Slashdot Mirror
MPAA Touts Record Year For Hollywood
proudhawk writes "A blog posting in p2pnet today catches MPAA boss Dan Glickman at the ShoWest convention in Las Vegas crowing about Hollywood's profitable year: 'Today, we stand on a new mountaintop, and I have to say: I like the view... We had about 5 percent growth in both the domestic and worldwide box office, all-time highs on both fronts reminding us once again that good stories well told always find a place in our hearts, our lives and our local theaters.' What ever happened to the ravages of online piracy?"
What ever happened to the ravages of online piracy?
the "ravages of online piracy" excuse is for years when they knowingly put out complete garbage and don't want to own up to it.
The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
This doesn't contradict the "ravages of piracy" at all. Instead, the MPAA will say, "See, look! We cracked down on pirates and had a record year! CRACK DOWN HARDER!", as a justification for their future activities.
"16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
They are saying box office revenues increased. Piracy most likely hurts DVD sales and rentals more than going to a theater. There is a big difference between a movie theater and a DIVX movie on you 17 inch LCD monitor, or if you are more crafty, a bigger TV. Its the equivalent of saying "box office revenues went up despite the rampant use of recordable media in the home". From my experience, a movie you go and spend $10 on plus refreshments, and gas (plus potentially someone else's ticket and refreshments) is not something you would download instead.
Without them, it could have been a 6 percent increase and I could buy a new ferrar... erh, I mean, yeah, right, where is the neck-breaking pirates now?
Seriously, people. The three driving emotions for people are greed, fear and greed. And the more you have, the bigger your greed gets. You have 5 percent increase (when everyone else is struggling to stay in business or have any kind of profit at all)? Doesn't mean jack, you want 6. You want 7. You want 10. And you could have 10 percent more income if it wasn't for all those who copy the content. It would be 15 if you could force people to throw away their VHS tapes. Hell, it could be 30 percent if you could force them to throw away DVDs!
It could be 50 percent if you could make those BluRays die after playing them 10 times. It could be 100 percent if you can make them so they die right after playing the movie once! It could be 200 percent when they couldn't play the movie at all... erh...
Well, if they still buy it that is.
And that's what this is about. The studios want more. They are not satisfied by having more than everyone else, they're not satisfied with having the best year of their existance, they're not satisfied with making a plus when the economy as a whole is struggling to avoid that big bad word that starts with an r and ends in cession. they want to have more than they already have. And they see some way to make more (i.e. crack down on those that copy), so they try to get rid of them. If they found a way to make you pay for every time you watch that movie, they would gladly do so.
And I'm fairly sure the next generation of players will have some sort of internet connection that enforces something like that.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
there is a HUGE difference is downloading a movie and printing copies and selling them for a profit. some people tend to download first, if they like the movie they will buy it on DVD and if its good enough go see it in the theater. Lets face it a good movie is still better on the big screen than on a PC. SO all this does IMO is give the producers incentive to stop putting out crap movies, and start making products that are worth something.
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Fifteen years before that, the RIAA leaders touted their "record year" for album sales, and CDs immediately supplanted records in 1988 and never looked back.
And thirty years ago in 1978 when Tomita released the final quad 8-track tape, the industry said it was "on track" for the best year ever as it instead saw the multi-track format slip into oblivion.
So when the MPAA touts a shiny year for DVDs, Blu-Ray is probably poised to make them eat their words.
That's partly true I think but the drive in Piracy would be more due to the way the studios try to fragment their markets in different regions, to maximise their own profits.
The internet has made the planet a truly global community and they have to relase globally, not try to stagger around the planet with Theatrical releases/DVD Releases and even different dates for TV premiere's.
In Australia we still cannot get video/TV on iTunes because of this or get access to other such online content because its all being restricted, so many people resort to pirace to see what they want and not wait 3-6 months(Up to a year some times) later.
Like the music industry the movie industry will only end up hurting itself by trying to contain online content rather then let it flourish in an open market, the more they put online for fair prices the more people will pay. Just take phone ring tones as an example of how people are willing to spend money on absolute crap. If more people could get movies at those prices they would be making huge sales.
Actually, a joint study by Harvard and University of North Carolina (CNET news story here, pdf link to original study available from the article) suggests that filesharing has almost zero effect on CD sales. Admittedly it is a few of years old now (March 2004) and is by no means exhaustive; however, the conclusions are still relevant and suggest that there are greater influences on music sales than piracy (despite what the RIAA would like us to believe).
Sounds like you're making up for never having a date to take to the movies. :P
Wait a second? Isn't this the same industry that cooks the books to never run a profit on movies so they don't have to pay their people? I assume these profits must be including all those "services" they charge themselves for. To me that seems a liability. It seems like they just gave the final data points necessary for all those people promised net points of nothing to do the math and find what their movies really made.
I'm being facetious, of course; Iron Man's only been around for 45 years.
The World's Worst Webcomic!
The confusion between someone copying a movie from a P2P network for no profit and a criminal organization deliberately making unauthorized counterfeit copies of movies to sell in stores is a difference that a lot of groups want the line blurred.
Counterfeiting is truly theft, as each single counterfeit copy takes a sale away from a genuine firm. The other is not theft, but IP infringement, which is not considered a criminal offense in most countries (although there are a lot of deep pockets wanting to change that.)
I hate parasites like you that refuse to pay for what they use.
(Same AC)
You must really hate yourself, for you don't appear to be a subscriber here on /.
Ignore this signature. By order.
How many of the 20 top grossing movies of 2007 were not adaptations, remakes, or franchise installments? How many actually involved original creative development?
For that matter, how many were over-hyped drivel titled "[adjective] Movie" or starring Will Ferrell?
Hollywood is out of ideas. Period.
People pay for the big screen. People pay for live shows. You can't make a digital copy of a 60ft screen and you can't make a digital copy of being in a crowd, watching a live band. The only reasons theater sales drop are: 1. Crappy films 2. Obnoxious theater goers 3. Cell phones (see number 2)
If you live in the US, you're still missing out...the films you watch in HD at home aren't the same movies that you can see at the cinema, they're last year's box office stories. Now, here in Australia, a great many films end up on my big screen via an .mkv file on the hard drive well before they hit the local cinema :D