Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Piracy Boosts Anime Sales, Says Japanese Government Study

Posted by Soulskill on from the eyes-bigger-than-stomach dept.

An anonymous reader writes "A new study seems to confirm what a lot of the Slashdot crowd thinks, and the opposite of what the **AAs say: 'A prestigious economics think-tank of the Japanese government has published a study which concludes that online piracy of anime shows actually increases sales of DVDs. The conclusion stands in sharp contrast with the entertainment industry's claims that "illicit" downloading is leading to billions of dollars in losses worldwide. It also puts the increased anti-piracy efforts of the anime industry in doubt.' More specifically, '(1) YouTube viewing does not negatively affect DVD rentals, and it appears to help raise DVD sales; and (2) although Winny [a popular P2P program in Japan] file sharing negatively affects DVD rentals, it does not affect DVD sales.'"

29 of 199 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Remember by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Lack of correlation however is a good indicator that the opposite view is full of it.

  2. anime may be a bad sample subject by v1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    due to the very large crowd of fansubbers and their fans. Almost universally, fansubbing groups place recommendations at the start/intercession/end of their subs urging their audience to buy the anime when it becomes licensed in their area. Many also suggest that everyone cease distribution of the series at that point as well.

    Hard to say how many listen to that, but I know I've ordered box sets when they became available in my area, entirely because I was able to watch the fansubs and enjoyed the series and wanted higher quality and the extras they tend to ship with, and I know many others like me that way.

    I'll hit up the anime fansubbing sites every week or two, and download a few eps of what's popular, and I go from there to decide what series I follow. It's too bad more things can't work that way normally.

    --
    I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    1. Re:anime may be a bad sample subject by Necreia · · Score: 2

      Perhaps it's an age or regional thing then. The last fansub circle I was in was in the mid-20's to mid-30's demographic which had a pretty stout "Buy it when it comes out in the states" stance.

    2. Re:anime may be a bad sample subject by VirginMary · · Score: 2

      I will download anything I like and then immediately buy it when it becomes available in my region. I have been known to even buy multiple editions and will always buy special editions should they be available. I use online and/or pirated material primarily as a screening resource. Since there is so much material out there there is no reason to watch anything that I don't greatly enjoy and if I greatly enjoy it, I want to support the creators and very likely watch it again and/or loan it out to some friends! I already own 400+ animé DVDs and blu-ray discs. Of course I am not likely to be a part of the typical target demographic as I am almost 52 years old.

      --
      When 1person suffers from a delusion,it is called insanity.When many people suffer from a delusion,it is called religion
    3. Re:anime may be a bad sample subject by Imrik · · Score: 2

      While fansub viewers may greatly outnumber buyers, buyers who watch fansubs greatly outnumber those that don't. Without fansubs there would be almost no market for anime outside of Japan. Even the shows that actually make it to regular television generally have fansubs to thank for their popularity.

  3. Well... by msauve · · Score: 3, Insightful

    so what? Whether it's good or bad, it's still copyright infringement. The most this study could argue for is to encourage copyright holders to ignore piracy. It does not provide an excuse, or even a rationalization, for piracy. If you're looking for an ethical out, this isn't it.

    It says nothing about the real problem with copyright, the continual extension of terms. Disney got rich copying from Mark Twain, Bros. Grimm, Aesop, etc., yet wants to prevent others from doing the exact same to them. THAT is the problem. As Lawrence Lessig has (unsuccessfully) argued, copyright exists to encourage the creation of works ("promote the progress of Science and the Useful Arts," in the US), and extending copyright on existing works does nothing to achieve that.

    I have no problem with laws protecting IP for limited periods (relative to the useful lifetime - longer for philosophical works, shorter for technological ones), but I do have a problem with keeping those works from the public domain indefinitely.

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    1. Re:Well... by Sparx139 · · Score: 2

      I'm not sure what can really be done to change copyright duration. At this stage, nobody is talking to anyone else and the situation is only getting worse as the views of the most vocal out of both crowds become increasingly polarised. The *AA's stance on copyright is well known, and opposing it we have "Operation Payback is a Bitch". I have to wonder what would happen if instead of this escalating 'war' - some new, draconian way to prevent infringement, which is cracked within a week - record companies had accepted piracy was going to happen and attempted a rational response.

      The current state of copyright protection and laws isn't helping anybody, and the only people who are getting hurt are the honest customers - Various company's (most recently Ubisoft)'s game-breaking DRM, the Sony rootkit, the heavy handedness of the *AA's response when they find someone they can accuse of copyright infringement*, they're driving their own customers away, in what appears to be the death throes of a failing business model. On the other side we've got Anonymous. Enough said.

      The only hope I can see is for the various Pirate Parties to gain some sort of influence. I mean, we occasionally hear about it, but I've never once seen them mentioned in the mainstream media (In countries such as Sweden it might be different, I don't know). That, and the *AA need to stop this crusade and start considering the idea of rational discussion. Of course, the day that happens is the day unicorns will frolic in the grass whilst it rains beer.

      --
      Our culture doesn't get smarter, it just finds new ways of being retarded.
    2. Re:Well... by vadim_t · · Score: 2

      You're looking at it the wrong way, I think.

      A business, which manga and anime production are very much, is into it for the money, not for some philosophical goal of obtaining a 1 viewer to 1 buyer ratio at any cost.

      So if ignoring piracy makes more money then a good business would ignore the piracy and make more money.

      so what? Whether it's good or bad, it's still copyright infringement. The most this study could argue for is to encourage copyright holders to ignore piracy. It does not provide an excuse, or even a rationalization, for piracy. If you're looking for an ethical out, this isn't it.

      Well, and why is it a bad thing? In my view, the main reason why piracy could be said to be morally wrong is that it economically harms the people who make the anime. If however it turns out it benefits them, then there's no harm and for me without harm there's no moral wrong. There's your ethical rationalization.

    3. Re:Well... by commodore64_love · · Score: 2

      >>>If you're looking for an ethical out, this isn't it.

      I have an ethical out: Hollywood won't let return these that are crap. Even candybar makers advertise, "Satisfaction guaranteed or return for a refund." Why can't CD and DVD sellers make the same promise? So I download to avoid throwing-away my money on shit movies (like transformers 2). I would buy this stuff legally if T2 was returning, but since it isn't, and I don't want to throw-away $20, I watch it first before buying.

      And don't try to argue that I should read reviews. Those things are bought-and-paid-for by the companies, and therefore worthless.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    4. Re:Well... by h4rr4r · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And what exactly is wrong with copyright infringement?

    5. Re:Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > I have no problem with laws protecting IP for limited periods

      Please refrain from using such an expression ("IP") for the following reasons:
      1) It encompasses too different things (e.g., copyright and patents) and thus causes a lot of confusion because one can be misled to apply the same reasoning (and decisions!) to apples and oranges;
      2) It opens an even larger breach to allow inclusion of even future, unconceivable legal constructs, thus leading society to a situation which can be frontally contrarian to our very human nature;
      3) The words themselves are an oxymoron of sorts... "intellectual" being something related to both ingenuity and art (two very different areas) and "property" (something which one gets to keep to oneself and deny others)... as the old adage goes, what is said cannot be taken back, because it pertains to everyone. No idea, once put on paper or discussed, can be "property". If one wants to keep something to her/himself, one must not say it. Ever.

      There's a harsh fight between a working capitalist system, which has served well the public till now, and some deviant corporations with monopolistic/antisocial behaviour which would stop at nothing to achieve whatever objectives they have. It's not about profit anymore, it's about "total control". Controlling ideas is a necessary step in such strategy. "IP" is the materialization of a non-existent concept which, if allowed, could become a powerful weapon to restrict Freedom.

    6. Re:Well... by robot256 · · Score: 2

      The study asserts that, at least in this isolated case, the act of copyright infringement results in more profit for the creators, not less. Tell me why this wrong, and I'll answer yours.

    7. Re:Well... by kronosopher · · Score: 2

      wouldn't it be fair to say that the labor for profit game is antiquated by the propensity of labor to be automated? and by extension, the idea of copyright is rendered obsolete.

    8. Re:Well... by VortexCortex · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Tell me why a person has no right to profit from their labor, and I'll answer your question.

      The product of your labour is only valuable due to the fact it includes huge portions of the public culture's resources.
      Language - Did you invent the language your work is produced in? Did you invent the concepts and notions of word play, drama, suspense or modern cinematic treatments thereof?

      No. You are standing on the shoulders of giants -- In proportion to your own work, the inclusion of the public culture's resources far outweighs your contribution to any thought-product protected by copyright.

      Many Inventions are far more creative and/or useful than the works of film-makers or authors, yet the former only receive a ~20 year monopoly with which they may profit from their creations. Copyright holders enjoy a monopoly over their creations for Lifetime + 70 years -- THAT'S TWO GENERATIONS OF HUMANS AND THEIR CULTURE!

      The original intent of copyright law was not to prevent the general public from making reproductions, or remixes of a copyrighted work. Originally, copyrights were enacted to prevent Publishers form abusing the public and creators of works -- Publishing contracts currently provide them an end-run around this. Copyright laws have been turned against the general public and the content authors. Copyright violations are so prevalent largely due to the fact that copying is so cheap that reproductions are essentially in infinite supply -- Economics 101: Regardless of production cost; Price tends toward zero as supply increases to infinity.

      I do not have a license to make reproductions of a DVD, yet it must surely be duplicated at least FOUR TIMES PER VIEW (once within the DVD SATA cache, once in main RAM, another in my VIDEO CARD, and a fourth on my monitor's display). I must break copyright laws under which you operate completely no less than 4 times to consume your works; That's what I call irrelevant laws. (Note, only recently have I been allowed to legally view most DVDs on Linux -- I compiled the player myself == unlicensed player).

      The very state of the culture itself is what makes your product have worth.

      Please explain how much worth any thought-media is in proportion to the entire human culture's collective contribution to said work. Please explain how relevant pay-per copy models are now that copies are in infinite supply. Please explain to me why basic economic principals do not apply to industries that profit from copyright.

      When you can fully explain to me why continued abuse of the general public is allowed instead of reformation of the ancient copyright laws considering that 200 years of technological advancement have made the laws irrelevant, then I'll extrapolate the amount you may earn by producing those works -- It may be a negative amount due to the harm that abused copyright laws have caused the public.

      If not for "piracy" there would be no incentive to change the model -- The Piracy epidemic exists because modern technology has rendered the pay-per-copy model irrelevant.

      I agree that creators should be compensated for their works, but I do not agree to TWO GENERATIONS OF MONOPOLY for works that are only a small fraction original. I can see why some would, in protest, ignore copyright laws in order to offset the absurdity of the state of copyright laws -- CAN YOU NOT?

    9. Re:Well... by Draek · · Score: 2

      so what? Whether it's good or bad, it's still copyright infringement. The most this study could argue for is to encourage copyright holders to ignore piracy. It does not provide an excuse, or even a rationalization, for piracy. If you're looking for an ethical out, this isn't it.

      Ethics is irrelevant of the law, so the fact that it's still copyright infringement doesn't affect whether it's good or bad.

      I have no problem with laws protecting IP for limited periods (relative to the useful lifetime - longer for philosophical works, shorter for technological ones)

      And inflict upon ourselves the hell of every copyright creator and their dog trying to claim their work, regardless of media or content, mysteriously falls under the category with the longest terms? or worse yet, *change* the work so it fits?

      It'll be great seeing the protagonist of a comedy suddenly jump into a philosophical diatribe just so the studio can get a couple extra years out of it. Oh, wait, it won't. Fixed terms, to be determined by scientific studies looking to maximize the number of works on the Public Domain, it's the only way to do it properly and painlessly.

      --
      No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
    10. Re:Well... by noidentity · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Disney got rich copying from Mark Twain, Bros. Grimm, Aesop, etc., yet wants to prevent others from doing the exact same to them.

      Thanks, this never clicked for me until now. Sure, I've heard people say how they "stole" these things, but that always came across as hyperbole because they never prevented anyone from reading the originals. But what you said puts the inconsistency in plain view: Mark Twain's work wasn't hundreds of years old when Disney made things based on it, yet the copyright extensions pushed by Disney etc. will make it at least that long until anyone derive from Disney's work.

  4. Re:Remember by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    And legalizing everything and handing out heroin to addicts actually reduces drug addicts.

    Don't expect Americans to actually take notice. They'll start imprisoning file sharers along with the drug users and promise it'll reduce piracy.

  5. Anime FANSUBS create a market where there was none by Bonker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You think U.S. fans would know what to expect from a title like Bakemonogatari is without having seen a fansub first?

    Turns out that the aforementioned title is a popular romantic fantasy story about a young ex-vampire and the various supernatural girls he meets. Its title is probably best translated as 'Ghost Story'.

    Despite the relative obscurity of both the story and the source material, It has a fairly strong U.S. fanbase that will likely make publishing a run of Region 1 DVDs profitable for both the Japanese and North American companies involved.

    Without fansubs, that market simply wouldn't exist and everyone would miss out.

    --
    The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
  6. The **AA is actually right by erroneus · · Score: 2

    The **AA doesn't want to sell CDs and DVDs any longer. They are too expensive. They are already making like 1000% profit, but those costs of publishing are eating into their ability to get even more money. They want to "sell" content that expires in a short time so that people have to buy it over and over and over again while at the same time, the publishers don't have to manufacture anything at all!

    They want their money for nothing and having to spend money to make it is a highly limiting factor... the difference between limited and limitless.

    This is what they want. Make no mistake about it. And as long as digital copies without limits and expirations, there will be perceived losses.

  7. Re:Anime FANSUBS create a market where there was n by interkin3tic · · Score: 2, Funny

    Turns out that the aforementioned title is a popular romantic fantasy story about a young ex-vampire and the various supernatural girls he meets... Without fansubs, that market simply wouldn't exist and everyone would miss out.

    I don't think Americans being unexposed to what sounds like a Japanese version of "Twilight" qualifies as "everyone missing out."

  8. The price of tea in China by PPalmgren · · Score: 5, Informative

    The article specifically mentions Japanese releases and sales within Japan. I don't think fansubbing has any relevance in this specific case.

  9. Re:Anime FANSUBS create a market where there was n by Microlith · · Score: 2

    Thankfully, nothing in Anime, even the worst stuff, is as bad or as outright shitty as Twilight.

    Oh and what's with the damned FIVE MINUTE DELAY between posts, Slashdot? Are you trying to kill the site?

  10. 1337 lawsuits? by reilwin · · Score: 2

    The results of the study come at an interesting time. For years anime distributors where considered quite lenient towards piracy, but last week the American anime distributor Funimation announced lawsuits against 1337 alleged BitTorrent downloaders.

    Wait, really?

  11. Re:Remember by marcello_dl · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ask ten people if having an mp3 is to be considered a penal offence, and then work out the probabilities that such laws passed around the world represent the opinion of the people.

    I must have said it here already. RIAA and all the others do studies too. They know that their public position on piracy = theft is utter BS. They don't fear pirated stuff, they fear the cropping up of alternative channels for the fruition of media. Because then the market fragments and the consumer becomes the Chooser.

    From a numeric point of view, that should not matter to them if they spend 10 million to produce and promote a band or spend them producing and promoting 10 bands, as long that they make up more than 10 millions in record sales. On the other hand, Art has often been about entertainment on the receiving end, about influence on the producing end, and I see no reason why this should have never happened after WWII propaganda efforts.

    --
    ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
  12. Re:Anime FANSUBS create a market where there was n by SeaFox · · Score: 2

    Main guy isn't an ex-vampire, he is the living food dispenser for a depressed loli vampire. And most of the girls he meets aren't supernatural, they're possessed.

    You do an even worse job describing the show. He WAS an ex-vampire, and he only used the loli-vampire as a way to strengthen himself physically in a single story arc of the show, other than that she's just a side-character whose history is left as more a mystery to the viewer. The girls aren't possessed in the classic sense except for Hanekawa and possibly Hitagi. Hachikuji isn't even human to start with. It's more like they're being harassed by spirits.

    Really this show has more in common with Mushishi than Twilight.

  13. Re:Remember by zalas · · Score: 3, Informative

    Disclaimer: I am not very well versed in statistics and have only just read the Wikipedia article on Instrumental variables.

    On page 14, the report discusses the model they use, which is a linear system of the log of the four variables they're trying to find relationships between. They then discuss 4 instrumental variables as well as two dozen or so dummy variables that describe aspects of the actual show, like when it is aired on TV, whether they have related drama CDs, net broadcasts, whether the anime was an original work or based on manga, novels, games, etc., who the target audience was and how many regions the show have been broadcast in. Table 3 has the full list, and also includes what I assume to be slopes in log-log space from their analysis as well as a "t" factor for which I'm not sure about. The four main instrumental (non-dummy) variables are: DVD price (number of thousands of yen per episode, how long a video on YouTube persists ... while the series is airing, within 1 month of that particular episode airing, and after the series is finished airing).

    Table 4 is a chart highlighting that there is a negative correlation with DVD price and DVD sales, but a positive correlation of DVD price and YouTube views. There were also positive correlations between how long a video managed to stay on YouTube after airing of the TV show has been completed and DVD sales, rentals and YouTube views, but a negative correlation with Winny downloads.

    According to Wikipedia, use of instrumental variables is one way to see if there is actual causation between two variables. However, I'll leave it to someone more well-versed in the subject to see if the report is accurate or not.

  14. Re:Remember by X0563511 · · Score: 2

    Occupied territories?

    (disclaimer: I am a US citizen)

    --
    For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
  15. Re:Remember by dryeo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In 1930 if you asked 10 people if having some hemp should be a penal offence, you would have been laughed at. A couple of years later they renamed it and prohibited it. With a good propaganda campaign it didn't take long for most people to agree that possessing some marijuana should be a penal offence if not a capital crime.
    It's amazing what you can get accomplished with control of the media and a good propaganda campaign.

    --
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
  16. Re:artists are not doing bad though by boxwood · · Score: 2

    They pay Will Smith $20M per movie because having his name above the title will likely get about $20M from people that want to watch a Will Smith movie. Yeah maybe you don't like Will Smith (myself I'm Will Smith neutral) but there must be actors that you like and their involvement in a movie will make you more likely to go see the movie.

    Yeah its ridiculous that the idiots on Jersey Shore get so much money. But people watch them for some reason and without those idiots they don't have a show and they don't have viewers. But 50,000 per episode is cheap. The cast of Friends were getting $1M per episode each. This is of course the reason why there has been a shift to reality television.

    Anyway don't worry about it. If you don't like the entertainment business, you don't have to buy or even view the stuff they put out.