Quoted from Sandra Elstree. Yes, there might be some people that try and "steal" something and enjoy it privately, but that will NOT LAST. Eventually, their conscience will get the better of them and they will wind up giving back a gazillion fold. It will happen. It's the laws of physics and nature. That's it.

Sandra, you're sweet and we love you, but this is a pretty retarded thing you just said.  These pirates feel justified in what they do.  Some will argue that the studios make enough money; others will say that the studio wouldn't be getting the money anyway.  It doesn't matter.  They're stealing and they just don't care.

And, before anyone brings it up, I don't have any software in my computer that I don't legally own.  Bootleg software is stealing, also.


Phil

Hey Pia,

As I said, I'm not convinced that torrents of Truth would have a significant effect on its returns.  The kind of people likely to be interested in a low-budget arthouse indie horror flick are, I suspect, the kind of people willing to pay.  I think most people, really, are willing to pay for something if it's good.  A lot of musicians make significant money by offering their music free online with optional donations.  We've looked at this approach for Truth.  And if it's not good, then why should people pay for it?

In the video you posted, there's nothing in Bruce Leddy's story explicitly linking piracy to the film's financial failure; the connection is entirely implied.  Taking a quick scan over the IMDb page, it probably failed because it doesn't look interesting and people don't like it.  And as much dramatic music as they play in the video, it's not like it was the end of this guy's life.  He's been working steadily since his movie, just like he was before it.

Hey Phil,

Yessir I am serious.  Expecting film to pay the bills is a major risk.  Most people, studio and indie, make bullshit films, and whether or not they do get paid for it, they shouldn't expect to.  

Putting your life savings down on anything is a gamble.  I put as much money as I could and hundreds of unpaid hours into our current film and I'm a lot more concerned that somebody see it than that somebody pay for it.  I've got a job.  I go to school.  I'm not gonna keel over dead if I don't get paid.  But I'll sure feel silly if nobody sees the film I put so much work into.  

Quoted from Heretic Yessir I am serious.  Expecting film to pay the bills is a major risk.  Most people, studio and indie, make bullshit films, and whether or not they do get paid for it, they shouldn't expect to.   Putting your life savings down on anything is a gamble.  I put as much money as I could and hundreds of unpaid hours into our current film and I'm a lot more concerned that somebody see it than that somebody pay for it.  I've got a job.  I go to school.  I'm not gonna keel over dead if I don't get paid.  But I'll sure feel silly if nobody sees the film I put so much work into.

I understand this, but I also remember me being in meetings negotiating people investing $3M+ to invest in our reality show. It's a BIG responsibility and if in the end you just have to shrug and tell your investors, sorry there will be no return on your investment because it's already online by some asshole making $300M a year showing it online for free.

And Phil, I respect intellectual copyright too. Every program I have, I have paid for. I feel VERY strongly that people that create something out of nothing should be protected. Inventors are what has moved us forward. Regardless of the product they invent, they need to be rewarded and not ripped off.

Hey Pia,

I can definitely agree about responsibility.  Again, though, I'm not convinced that piracy is gonna be the difference between red and black.  I checked out a few scholarly articles on piracy studies and in my limited perusal there seems to be no definite consensus on the impact of piracy.  Studies that did show negative impacts of piracy reported relatively small losses compared to the films' respective budgets.  

Anyway, if it were the case that piracy, directly and solely, resulted in a massive loss on the part of your investors, that would be a risk that your investors had chosen to take.  I don't think investors are too worried about piracy.  There are a lot of films being made.  Not that I don't think it's any concern at all, but I don't think that it's first and foremost on investor's minds, because I don't think anyone has shown it has a significant impact.

I have two scripts optioned.  Payment for both (if produced) is something up front and points in the back end.  Who's going to pay me for those who watch them from torrents?  You?


Phil

I hate when threads I commented on proliferate while I'm away. Too much to respond to.

Quoted from Grandma Bear Not sure how many of you watched the whole video, but I was amazed to see how many people this affects. Especially independent filmmakers who has investors and see their films go online for free the same day as they appear on DVD or some other distribution. Curious how you feel about that James since you are an independent filmmaker (I think).

"(I think.)" ...this is strange. I'm disconcerted by the way this phrase was thrown in there. To clarify, I'm involved in independent film productions in my community, yes, but as of yet, I'm still working on my official directorial view.

Anyway, piracy doesn't phase me. For now, it's kinda inevitable. So why cry about it? Especially when it affects everyone in the industry and you are powerless to do anything about it. Either deal with it or take extraneous, painstaking measures to protect your work that probably won't work out anyway.

Also, I don't expect any of the scripts I've had produced to turn significant profits, with or without piracy. Even if one of my films got pirated, I have my doubts as to how many people would actually see the pirated version. I have my doubts as to how many people actually saw the pirated version of the Weekend Wedding. I haven't even heard of it.

If you're nobody, why would anyone pick your pipsqueak indie film out of the bunch when they have so many Hollywood blockbusters, Oscar baiters and Cannes darlings to choose from? And if someone actually does, you should be glad a single soul even took the time to watch it.

That's the way I feel. To put it bluntly, piracy sucks and if you're making films now, you're going to have to deal with it on one level or another so it's useless crying about it.

The people who should be prosecuted are those who make screeners available for copying. I mean, if you get a DVD for 'awards consideration only' and suddenly that has been distributed across the net, well . . .

As Kevin pointed out, the task of counteracting piracy is very tough. Believe me, I know, from a computer programming and engineering point of view, i have tried to come up with some solutions.

Here are some of the problems:

If you add tracibility information or IDs to a media, like a DVD, they can be blurred or edited out

If give the DVD a 'one play only' or code to enter so it can be played, the video can be captured by software or the code can be cracked.

If you include encryption on the DVD or player, again the video can be capture when displayed on a screen or computer.

I think they can block bootlegging at the cinema by screening for electronic devices on entry or sending out a sync or overlay signal that makes the video captured fuzzy or unwatchable.

Quoted from James McClung If you're nobody, why would anyone pick your pipsqueak indie film out of the bunch when they have so many Hollywood blockbusters, Oscar baiters and Cannes darlings to choose from? And if someone actually does, you should be glad a single soul even took the time to watch it.

Why would the torrents load them on their sites?  Maybe your pipsqueak indie film is the sleeper everyone's been looking for.

Whether or not you get a crack at a second movie depends on how much your first one made.  I don't think anyone considers how much your first film is pirated in this decision.


Phil

There's an old Chinese saying that goes something like:

If you have a problem and there's something you can do about it, there's no point worrying.

If you have a problem and there's nothing you can do about it, there's no point worrying.

So in short there's no point worrying about it.


Ultimately piracy is here to stay. There's a lot of very clever people out there, and they will get round any protection you put in place.

You have to deal with it...maybe even embrace it.

I think a film called Ink was released on torrents site...and built up quite a fanbase:

"As no big studio picked up the film for theatrical and home distribution, Double Edge Films pitched the movie directly to independent cinemas and also saw to the DVD, Blu-ray and online distribution themselves. DVD and Blu-ray copies of the movie are sold directly via the company's website starting from October 30, 2009 and are sold at retail stores starting November 10, 2009, as well as downloads at Video on demand stores.[4] According to TorrentFreak, a file sharing news site, Ink was downloaded via BitTorrent 400,000 times in a single week and exposed the film to a large audience, leading to higher DVD and Blu-ray sales in return.[5] Jamin and Kiowa Winans wrote in their newsletter that they had "embraced the piracy" and are "happy Ink is getting unprecedented exposure."[5] Around Christmas 2009 the film was also released on Hulu for free viewing.[6][7]"


That's something you can do...put your own high quality download out there first and ask for donations, or advertise your website. At least then you get the benefit of the exposure.

You can also use your film as a marketing scheme in of itself. Build a fanbase and maybe they'll buy some merchandise..perhaps your biggest fan has never paid to see a single one of your films, but he's bought the signed poster (I have my very nice Bad Penguin poster right here!), a framed still of the film, the mug and the T-short with your hero's catchphrase on it.

Maybe give the people who buy the film some kind of experience the pirates don't get. Whether that's simply some amazing art on the DVD cover, or  voucher for something, whatever. Make people feel good for buying it.

Basically, you have to evolve with the times.

Quoted from Scar Tissue Films You can also use your film as a marketing scheme in of itself. Build a fanbase and maybe they'll buy some merchandise..perhaps your biggest fan has never paid to see a single one of your films, but he's bought the signed poster (I have my very nice Bad Penguin poster right here!), a framed still of the film, the mug and the T-shirt with your hero's catchphrase on it.

Another satisfied customer!

The problem with merchandising is that it's also pirated/counterfeited.  Bill Watterson discontinued his comic strip Calvin and Hobbs because he was tired of seeing his characters on products he didn't endorse.  Despite the fact that the strip was discontinued six years ago, you can still see the characters on shirts and the rear windshield of cars (pissing on car logos).


Phil

I can't think of any good reason not to be able to prosecute websites that are deliberately and openly pirating and making money off it selling advertising. I don't see how having laws and international treaties allowing such prosecution will limit internet freedom.

Would that completely stop pirating? No, of course not. There will always be software similar to the torrents and other share systems out there. The hackers will always find their stuff for free. But it can't be made so easy that everyone can find pirated stuff and use it without much effort, and so people use it on legitimate looking websites and don't even know they are using stolen content.

I am skeptical that this has had much impact on the film industry yet. But that's soon to change when everyone's TV is connected to the internet and you can watch pirated movies as easy as channel surfing.

I am also skeptical of this idea of people donating to films they appreciated. Come on, be real. That's fine for a super low budget flick, but a film is NEVER going to make significant money that way...and film investors know that.

Smart producers will find a way to utilize what's going on with this technology. I saw an interview with Danny Devito where they had just finished making a feature film designed to be showed on Youtube. All the profit was to come from advertising on that site. No idea how it did, but that's thinking outside the box and is to be applauded.

Let me ask you this, Rick and Chris: if a producer took a script, and paid for the film by selling advertising to Coke, and filled the story with coca cola scenes, how would you feel about that? Is the artistic purity of the story compromised? Films have always done this to a degree, but if that becomes the only way to make money, they might have to really turn films into commercials.

The problem of pirating does not allow a one answer solution. You can't stop content theft, but you might be able to reduce it. Educating the public is just one part of that battle. And producers are also wise to deal creatively with a changing world by adapting.

People steal content because it has value. But the fact that it has value also means those that own the content will always be able to fight back. The war will never end, but you can choose a side.

Quoted from James McClung "(I think.)" ...this is strange. I'm disconcerted by the way this phrase was thrown in there. To clarify, I'm involved in independent film productions in my community, yes, but as of yet, I'm still working on my official directorial view.

I was thinking of Frozen In Time, but wasn't sure if you the writer only or part of the production. That was all.  

Will this piracy take the film industry the same path it did with the music industry?...

I just hate when people steal anything, but I guess that's what the world is like today. People see something, want it and then take it...  

Just to be clear Kev, I'm not suggesting that you base your entire economic strategy on getting donations, just that you accept that some people are going to download the film, so you well as well ask them using your own copy, rather than allowing someone else to upload your film.

Some people are not going to pay to watch your film.

If you stop them from downloading it, they won't buy it, they'll simply do something else...like watch Youtube.

The only thing to take from that video is an analysis of where the Wedding Weekend Director went wrong.

He followed some archaic distribution model that is dead. An hour spent googling distribution would have told him that.

He took too much of a risk with his own money and with other peoples. This is a guy with industry connections who couldn't get traditional funding for a comedy? This instantly suggests it's a dud.

There are no faces recognisable to a world wide audience...so they may as well have been local actors doing it for the reel. The poster and title are so boring that even having watched this video about it, I can't even build up the inclination to watch it for free, just out of curiosity.

There's no marketing hook. It's mix genre. It sounds dated and looks trite and middle class. What is the demographic for this film? Middle America, I suppose, people who work, have the white picketed fence you hear about...the kind of people who come home from a hard day and watch whatever's on the telly...and don't go rooting around trying to find obscure dramedys.

He should have made the film for ZERO, with friends.

The traditional system where it takes three people to make a cup of tea, and every assistant has ten assistants is going.

Very soon there will a 4K Raw cam on the market for a few thousand. The future of most filmmaking will be one guy with a cam, and maybe one sound guy. Look at Monsters...one guy with a prosumer cam.

Only the tentpole pics will be able to have enormous crews.

Napster won. The coming generations will have grown up never paying for music or films.

You either have to deal with that reality, or do something different. It's not worth spending even a minute worrying about it. You'll drive yourself mad for no reason.

As for the coke thing. No-one would watch it...and more people would watch independent films that didn't take the piss out of you.

Hey Rick

I won't argue your points on that guy's film. You are probably correct on all of them, at least as far as the likelihood of his being successful with it anyway. Though I have to profess ignorance of the subject. I really don't have a sense of what the DVD market would be for indie films like that.

Think of one of your favorite films of the last few years. Are you telling me that if we just add 4 or 5 scenes with a bottle of coke somewhere in the background you will no longer watch it? That no one will? I'm not talking about big studio Hollywood films. I'm talking about an indie producer that just wants to finance his project, and works out a deal with coca cola. Isn't that the way to "deal with it"?

Also, there's a HUGE difference between worrying about something and taking a position. By your logic one should not vote. One vote doesn't make a difference, so why bother? One shouldn't be worrying over this, but they can and should take a position. The people who own the content of films have the resources collectively and individually to fight back. They create films like this because they want public support.  I don't think there's any question this theft effects a lot of people.

Quoted from dogglebe Another satisfied customer! The problem with merchandising is that it's also pirated/counterfeited.  Bill Watterson discontinued his comic strip Calvin and Hobbs because he was tired of seeing his characters on products he didn't endorse.  Despite the fact that the strip was discontinued six years ago, you can still see the characters on shirts and the rear windshield of cars (pissing on car logos). Phil

If he genuinely stopped making his cartoons because of that, it seems a very strange attitude to me.

The more popular something is, the more it will be copied, but at the same time the market for the official/real product will increase.

One of my ambitions in film is to create a shared Universe environment where different people can contribute, and I'd have it on a creative commons licence so anyone could use the characters, and even sell products based on it for just a small licence fee.

I'm with Sandra that if you allow people to be involved, give them stuff etc, they'll give back.