How to combat piracy? (1 Viewer)

[Rich Co]

hi

i live in the Philippines where DVd piracy is prevalent it cost about $9 for each bootleg copy. I have never bought one and never will buy one.

How do you think piracy can be stopped?

 

[Kyle McKnight]

The only way pirace of anything can be stopped...we'll take movie's for example...would be to stop making movies.

Any kind of copy protection will be defeated, a new one introduced...and defeated etc...

 

[MikeAW]

Rich, if you would find a better argument against piracy, other than low cost, we would "fight" piracy...other than that, why should we "fight" it anyway ?

 

[Jeff Kleist]

For movies, contact the MPAA, name names, addresses, phone numbers. It's always worked for me
http://www.mpaa.org

 

[rutger_s]

The short answer is...

You can't.

Even the MPAA admits to this. Simply put:

Wherever there is a person wanting a film on home video first.

The pirates will be there.

Wherever there is a person wanting a video for a cheap price.

The pirates will be there.

Wherever there is a strong desire to make money with low rent products.

The pirates will be there.

Going to the theater in other countries is amazing. Some countries do it like a U.S. sports event, where the price of the ticket depends on the location of the seat.

And with some theaters charging $15.00 a pop, some people would rather spend $5.00 or less a pop to own a p*ss-poor copy.

The MPAA can pressure other countries to do something but even if 100 people refuse to give in to piracy, chances are another 100 people will give in.

 

[SteveGon]

In the old days, they used to hang pirates...

 

[Reginald Trent]

You will never stop piracy. However, you can reduce it by making the cost of your product fairer to the consumer. People tend to treat others better including companies when they feel they have been respected and treated fairly.

 

[Geoffrey_A]

One thing I've always wondered about is the claims the MPAA makes about how much money they lose to piracy. Not that I condone piracy mind you, I just question the logic behind their estimates.

Seems to me the MPAA is missing out on a couple fo rather important points when making their estimates. First, their estimates seem to assume that for every time a person watches their pirated copy, that is one ticket sale lost. That seems fairly ridiculous to me, because if the person didn't have the pirated copy, they more than likely wouldn't be heading to the theater to see it, hence no money lost.

Secondly, pirated movies tend to be of fairly low quality, and are likely to be replaced by the official release when it becomes available. Those that keep the pirated copy instead probably weren't likely to buy a copy of the film anyways, and only purchased it because it was so cheap. All this makes me wonder how much piracy is really costing the movie industry.

Granted I'm talking in North America, where VCD isn't nearly as prevalent. I suspect the industry could loose a fair chunk of change to pirated copies of movies that have already been released on home video, as high quality copies are easier to make in that case, but home video is so cheap now anyways, it's hard to see why anyone would bother seeking out pirated movies.

I'm sure piracy does cut into profits, but I recall Jack Valenti talking about the loss in excess of 3 billion dollars, which seemed awfully steep to me. I dunno, what do you guys think?

 

[Greg_Y]

I don't think the MPAA cares quite as much as they say they do. I contacted their piracy hotline a few months back to give them a link to a blatant dvd bootleg site, and it's still up and running as of five minutes ago.

 

[Rob Robinson]

Pull an adobe...

Asian piracy is too rampant for them, so they are going to stop producing localized versions for Asia; I read it costs them 800k per version localization, and the governments of those countries do absolutely nothing to repect their copyright- so fuck em.

they cut em off, and i'm actually siding with the big IP holder this time. we'll see how that works out.

 

[John_Berger]

I'm sure piracy does cut into profits, but I recall Jack Valenti talking about the loss in excess of 3 billion dollars, which seemed awfully steep to me. I dunno, what do you guys think?

I have to agree. The problem is that there is no way to get an accurate count of why people pirate and if the pirated version is meant to avoid paying a higher price for the commercial item. Additionally, "pirating" is relative and clearly has a different definition from one person to another.

For example, and I'll admit this, I downloaded a really crappy cam version of "The Lord of the Rings: FOTR" on VCD from the Internet. Some people might think automatically that that makes me an unethical pirate who has stolen money from New Line Cinemas.

The truth is that I've paid to see the movie twice already and I'll be seeing it at least two more times before it finally leaves theaters. And when it comes to the DVD, I will be purchasing one -- possibly two, one to use, one to keep -- on the very day that it comes out.

The VCDs are nothing more than a way to curb my lust for the DVD to be released. Since I still plan on spending more money in the theater and on the DVD, my download of the VCD has not resulted in any lost revenue.

By the letter, I might be a pirate, but that download resulted in NO lost revenue since I have seen LOTR in theaters and will pay to see it in theaters again. But if I'm in the mood for it at 11:30 at night, I can at least throw the crappy VCD in my PC or DVD player and enjoy it, confident in the knowledge that New Line is still destined to get my money in the future.

This is the whole problem with the piracy argument. It is NOT black-and-white and frankly I get pissed with the people who try to make it that way. Even the software industry admits that by their estimates about 25% of "pirated" software is software that (A) would not have been bought anyway or (B) is not being used and is more of a psychological trophy. It's too bad that the MPAA/RIAA can't see movie downloads that way.

I also wonder -- if I download the MP3s to the LOTR soundtrack, am I still a pirate even though my wife bought the soundtrack for me for Christmas?

 

[Jan Strnad]

The best way to combat piracy is to issue your material promptly, and sell it at a fair price. Most people will buy from their local DVD outlet, whatever it is (from specialty shops to Wal-Mart) rather than tracking down a bootleg copy.

 

[KeithAP]

I would agree with Geoffrey_A about how the industry over states its losses due to piracy. I would also agree (somewhat) that a less expensive product, offered in a timely fashion would also help reduce the demand for pirated material.

However, there is one key piece of the puzzle missing, the person doing the purchasing. Many people feel it is not morally wrong to steal under certain conditions. Maybe they can't afford the "real" product, maybe they think no person deserves $20 mil for making a movie, or maybe they think rich people are plenty rich already and they don't need more money than they already have. Whatever the justification, there is someone purchasing this pirated material that thinks it is okay to do so.

Until they deal with that problem. Piracy will always be around.

-Keith

 

[Will_B]

And by "that problem" do you mean that people with less money feel they are justified to get something for less - or that the division between levels of income is somewhat excessive, prompting people to find another way of satisfying their interests?

I'm not advocating socialism or anything, but it is hard to say to a poor person that they should just do without books, movies, music... leave those things for those with more moolah, and, maybe try getting reincarnated into a better family next time. Is it morally wrong? I don't know. Easy to say it is wrong when you can afford them yourself. Were I in other shoes, I'd maybe have a different view.

Of course, the above makes the false (?) assumption that only people with less money steal. Cheapest people I've ever met have been rich ones...just ask a bartender who tips better! Generally speaking, of course. Present company excluded, I am sure.

 

[Edwin-S]

IMO, pricing is the most important factor when it comes to pirating. Piracy becomes less attractive when the price of a legitimate copy is reasonable. I find $20-25 Canadian for a DVD copy of a movie a little steep but it is still within my comfort zone to purchase it. At $30 and above it becomes more of a case of "only if I really, really like it". If a DVD copy of a movie was $60 or more (like most software), piracy would start looking a lot more attractive and...no....I am not condoning the practice or promoting it. I am merely stating that for a lot of people it would start looking more economically attractive to pirate rather than purchase. How many people were actually purchasing video tapes when they cost $80-$100 a crack for prerecorded tapes.....IMO, not many. The most likely thing a person did, if they wanted a copy of a film they liked, was to rent it and then dupe it for themselves.

If DVD movies were selling for $14, would it make any sense to spend money on a DVD copier and pirate.....not really. The manufacturers do it to themselves. They set prices at levels that almost ensure that a large proportion of people are going to copy it....be it CDs, DVDs or computer software. There is a segment of Scrooge McDucks that would rather get it free, even if it only cost 50 cents but I think those people make up a pretty small percentage.

 

[KeithAP]

"By that problem" I mean what I said Will, there is always some reason that people who buy pirated material will use to justify the theft. I never said that only people with less money steal. I guess I left that impression because of the examples I picked. Feel free to choose your own reasons. In the end, the purchaser will be a participant in a crime, poor or rich, it is still a crime. Although I will freely admit, that not everyone buying pirated material is 1) aware that the material is pirated and/or 2) that what they are doing is a crime.

Looking at the conclusions that you jumped to in your post based upon what I said, I think it equally reasonsible for me to jump to some conclusions of my own. You are, in fact, advocating socialism. However, that is way off topic here. Besides, I think you made my point already.

Regards,

Keith

 

[rutger_s]

Pricing a title cheaper is not going to stop piracy. You could price a DVD for $4.95 and there will be at least one person who will not pay that much. They would rather have it for free or for half the asking price.

Also, some countries do turn a blind eye. In Thailand, Anna And The King was banned from theatrical & home video release by the censor board. The government stopped the pirates who sold copies on the street but allowed citizens to have pirated copies of this film.

As for the issue of what is legal or not.

You can make one back-up copy of software, CD, cassette, or movie under the First Right law.

You just can not BUY a pirated copy.

Fans who paid the money to see LOTR in theaters are not justifying the piracy on the internet. Basically, you DID steal a copy of the film from the distributor. Which is illegal.

 

[John_Berger]

Fans who paid the money to see LOTR in theaters are not justifying the piracy on the internet. Basically, you DID steal a copy of the film from the distributor. Which is illegal.

Sorry, but I don't buy that argument. This is the kind of tunnel-vision thinking that attempts to make "piracy" the polarized, "letter of the law" topic that it is not.
If someone downloads a movie that they already own or have already paid to see, that action has not resulted in a loss of revenue, which is the FOCUS of the anti-piracy movement -- LOST REVENUE. Studios don't care about whether it's illegal or not -- they care about whether they're losing money or not, and rightfully so.
Don't accuse me or others of attempting to "justify" piracy just because of your tunnel vision. I don't justify it. Those people who are looking to use pirated movies as a way of preventing the need to buy the real thing are pirates. I agree with that, plain and simple.
I personally would never use a pirated copy of a movie as a replacement for the real thing. If I love a movie, the studios and film makers deserve my cash (or at least a swipe of my plastic) -- they have gotten it and will get more in the future. Downloading LOTR might be technically illegal, but that is not piracy because I am not looking to prevent giving my money to the studios in the future, and THAT is the main idea behind the anti-piracy movement -- giving studios the money that is due.
But once again, someone is coming out saying, "It's theft. Period," trying to paint as black and white what is a very grey issue.
This is nothing more than a variation on the riduculous "If you convert your old records (which you own) to MP3s or audio CDs rather than buy a new CD, you're committing and justifying theft" theme.
As long as there are people who are willing to accept a crappy copy of a movie for the cheapest price possible, piracy will always exist. That's just the sad truth. But painting ALL people who use such movies, even temporarily, as "pirates" or "justifying piracy" is ridiculous.
[sigh] Come on, August.....

 

[Derrick_Ellis]

As other people have said here Rich, the only way to fight piracy is to support the studios, and not to support the pirates. As technology becomes more advanced, and is easier for the common person to get their hands on, it will be easier and easier to be a 'digital pirate'. Just as any teenager can be a 'hacker' because the tools to do the hard work are already there. It doesn't take a rocket scientist, just motivation.

 

[Kimmo Jaskari]

You can't stop it entirely, and why would you need to?

As it is, despite the Internet, DivX, VCD's and the incessant howling of the MPAA / RIAA, studios are making money hand over fist on DVD. I read somewhere that DVD's are now raking in as much money again for them as the theatrical release. In many cases they earn several times what the movie cost to make in a combined total. I think that's more than fair.

The problem can be minimized by sane pricing. IMHO, the price per disc should be lower than it is today by a considerable margin. Actual for-profit copying, as is done in Asia etc where they sell illegal copies, should be stepped on via the legal system. Home users copying should be recognized as being the non-problem it is.

As long as the copyright holders can turn a healthy profit, that should be enough. Certainly we consumers shouldn't have our rights taken away because these megacorporations want to make an even more indecent profit; there is a reason the US and most western countries have fair-use laws etc - it's in the interest of the public to have them.

The rights of us as consumers to get a hassle-free product always outweigh the right of the corporation to squeeze every last cent of profit out of it, that's just the way it is.