC, JAH, APC, RNS, TMD et al !
Believe it or not, the popularity of DVDs is probably contributing to movies improving. It used to be that they could release a stinky movie with a "catch" (e.g. Jennifer Lopez, The Hulk, etc.), and they could be guaranteed an amazing opening week. The fact that no one really wanted to see the movie again was small potatoes. The cost of improving the movie would be more expensive than it was worth.
Cue DVDs in 2004. Suddenly, the studio execs realize that 52% of their profits are now coming from people who've seen the movie, but want a permanent or "collector's" copy. Studios thus decide that they need to create really good movies so they can sell you the DVDs 3 times over. (Original, Special Edition, and Collector's Edition. Of course, I'm still waiting for the collectors edition of Nemesis with the extra hour of footage. Hello?! Are B&B listening?! Wait, what am I saying...)
BTW, when did we confuse the MPAA with the RIAA? Last I knew, the MPAA's biggest crime was the whole DeCSS thing. They actually took a halfway decent approach to piracy with their (admittedly lame) commercials. They've actually been claiming that more blame belongs to the "cell-phone users" who IM their friends that a movie sucks.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
No matter how badly badly unlawful copying hurts their proficts, it doesn't give them the right to bribe Congress into unconstitutional extensions of copyright. They aren't interested in enforcing the law of the land. Indeed, they are willing to diminish the rule of law (passing unconstitutional laws) and increase contempt for the law (passing laws the majority WILL disobey)long as it increases their profits.
Yes, copying contrary to the law is wrong. Somehow, I can't get too worked up about it.
"I should point out that a healthy industry is not an excuse for stealing intellectual property. Cop: "You're under arrest for stealing TV's from Sears!" Crook: "What? But Sears posted a 13% profit increase in the 3rd quarter! They can afford this!" That doesn't work." - Psymunn
See what i just did?!? I stole your intellectual property. I took credit for something you said. But wait.. I can't help but notice, affexed to my own post, your quote is still there, glaringly obvious for all to see...
Surely if I stole it, it must be gone. Mayhaps a diffrent crime has taken place, but theft it can not be...
I thinkt he problem people have is not that there is health of the industry, therefore I can steal but the possiblity (though this has never been proven) that P2P actually helps the movie industry. After all, thanks to me, your words got approximatly twice as much viewage (my taking credit for them however was morally bankrupt, that i must admit). Years ago people where declaring that VCRs would be the death of the movie theatre business. But, what people don't realise is, I do not have a 3 story high screen in my basment and, some movies, really are meant to be seen on a BFS (big friendly screen). I think (with music, and movies) P2P allows people to sample things a lot more and, with a bit of luck, will ultimatly mean the death of one-hit-wonders.
Granted, illegally copying copyrighted material is still illegal, but all that clamping down on this apparant scourge on society is giong to do is, hopefully, help the indie guys who aren't making much money and just want to have their stuff seen.
The Neo-Bohemian Techno-Socialist
Reinier Wolfcastle: Its me standing infront of a brick wall of three hours. It cost eighty milion dollars.
Jay Sherman: [To Reinier Wolfcastle] How do you sleep at night??
Wolfcastle: On top of a pile of money, with many beautiful ladies.
Jay: Yeash, Just asking.
A morning without coffee is like something without something else.
90% of everything is crap.
Also, crap is relative.
DNA just wants to be free...
is really working out for us, they're really on the ropes now.
The highly groomed, preened and prepped young teen markets, of course. Oversaturated with hype from Viacom's twin dumping spouts -- Nickelodeon and MTV. Our poor kids get fed a tremendous amount of tie-in movie hype from these two, alone, let alone Disney's all-advertising, all-the-time channel.
The only youth oriented channel on US Cable that doesn't steadily pump our kids full of marketing hype is Cartoon Network, and that's probably just a matter of time.
Weapons of Mass Analysis
people go to movies for the same reason people go to church: it's a community thing
no, really, it's sociological and psychological
the sea of humans around you is a major reason people go to movies, it's not just for the big screen and the great audio
movie is culture, and you partake of your culture and announce your allegiance to your culture by going to movie houses... movies are our shared cultural experiences, the thread of common experience which makes us who we are, and to be certain that everyone around you knows who the tinman in the wizard of oz is, or the shark in jaws, or who neo is and what the matrix is... this is no small thing, it is an important part of knowing who you are and what community you belong to
human beings are pack animals, and we do things in groups, for better or for worse, because we all have a need to belong, and we derive pleasure from feeling part of a group
if the mpaa is threatened by downloading, then they haven't been studying their history: the vcr didn't kill them, television didn't kill them (that was one of the reasons why the widescreen format was born in the 1950s: movies wanted to make sure their content couldn't be put on tv easily, but it was still unnecessary... televangelists didn't kill churches, and television didn't kill moviehouses)
now, the riaa is another story, as most people enjoy music in solitude
and books are another story too: wood pulp has a higher screen contrast, versatility, durability, and battery usage than any laptop could hope to achieve
so movies and books need not fear p2p
but music? p2p is going to eat the music industry alive
it's all amout the medium, how it is stored and used, and movies have nothing to fear from p2p if they truly understand their own business and its relation to american culture, to world culture, and sociology
watching a lossy version of a movie that took me 20 hours to download on my 17 inch monitor will never replace sitting in the cathedral of the modern cinema, happily munching away on popcorn in a sea of my fellow human beings around me, laughing at the same jokes, gasping at the same tragedies
it's part of the moviegoing experience you can never recreate at home
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Considering the price of movie tickets has doubled in the last 6 years. They aren't selling more tickets, they're extorting money from those willing to pay.
Where did you get your numbers from? Here's what I was able to dig up:
Average ticket price 2003: $6.03
Average ticket price 1997: $4.59
source
Number of admissions (billions):
2003: 1.57
2002: 1.63
2001: 1.49
2000: 1.42
1999: 1.47
1998: 1.48
1997: 1.39
source
It seems the price has not doubled and ticket sales are generally rising.
Hmm, Butterfly Effect gets a 7.4/10.0 at imdb, not what I would call a horrible movie by any stretch. Along Came Polly garnered a 5.7/10.0, considering that imdb's audience is pretty highly squewed towards the male half of the species that's not too bad. Btw the production cost of Butterfly Effect was only $13 million its US box office reciepts were $58 million, quite a handsome profit. Along Came Polly grossed $88 million on a budget of $42 million. If you wanted to quote stinkers or flops there are plenty of examples out there but neither of the films you listed were good ones.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
Maybe he downloaded it onto an old hard drive that was failing and then promptly threw it into the trash?
GreyPoopon
--
Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?
Oh, come now. You must admit that Hidalgo was the best Swedish actor playing a western cowboy racing through the Arabian Desert movie you've ever seen.
GeneralKael -- Slacker Extraordinaire
Maybe he downloaded it onto an old hard drive that was failing and then promptly threw it into the trash? :-)
That's an excellent point! It must be part of his disk wiping procedure. I guess it now goes something like, "zeros, alternating, ones, alternating, Gigli..."
A dingo ate my sig...
If you dont work in finished goods (ie, somthing that you can hold or touch) then why are you getting paid? By your own value system you dont produce anything.
Many people, perhaps even most people, actually make a living performing services. Perhaps you should consider that what you're doing should be a service, not a product.
Intellectual property used to be a very very tiny segment of the economy, comprised mostly of authors. Even musicians used to provide a service, not a product.
Nowadays, there's intellectual property. So no longer do you have to perform services, you just have to perform the service once, record it, and voila! Free money forever! It comes as no surprise to me that this oppressive legal concept is starting to chafe on consumers and the economy.
It's not sustainable. There was a world for you before intellectual property, and there will be a world for you afterwards.
Random and weird software I've written.
. . .since 'Ishtar'. . .
"History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." Mark Twain
I declared Kanli on the RIAA a while back, and I feel good about it. I stopped buying CDs except directly from small-time artists and used CD stores, and I try to convince others to do the same. Easy enough boycott. The one thing they want to sell is either crap, or easily obtained in a more convenient format for zero cost and zero hassle, at their detriment.
The movie / TV industry, however, is a much harder beast to fight.
It's so much easier to boycott and declare war on the music industry... they don't offer what we want for a reasonable price. The movie and TV industries are just as evil when it comes to lobbying against the public in the copyright law arena, and screwing up the tech with DRM, region codes, etc.., but they provide something most of us are still willing to pay for.
I've rambled about the problem... I wish I had a solution. (and even if I could be convinced to stop giving them $$, most people don't have the same hatred for the above practices as I do, and won't be swayed)
The IFPI/RIAA/MPAA is fighting a lost cause. And I think they know it.
r e).
First off all, I have difficulties with their acclaimed 'stealing' of music/movies/etc.. As far as I know, stealing implies that the one that has been stolen has been derived of something. When you take a copy, you do not take the original away, thus they have not 'lost' anything. They might claim that they loose money when ppl d/l music, but even that is far from certain. Not only is it not shown statistically to have had that effect (they didn't even show a correlation thusfar - see aussie music-news - let alone a causality). Furthermore, in an individual case, they would have to show they actually lost revenue. Which is far from said, because I sure know some guys who d/l music or movies, but would NEVER have bought that music if they were unable to d/l it. So, how did the RIAA/IFPI/MPAA loose revenue, exactly? And if they didn't lose anything, how can the term 'stealing' apply?
It would still be copyright-infringement, ofcourse, but that's another matter. I think maybe it's time we went beyond our current system of copyrights and walk into the era of cyberspace. With the industrial revolution, patents and copyrights knew a high flight, maybe it's time to let it leave and try something new? Maybe something in the lines of this: fairshare (http://freenetproject.org/index.php?page=fairsha
And don't worry, contrary to what the RIAA claims, musicians will not starve to death, and music-making will not stop. We had music long before we had copyrights, and we will have music long after copyrights have vanished from the scene.
And lastly, it's something that *can not* be stopped. P2P progs and their development act as organisms that follow the darwinian rules of survival. When Napster was 'killed' by the RIAA, immediately others (like kazaa) took over, being more resistent to attacks from the RIAA&co. Whenever kazaa will be shut down, others again will take over. When endusers are targeted, systems that protect the user will become dominant (like FreeNet).
It really is a lost cause. But then again, they are not truelly battling for the survival of musicians (as I said; they will survive, just as they used to do), it's for their OWN survival they are fighting. There is no way in hell they are going to keep the giant profits that they have been gathering for the last decades.
But ultimately, they will have to do what P2P systems are already doing: adapt to the new circumstances (and forget about the former levels of profit), or whither and die.
--- "To pee or not to pee, that is the question." ---
I know some countries like France do both (entries and box office take), which gives you a more accurate picture of how many people are seeing movies. Sure, it doesn't sound as sexy as "Biggest grossing weekend ever," but I'd give more credance to the title "Most viewed movie ever."
Many theaters do refund your ticket if you leave before the end of the show. I know for a fact United Artists/Regal does.
Are you Kidding me?
There is absolutely No justification for stealing, regardless of the quality of the product. I am certainly not siding with the MPAA or any of their affiliates, the movie industry is just a big fat cash machine. Who didn't know that?
Is the problem with the MPAA? I don't know about that, if we(consumers) were simply not willing to pay $9 a ticket to see a movie, they would have to lower prices, however, they keep charging and we keep coming.simple econmics, and don't come back with that crap that volume(more people will come if you lower prices) speaks louder, becasue that is clearly not always the case and may not be as profitable.
What you need to do is take a look at the entire system, everyone gets a piece of the action and they demand very large pieces. Actors and Actresses command huge paychecks, agents, publicists, movie crews, designers, the list goes on..they all have to maintain that hollywood lifestyle.
There is a positive light though, if a movie costs $50 Million, you pay a mere $10 dollars to see it, that really is amazing to think that someone shelled out that kind of cash just to entertain you/us.
Either way, there is no justification for theft, furthermore, while I did not even remotely consider seeing Gigli, I am sure that there are movies out there that you would deem garbage,and I may enjoy so, lets not change the whole process just to fit your tastes? What the hell is that, I might not care for Harry Potter, I wouldn't drop a dime to see Michael Moore propoganda and dodgeball is just another cookie cutter money maker for Ben Stiller, would you put this on your "Blockbuster" List?
Watch the movies, or don't, but please stop crying about it, rent a classic, read a book, take a walk, there are other options... Hollywood will roll with the punches and continue to make huge money.
Becuase of the actions of the RIAA, a sort of "Downloaders Creedo" has been developed. Since the actions by the MPAA are slightly less offensive, they will prosper under the Downloaders Creedo.
Music:
1. Don't buy ANY RIAA music, EVER! (riaaradar.com)
2. Download all RIAA Music for FREEEEEEEEE!
3. Pay for any non-RIAA music
Movies:
1. Download all movies for FREEEEEEE!
2. If you like the download, buy the movie.
(You'll find yourself buying even more movies than you would had downloading never been invented).
... and in the DRM, bind them.
It's time to make a real stinker. One for the record books.
While only a TV movie, 10.5, the show about a large earthquake hitting the US, was reportedly made because it was so bad that people would *want* to watch more reality TV after seeing it.
If the MPAA wants to keep my butt in a theater seat, they need to employ the guys with night vision scopes and listening devices to kick out the obnoxious patrons who talk, kick seats, throw things, and talk on their cell phones during a movie that I paid $50 (family + concession stand) to see.
I used to work at a theater and we had a manager with a real knack for remembering faces. If he ever kicked you out of a movie (and he did so frequently), he would go get you out of line a month later and tell you that you still weren't welcome in his theater. Yes, he was a jerk, but he wouldn't let some punk ruin a movie for everyone.
I really like going to a theater and I love seeing movies with crowds that appreciate a film (cheering and laughing), but with the prices, I should just stay home and buy the DVD -- it's cheaper, my HDTV and surround sound are great, I don't have any guilt over stealing, etc.
Minor Spiderman 2 spoilers ahead:
I went to see Spidey 2 again last night with my wife since she was out of town when I saw it the first time. The guy behind me spent the whole movie doing the Commentary for the Mentally Disabled. Some scenes and quotes:
Peter's vision goes bad.
"He can't see without his glasses. He must be losing his powers."
Peter's vision gets better.
"He can't see with them glasses on no more."
The wedding.
"She stood him up. He ain't happy 'bout that!"
and so on...
-- stream of did I lock the front door consciousness
I bet they have discussions like this...
Exec 1: Here we have a script in which malevolent robots run amok, and stylish humans with big guns save the world by shooting them.
Exec 2: Hmm. How can we make it more marketable? What's a good name in robots?
Exec 1: Well, Isaac Asimov looked at the current robot-story market of his day, and found it flooded with tales in which malevolent robots run amok, and stylish humans with big guns save the world by shooting them. He created the Three Laws to prevent himself from repeating this cliche, and created some of the most beloved SF stories of the era, collected in the omnibus "I, Robot".
Exec 2: Catchy! We should use the name, draw in his fans.
Exec 1: Should we change the plot to reflect his creative influence in any way whatsoever?
Exec 2: Nah, too much work. just rename the eye-candy babe to "Susan Calvin".
Exec 1: I can taste the box-office receipts already.
Can you think of a better reason why they did it?!
--grendel drago
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
The rise in revenue is due solely to increased ticket prices, not because more people are seeing movies. In fact, movie attendance has dropped in three of the last five years. The fact is, there will always be a market for movies, as few non-slashdotters consider watching a bootlegged movie on your computer to be a "good date", but tickets will instead become even more expensive.
the sea of humans around you is a major reason people go to movies
Um, actually, that "sea of humans" is a big part of the reason I don't go to movies anymore. Humans are OK, I guess, but not in groups of more than 10 or so.
Downmodding is the refuge of the weak. Don't downmod, make a better argument!
BTW, when did we confuse the MPAA with the RIAA? Last I knew, the MPAA's biggest crime was the whole DeCSS thing.
You need to pay more attention to their congression testimony and other legislative antics. Everything from incessant Boston-Strangler style ranting to attempting to push through the SSSCA/CBDTPA which would outlaw ordinary computers to playing the FCC like a puppet and getting the Broadcast Flag mandated (outlawing non-crippled non-crippled TV tuners as of one year from this month). Oh, and don't forget pushing for the various state SuperDMCA laws.
Hell, that list is just off the top of my head.
Not that getting the DMCA passed and the crippled DVD player/DeCSS thing wasn't bad enough in the first place.
No, the MPAA is no better than the RIAA.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
Please note that it's the Mexican music *Industry* that's being hurt. The music continues to be played & recorded, and people are still listening to it. The ones that are being hurt are the middle-men that try to price CDs at the equivelant of $15-$20 U.S., in a country where there average daily wage is about $4. And they wonder why their business model isn't working??
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Are those examples all theft? If not, what is the difference between these actions and downloading a movie that makes one theft and the other not? Hint: what was stolen and who was it stolen from?
-- Adam
Better re-read your industry group history. The MPAA (and it's politically-very-well-connected) head, Jack Valenti) was heavily involved in the Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Act and the DMCA, to name a few of their more egregious crimes against the nation. So, no, while they have avoided most of the RIAA's PR gaffes they are by no means blameless or any less dangerous than their sister organization.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
If I take my family to the movies, it's $5.50 x 2, plus $6.50 x 2 = $24.00 to see one movie. (Child and Adult matinee prices locally.) Now, those movies need to be PG rated or lower, or I can't take my kids. Otherwise it will cost me slightly more to hire a baby sitter and buy dinner for them to eat. Naturally, I end up going to see a movie after the matenee times when I hire a baby sitter, so I also tend to pay another $4.00 more for my two tickets than I normally would have. Whaa!
Also, theaters only take 20% of the box office the first few weeks a movie opens. So they hike the price of consession stand items to compensate. Which, is good business, but not very friendly to patrons. Not to mention their stands take on average of 10 minutes to clear your way through. So, you better be extra early if you want to buy that tub 'o pop-corn. Which isn't fun. And I can't pause the movie when I have to pee after drinking their 32oz of pop. (Which I'm suspicious about them lacing their drinks with pee enducing chemicals just to get me to come back to see the parts I missed!) And I can't tape it with my camcorder to re-watch it. If the sound is messed up, the screen is dirty, the idiots who bring their screaming babies are in force, I can't get a pass to re-watch the movie. One ticket, one admittance... I can't even bring my own food in if I wanted to have taco's while sitting for two hours. Bummer on convience.
So, now I've got a nice 50" screen at home, a nice set of 5.1 THX Certified speakers & Amp, and a DVD player. I can watch DVD movies at night, bring my own food - which costs far less, send the kids to another room to watch their own DVD movies, and pause the movie when I have to pee. All this for $9.99 - $19.99 which is the cost of a DVD. Or, better yet, for $3.95 - the cost of renting a DVD. And I only have to wait 6 months or less to see the film. Plus I get more content on the DVD.
The way I see it, DVD's are a better deal. There isn't a good reason for me to keep paying a premium at the box office. Especially if they are going to offer me less than what I get at home.