I'm curious;

Given the choice, would each of you rather have a small number of people see your movie and pay for it, or a much larger number see it but a slightly smaller number pay for it?

Since I'm wide awake in the middle of the night for some odd reason.  Here's an article that might add to the discussion.  

http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/top-10-pirated-movies-time/

Since movies began in the 1800's they have been pirated. It's not anything new. The industry has had  constant battles against it but piracy still flourishes...so does the movie industry if Avatar is any example.  

LOL at Kickass and RocknRolla being on that list. How delightfully random.

Quoted from James McClung As for friends using piracy to watch films, I don't condone it but I wouldn't say anything to them about it. It's not my business and frankly, it'd be akin to telling someone their meat eating or pot smoking is wrong.

James - completely understand the analogy you're making here - and I'd never stand on a friend's doorstep and condemn them re: illegal downloads. But frankly, I think it's more akin to standing in a convenience store, and allowing your friend to shoplift in front of you.  In that case...yeah...I would say something!  

Rick: Thx for the nod to Bad Penguin.    And I'm sure you understand, as a director.  You and your investors front the money for your films, and you take the risk - it's your hard work that makes it possible.  It's blatantly wrong for someone to be able to lift the film, and provide it for free to the masses..reaping benefits of it just because they can...  (Not saying it's 100% preventable, or that there aren't separate issues with the major studios that are important to address as well.)  But the least I can do (and will do from now on) is not being yet another person downloading illegal films.  It's the least I can do - and support any efforts to see it stopped, as much as possible.

Quoted from wonkavite and support any efforts to see it stopped, as much as possible.

But that's the point... it isn't going to stop.   If you make treaties with a county to stop piracy there, the pirates are just going to go to another country where it isn't illegal.  I may be a bit cynical here, but getting the whole world to enforce anti-piracy legislation is just not going to be possible - especially not in Asia.

Did you know by the way that part of the reason Hollywood is where it is is because of piracy?   Edison had a lock and patent on film in the early 1900s, the MPPC was controlling the industry in the states.  It was east coast based.  In order to distance themselves from the enforcers of those patent fees, filmmakers moved to the other coast.  Also, if they were caught - they were very close to Mexico and could easily flee there.  

The way for the movie industry to combat piracy is not legislation.  It's making films that people want to see in theatres and/or making their films accessible online for a reasonable price.    

No reason we can't pursue both avenues.  (If lawmakers made a point of giving up enforcing justifiable laws because the crime can't fully be stopped, that pretty much runs the gamut - theft, physical domestic abuse in many cases, any number of other criminal acts.  And...even if there's no chance of the cops actually catching the (*&*($ who breaks into my car, doesn't mean they shouldn't continue to try!)

Quoted from wonkavite No reason we can't pursue both avenues.  (If lawmakers made a point of giving up enforcing justifiable laws because the crime can't fully be stopped, that pretty much runs the gamut - theft, physical domestic abuse in many cases, any number of other criminal acts.  And...even if there's no chance of the cops actually catching the (*&*($ who breaks into my car, doesn't mean they shouldn't continue to try!)

But the cops aren't going to chase your car thieves over four continents at a cost of hundreds of millions of dollars either - I'm sure the taxpayers would be really happy with you if you made them foot the bill for that.

M -

I doubt it would cost that much, if mutual agreements were arranged between countries.  

Also, that's a dangerous precedent to send - if prosecution is too costly, a criminal can expect to get away without even an attempt at apprehension...!  (And - even given the expenses involved, I'd much rather see the funds spent on something legitimate like that, rather than the drug war, other 'social' vices, and/or wars that we shouldn't have gotten involved in to begin with...)  IMHO.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....gIQA9TK6nO_blog.html

A good article. Sounds like there are two bills floating around Congress. One is draconian and would inhibit free speech(naturally lobbied for by corrupt former Senator Chris Dodd of Connecticut); the other seems to be a common sense approach and is endorsed by Google and Facebook.

I don't think there should be a question about whether property theft is right or wrong, or whether copyrighted material should be protected. The question is how far you can go without affecting freedom of speech or freedom of the internet. Citizens should be vigilant about freedom of speech, while being open to common sense solutions which don't impact freedom.

Google are pirates.

http://contentownership.org/

Once the industry gets its act in order, I'll worry about the little guy.

If the government wanted to, it could pass law to block such websites.  It wouldn't stop the torrents but it would slow them down it help the fimmakers.

Anyone who says that this would violate someone's freedom of speech gets a frikkin' beating.


Phil

Quoted from dogglebe If the government wanted to, it could pass law to block such websites.  It wouldn't stop the torrents but it would slow them down it help the fimmakers. Anyone who says that this would violate someone's freedom of speech gets a frikkin' beating. Phil

The govt already seizes and blocks such websites.  It hasn't made an impact.   Unfortunately the US can only do this for websites that are on its own soil.  It isn't going to be able to make laws for other countries - especially when it's against the economic interest of those countries.   And even if it wasn't, I don't think other countries are going to allow the US to determine what is legal or isn't within their borders.  Ain't going to happen.  Get over it.

There are ways to make it in the economic interests of those countries to play ball. All you have to do is take countries that don't cooperate and make it illegal for American banks to do business with that country. The same thing they are working for Iran because of nukes. Pretty sure Norway does not want to be frozen out of the financial system just so pirates can operate.

I am no defender of Google. I think they are intrusive...and it's run by Left wing fascists. I'm just saying Google supported the legislation, so it could not be something that's threatening them. And they own youtube, which is full of unlicensed stuff.

Quoted from leitskev There are ways to make it in the economic interests of those countries to play ball. All you have to do is take countries that don't cooperate and make it illegal for American banks to do business with that country. The same thing they are working for Iran because of nukes. Pretty sure Norway does not want to be frozen out of the financial system just so pirates can operate.

That's fine and then you lose the American dollar as a world currency - it's really close to happening already and the only holdout is the investment in American dollars in Asia (just the countries you'll have to be freezing out.)