Slashdot Mirror


How Battlestar Galactica Killed TV

Don Melanson writes "Following up on the MPAA going after torrent sites, you may be interested in Mindjack's latest feature - Piracy is Good? How Battlestar Galactica Killed Broadcast TV by Mark Pesce. It includes a post-script written in reponse to the recent Torrent site shutdowns." From the article: "While you might assume the SciFi Channel saw a significant drop-off in viewership as a result of this piracy, it appears to have had the reverse effect: the series is so good that the few tens of thousands of people who watched downloaded versions told their friends to tune in on January 14th, and see for themselves. From its premiere, Battlestar Galactica has been the most popular program ever to air on the SciFi Channel, and its audiences have only grown throughout the first series. Piracy made it possible for 'word-of-mouth' to spread about Battlestar Galactica."

6 of 749 comments (clear)

  1. Great Show by nra1871 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I watched every episode off of bittorrent. Friday nights at 10 is quite possibly the worst time ever for me to try and see a show. I downloaded the shows and watched them when convenient. I pay for cable and get sci-fi so I don't see how anyone could reasonably consider it stealing.

    1. Re:Great Show by nra1871 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I really don't see how it is different. For years (coworkers for exampe) com in and say 'hey did you see the simpsons last night?' 'no I had to go out with the inlaws/friend/brother/dog' 'well i taped it, I'll bring it in tomorrow'. This is nothing new, just a different medium.

    2. Re:Great Show by Scrameustache · · Score: 5, Interesting

      There is a major difference between going for a piss during an advert break, and actively removing every single advert.

      You still have a full bladder in the later scenario.

      Other than that... Fuck 'em, I don't want to see their ads for tampons: I'll never buy tampons in my LIFE, if I ever do, it will be a brand specified by the woman making me run errands, not a brand selected based on advertising.

      I use the mute button or channel-surf when ads come on, I'm not watching ads on TV, I don't see ads on the net, I don't read the ads in the magazines, I don't listen to them on the radio, I don't owe anything to the advertisers.

      They try to brainwash me into giving them money, I resist by ignoring them, changing channel, muting, adlocking, turning the page, or skipping to thwe end of the commercial break. It isn't wrong of me to do this, like it isn't wrong of them to spend money to get me to know their product exists.

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

  2. This is totally true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I work at the leading worldwide online retail store in the world (Amazon.com) and checking the stats for keyword Battlestar galactica in customer search shows a increase of about 750 % monthtly since the torrent incident was reported in the press.

  3. Sounds like the Photoshop Effect by Gribflex · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I often read stories about this kind of thing; where a {piece of software, band, CD, Movie, TV Show, etc} gains popularity and a 'legitamate' user base as a result of piracy.

    The most commonly used example of this is Photoshop (followed closely by windows). Through a very high piracy rate, and a very low litagation rate, photoshop gained so much market share that it is now the dominant application in its field (bitmap editing).

    Adobe didn't condone the piracy of their software, but they also didn't actively pursue minor cases. That is, if some high school kid pirated photoshop, and used to create images for personal use, no biggie. If a company pirated photoshop, and used it for commercial purposes (and got caught), send in the lawyers.

    So many people used the software illegally at home that when it came time to make a purchase in the work place, the choice was obvious. People already knew how to use photoshop, and kept hearing the name of the application over, and over again.

    By allowing piracy (or in this case, downloading of tv shows) to happen amongst a demographic that 'doesn't matter' (home users that cannot afford the software anyways, or a small number of people that would have downloaded BSG regardless) but have influence over a demographic that does (companies that can afford photoshop, or friends and family that have never heard of BSG), companies can gaing huge market share. It's a grey area, but it has proven positive effects.

  4. Re:GPL violations killed the free software cause? by foreverdisillusioned · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I don't want to come off sounding like your typical anti-corporate zealot, but there's a big big BIG difference between a 12 year old girl violating copyright law and a multimillion dollar company violating copyright law.

    Consumers are NOT an organized whole. They are not out to destroy anything. As long as the TV/Music industry chooses to evolve, they will never be put out of business. OTOH, if a company like Microsoft could violate the GPL, they could virtually destroy Linux for all but the most dedicated enthusiast (use their war chest to build a ton of awesome improvements, convert all of the commercial users and a significant portion of the home users, then slowly break compatibility.)

    Your analogy fails because commercial enterprise is not the same as personal use. Downloading a TV show might not be "right", but it's not in the same league as major GPL violation. One is for profit; the other is not. Corporations do not (or rather should not) have the same rights that individuals do, and you just can't compare the calculated tactics of a software giant with a bunch of preteen p2p users who just wanna catch last night's Inuyasha.