Slashdot Mirror
Firefly Fans Fight Back Against Universal
Gossi writes "What happens when a film studio and a fanbase get into bed? Fans of Joss Whedon's Firefly, and the movie by Universal Studios — Serenity — are not amused. After being encouraged to viral market Serenity, the studio has started legal action against fans (demanding $9000 in retroactive licensing fees in one case and demanding fan promotion stop), and going after Cafepress. The fans response? Retroactively invoice Universal for their services."
If anyone doesn't think viral marketing works - then they should read this. The first I heard about Serenity was on a friend's blog. I think they'd got into a preview screening on the basis that they'd blog about it. I then watched the first eight minutes of it which was being shown to promote the film and enjoyed it. I then went to see the film and enjoyed it and thought it was worth it too.
There are very few films I go see at the cinema and because I don't have a TV most of the promotions for them pass me by - and a lot don't appeal.
Video Game cheats, hints a
Don't annoy someone who has more spare time than you do.
And this group has a lot of spare time and energy and has shown they'll fight for something they believe in.
But of course no one is required to have any social literacy to head a major corporation. Obviously.
Ok, having only briefly looked it over... I think what Universal is objecting to is this knucklehead selling merchandise for profit, utilizing their images. This isn't promoting the film, this is promoting his bank account. If I am reading it correctly, they're not telling him to stop promoting the film, they're telling him to stop promoting his products using their IP.
So, well, what's the problem?
So a guy decides to print up some Serenity t-shirts and sell them on cafe press, and is surprised when he gets sued by Universal. How braindead can you be? Viral marketing means putting a mention of Firefly/Serenity on your website with a link to Amazon.
That said, bring back Firefly. Best sci-fi series since ST:TNG in my opinion.
I don't think resources are an issue for the fan base. They've already shown a willingness to go to bat for a show/movie they liked, and did it all for free.
It can be pretty amazing what people can accomplish out of pure passion for the work, as opposed to the profit to be made from it. In this case, the fans are more than willing to make the effort. The question is, will it be for or against Universal releases of the future?
If it goes against, there could be some problems for future TV and movies from Universal, as this loyal block will remember and potentially boycott. Universal knows that the potential loss of revenue from a rabid base of fans in that much coveted "18-35 male without an understanding of credit card debt" demographic would be something advertisers would look at closely. It would certainly cost them more than the 9,000 they are looking for in liscensing fees.
Then again, the MPAA and RIAA are dumb enough to cut off the hands that feed them all the time. Why should this be any different?
Sorry, but that seems to be the sad truth.
Somehow, because they volunteered to promote a movie for little or no compensation, they think they have some right to personally profit from selling merchandise which uses the IP from that movie without getting permission or paying a licensing fee.
This is one of those cases there copyright is working exactly as it is supposed to.
- Roach
For Universal, don't mess with the kind of people who have a lotttt more spare time than you do. The group is the kind of group that *will* get into a good television show (especially as good as Firefly was). These fans were and still are super-dedicated to the show and have and will have a lot of energy to spare for the show that is practically their religion.
However, that being said, Universal will disregard everything that they (and anyone else) do. It's going to take a hot poker to get Universal to do anything pro-consumer. Remember, all of the decisions are made by a group of women and men sitting at a table trying to figure out how to maximize profit. And that they are going to try to do, even if they are shortsighted about it.
This is the clue bat. This is your head. This is the clue bat hitting your head.
As others have already pointed out, it's not copacetic to sell merchandise like that. You think you can start selling Star Wars t-shirts and Lucasfilm will be OK with that? Not likely.
But that is entirely beside the point. The point is that Universal believes this is a valuable franchise, and acts to protect it. They are not trying to shut down the fan community. Simply, there are people at Universal who think a Serenity sequel is a possibility, and they want to maintain control over that so when they fund the next movie they're going to get a proper ROI. That is all.
It's basically good news that they want to defend this.
Our intelligent designer has never created an animal that we couldn't improve by strapping a bomb to it.
I really can't understand why they would seek to alienate the fan base this way.
... the ones who actually own the rights to sell it to you.
If Universal aren't planning on making another movie, then there is no reason that they shouldn't allow the fans they're 'memorabilia'.
If they are, why go after the fans who will only be driving more people in to see the sequel?
They're not going after fans. They're going after people stealing their IP for personal profit.
I'm quite sure you can buy your "memorabilia" from them (Universal). You know
Or, you can buy it from someone ripping off the studio and selling it without a license for personal gain. Your Call.
Want to sell the stuff? $9k sounds like a pretty reasonable license fee. I'm quite sure the companies that license IP from other movies/sports/etc pay a LOT more.
- Roach
Sure, we can all agree to that, but you miss my point about legal protection. Unlike the labor of fans, it takes money to buy the labor of lawyers. Promoting something by posting about it on your free personal blog about how you like it is not even close to the same ballpark as filing a motion in court. Not even close. This community you are so fond of has yet to pool together money to mount a legal defense--it is only free time they have pooled. And like it or not, money and labor are not the same thing. And who is going to pony up the money to pay the legal professionals who can actually help them wriggle out of this problem? Mr. Free Blog Post? Probably not. It's a very real problem that cannot be glossed over by fandom.
Not only that, but if you read the copy of the email that was sent, it seems that Universal's issue is with the unlicensed sale of shirts. Hmm let's see...selling something for profit like a shirt is hardly the benevolent, grassroots effort that it's being made out to be. It's making that sweet merchandising money off of a property you absolutely don't own and have no right to profit from in that manner. For a community that loves the GPL and loves to espouse rhetoric such as "You can only license something you own", Slashdot sure does want to have its cake and eat it too. I would rate seeking compensation for unlicensed clothing as something no less petty than, say, demanding that "GNU" precede the word "Linux" in the name of an operating system.
I have to say that to me this speaks to a greater problem that I see in the business world. The overwhelming number of bad managers that seem to be running things. When I worked for RadioShack (canada) I saw the company run into the ground by a managment team who was completely incompetent. I predicted that the company would be bought out by walmart, and 2 years later it was bought out by circuit city. Now that I work in health care, I watch a well conceived system collapse under inept management. And to see all these studios, be they movie or music, completely unable to adapt to the changing landscape. I have to ask my self, "how, and why, did we end up with such incompetent management up in the ivory tower?"
Universal paid for the DMCA. Why is anyone shocked that they wouldn't use it?
Any calls for boycott will be forgotten when the new movie you want to see is being shown. Just like it has always been.
"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one." (Bushwhacked)
I didn't desert Windows; Windows deserted me: BSOD
yes it is a troll.
1) When it comes to advertising, t-shirts are indeed... "like creating bumper stickers and gift cards"
2) Man on the street to another guy: "Excuse me, but do you know what time it is?"
Second guy: "It's three P.M."
First guy: "Thank you... and I really really like your watch... I want to sell it to that guy over there."
Second guy: "What? Excuse me, it is my watch, I paid for it."
First guy (gathers a mob around him): "We don't care. We want it , and we're going to make our own and sell it."
Second guy: "Ohhhhh....well, I'm glad that I could spark your creativity. Good luck. (shakes second guy's hand)
Quit being stupid.
THIS is NOT what we're talking about here: "We don't care. We want it , and we're going to make our own and sell it."
If it were, the t-shirts would have been "spin-offs" from the original. They would have been more like Fan Fiction, in that they would have featured NEW characters that didn't exist in the original. They would have had different names instead of Firefly or FIrefly related names. THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN HERE. Wake up and stop decieving yourself.
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
if sitting down to watch a mediocre sci fi show is a requirement for a lame 2 hour movie after paying 8 bucks...
Fuck Joss Whedon
Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
All they are ever shown, and all they see, are fallacious reports and charts showing how much money they "have lost" and "will continue to lose" due to copyright infringement. Just like the RIAA and MPAA, they guestimate how many times people download their movies, and multiply that number (which itself is probably twice the actual amount) by the price at which they sell or plan to sell their movies. This figure is presented to management as their losses. Obviously these figures are bullshit as it is based on two false assumptions. First, that nobody buys a product after downloading it. Second, that every download is an actual lost sale (that is, the downloader would have purchased the product had he/she not downloaded it). Both of these assumptions are false, particularly when dealing with a movie/tv show with a very dedicated cult following. But if you were a wrinkly, fat, 97 year-old white billionaire with liver spots all over your face and severe prostate issues, and you were told your company was losing 75 billion dollars every month due to product "theft" you'd react the exact same way these Universal execs did. You can't be out of touch if you're misinformed ab initio.
Stupid people make stupid things profitable.
Except the issue here isn't with the C&D. The C&D came and was complied with well before the second message demanding a retroactive $9k in licensing fees, to close their entire store permanently, and logs of the last 12 months of sales.
Please consider making an automatic monthly recurring donation to the EFF