Independent Filmmakers Benefit from BitTorrent An economic argument for piracy The argument against piracy is generally that it hurts the artists who have created the work by allowing people to steal it from the Internet. Independent filmmakers seem to have a counterargument in the fact that their success is often driven by the way that BitTorrent sharing can increase interest in their works. Because smaller filmmakers don’t have the money to spread the word about their work, they rely on file sharing to generate interest in films that might otherwise go unnoticed. One example is “The Man From Earth” which went from unnoticed to being the 5th most popular IMDB movie as a result of a blog review that linked to a torrent of the movie. Of course, some independent filmmakers still oppose BitTorrent sharing but a number of them believe that it does more harm than good to their work. In related news, the television industry is beginning to realize that the popularity of pirated material is indicative of the potential sales popularity of content.
|
  RayWPremium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
kudos:1 | So called 'Piracy' has helped many people Bill Gates used it back in the 80's, early 90's to get his DOS and Windows software into prime time. Now look where that is. Granted he had help from IBM, but he did comment that he did not care about 'piracy' because once they got hooked on it, he would get his in the end (not an exact quote, but a paraphrase with essentially the same meaning). Now look where M$ is and how much wealth Bill has tied up in his own person.
It is the established folks that stand to loose control, that is why the media publishers and those who do not really create anymore are in the forefront of the anti-share mode. You notice that my first example only started getting sticky once he had the market sewn up.
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time. | |
|  | Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| Re: So called 'Piracy' has helped many people P2P applications have been so thoroughly demonized by the media monopoly (aided and abetted by the stenographer press) that it is conventional wisdom that P2P is "bad" and only used to "pirate content".
there are a few stories here and there about how P2P is being used for "legitimate" purposes, but these stories are overwhelmed by the rampant FUD the RIAA, MPAA, puppets in congress and the press churn out. Everyone "knows" the only use for P2P is to "steal" content.
p2p is just an application that moves bits around and is neither "bad" nor "good". | |
| | |  gatorkramNeed for SpeedPremium
join:2002-07-22
Winterville, NC
kudos:2 | Re: So called 'Piracy' has helped many people Yeah, and don't forget, the internet is full of porn, and pedophiles too.
If we could somehow make P2P good for children, they'd make laws requiring ISPs to love and support it 
--
Give me bandwidth or give me death!
»/testhistory/661871/4f240 | |
| | | |  MrMoodyFree range slavePremium
join:2002-09-03
Smithfield, NC | Re: So called 'Piracy' has helped many people said by gatorkram:Yeah, and don't forget, the internet is full of porn, and pedophiles too. Ha, you sound like my mother. Opinions formed by newscasts.
If we could somehow make P2P good for children, they'd make laws requiring ISPs to love and support it
--
The public is a poor business manager. | |
|
|  tshirtPremium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:3
 ·Comcast
| said by RayW:....but he did comment that he did not care about 'piracy' because once they got hooked on it, he would get his in the end (not an exact quote, but a paraphrase with essentially the same meaning)... Well, not exactly.....what he said was
"Although about 3 million computers get sold every year in China, people don't pay for the software. Someday they will, though," Gates told an audience at the University of Washington. "And as long as they're going to steal it, we want them to steal ours. They'll get sort of addicted, and then we'll somehow figure out how to collect sometime in the next decade."
This mimic's his original "AN OPEN LETTER TO HOBBYISTS "
»www.blinkenlights.com/classiccmp···ine.html
In no way was he endorsing software theft, EVER, just being realistic about the problem, and always hoping to eventually recover the lost revenue.
The "it's ok" spin was added by reporters and continues to be circulated by those trying to justify their own actions. | |
| | |  SrsBsns
join:2001-08-30
Oklahoma City, OK | Re: So called 'Piracy' has helped many people said by tshirt:said by RayW:....but he did comment that he did not care about 'piracy' because once they got hooked on it, he would get his in the end (not an exact quote, but a paraphrase with essentially the same meaning)... Well, not exactly.....what he said was "Although about 3 million computers get sold every year in China, people don't pay for the software. Someday they will, though," Gates told an audience at the University of Washington. "And as long as they're going to steal it, we want them to steal ours. They'll get sort of addicted, and then we'll somehow figure out how to collect sometime in the next decade." This mimic's his original "AN OPEN LETTER TO HOBBYISTS " » www.blinkenlights.com/classiccmp···ine.htmlIn no way was he endorsing software theft, EVER, just being realistic about the problem, and always hoping to eventually recover the lost revenue. The "it's ok" spin was added by reporters and continues to be circulated by those trying to justify their own actions. Absolutely correct. I was stealing windows xp for years but found it a pain to get updates via third party sites. I think microsoft knew disabling pirated windows was a bad idea and that just making a part of it not work right would eventually get me hooked into buying it. It did. | |
|
| | | said by RayW:Bill Gates .. did comment that he did not care about 'piracy' because once they got hooked on it, he would get his in the end What's changed since then is copyright law. Copyright is a social contract. A social moderation of common-law property rights. Without society mediating the exchange of property, you'd own whatever you purchase. To alter this arrangement, the seller would have to enter into a contract with every purchaser, initialing every paragraph, etc., to signify the consummation of that contract.
Copyright was intended to make it easier to operate under an umbrella limitation on the property transfer. In return, society became the owner at the end of the copyright turn (when the item fell into the Public Domain, free for all to use). This quid pro quo (the artist or publisher gets something in return for society getting something) is even described in the Constitution.
The first copyright terms were 14 years. As late as the 1980s durations were 28 years with an optional renewal of an additional 28 years. (It's hard to figure this out because subsequent copyright laws retroactively changed the durations). Frequently copyrights were not renewed. (I know this for a fact because I worked on some digitizing projects in the late '80s).
Today durations are "life of the author + 70 years." For corporate works it's 95 years.
The benefit of copyright has shifted *drastically* towards authors, corporations and publishers. Society has gotten significantly less. Especially when you realize the date works would roll into the Public Domain was frozen back in the '80s and '90s as copyright terms were extended.
Your example of Bill Gates is a good one. Consider how he used social copyright limitations on property transfer to distribute his products without a gigantic sales force which would be required to enter into private contracts (in the absence of relatively new "shrinkwrap licenses," which is another story of society taking it in the shorts). Since then he's been the beneficiary of increasing copyright terms, and society getting *nothing* in return. Windows 3.1 will go into the Public Domain sometime around 2070. It wouldn't be worth much to anyone today. How will society benefit in 60 more years?
That's what's wrong with copyright today. The scales have tipped outrageously toward authors, publishers, corporations. The idea that society should benefit for intervening in property transfer has been completely lost. Today, things have shifted so far toward publishers that you're supposed to consider *everything* is copyrighted. In the 80s and 90s, if a work was published without a copyright notice it immediately fell into the Public Domain. Publishers had responsibility to protect their works. Now they don't. They can publish without a copyright notice, and if you violate their rights (which they retain, even without a notice), you can be sued for damages.
This is why I support violation of copyrights. The system has been perverted. It doesn't deserve respect.
Mark | |
| | | tshirtPremium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:3 Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: So called 'Piracy' has helped many people said by amigo_boy:What's changed since then is copyright law. Copyright is a social contract....... A social contract, that is enforced by laws enacted because some of the "society" ignored the rights of the originator.
Ignoring federal and international copyright law IS NOT an effective way of changing said laws, contacting your representatives and campaigning for desired changes to the law would be better. | |
|
 Dnepr
join:2001-11-28
Tarpon Springs, FL | Grammar? "some independent filmmakers still oppose BitTorrent sharing but a number of them believe that it does more harm than good to their work"
This doesnt make any sense... | |
| | alalperPremium
join:2000-08-20
Philadelphia, PA | Re: Grammar? said by Dnepr:"some independent filmmakers still oppose BitTorrent sharing but a number of them believe that it does more harm than good to their work" This doesnt make any sense... Methinks it is worded backwards. Should be "more good than harm". | |
| | |  furloniumComputer Over? Virus equals Very Yes?
join:2002-05-08
Bethlehem, PA | Re: Grammar? said by alalper:said by Dnepr:"some independent filmmakers still oppose BitTorrent sharing but a number of them believe that it does more harm than good to their work" This doesnt make any sense... Methinks it is worded backwards. Should be "more good than harm". I was just going to post the same thing.
--
»www.myspace.com/intranet
I once had a dream that Sean Connery stayed at my apt., and he had his laptop with Win98 on it, and he knew how to connect to my wireless network. I don't do drugs  | |
|
| | | said by Dnepr:"some independent filmmakers still oppose BitTorrent sharing but a number of them believe that it does more harm than good to their work" This doesnt make any sense... Some don't mind promoting their films, called viral marketing, but don't want the whole movie being passed around. Some just give you the 1st 10 mins then hope you buy it from Amazon.com. I know a few and that's what they put on torrents--either the first 10 mins. or a long trailer of 8-10 mins. Even indie singers will put say 30 second songs on torrents and hope you buy the CD from them. Still, none want their works being put all over the web unless they are trying to get a big record deal. Support the indies by not stealing and buy their stuff. Trust me, that hurts Hollywood and the RIAA jerks more than anything.
--
Saving the world keeps me busy. However, I find Earth very primitive from my home planet of Krypton.
-Supergirl | |
| | |  RARPSL
join:1999-12-08
Suffern, NY | Re: Grammar? said by supergirl:Even indie singers will put say 30 second songs on torrents and hope you buy the CD from them. Of course, this 30 second clip can be unrepresentative of the full song and is the only "Good" part of it. Everyone knows the sun rise music from 2001 (Also Spake Zarathustra). From that the full tone poem sounds like it might be interesting to listen to. If you ever do, you quickly find out that the music goes down hill fast as soon as that opening second is over. Thus just hearing the part used in the Movie as a "sampler" gives a erroneous impression of the full work. | |
|
tshirtPremium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:3 Reviews:
·Comcast
1 edit | An economic argument for piracy?????? Hmm, the economic argument is what????
That because they have no budget for distribution anyway, it's ok to steal it? (meaning nobody gets paid. not the distributor, ad agencies, /theater owners/cd producer and sellers, nor does the film-maker).
I don't see this as a driver of any economy.
On the other hand if the film-maker producer CHOOSES to release material via p2p for advertising/expossure/publicity purposes, then it isn't theft/piracy.
Seems the article/author confuses/seeks to confuse the line between willful free release and theft. | |
| | | | Re: An economic argument for piracy?????? said by tshirt: Hmm, the economic argument is what???? That because they have no budget for distribution anyway, it's ok to steal it? (meaning nobody gets paid. not the distributor, ad agencies, /theater owners/cd producer and sellers, nor does the film-maker). I don't see this as a driver of any economy. On the other hand if the film-maker producer CHOOSES to release material via p2p for advertising/expossure/publicity purposes, then it isn't theft/piracy. Seems the article/author confuses/seeks to confuse the line between willful free release and theft. Yep, true. I advise such clients to use viral marketing of a trailer or the first 10 minutes of a movie than have links to buy the full movie on DVD.
I still don't get people, especially techies and kids (teens to late 20s) that think, "It's on the Net so I can download it and it's not stealing." It's stealing no matter how you say it. 
--
Saving the world keeps me busy. However, I find Earth very primitive from my home planet of Krypton.
-Supergirl | |
|
 KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | Hey! Not allowed to point out positive uses of Torrents! No positive uses of Torrent technology is allowed to be mentioned! Otherwise people won't believe the hype that Torrent is all piracy and that technology to block BitTorrents is therefore noble and just!
| |
| | tshirtPremium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:3 Reviews:
·Comcast
| Re: Hey! Not allowed to point out positive uses of Torrents! said by KrK:No positive uses of Torrent technology is allowed to be mentioned! Otherwise people won't believe the hype that Torrent is all piracy and that technology to block BitTorrents is therefore noble and just! Not at all, there are many (most, as yet undeveloped) However like opium / heroin / morphine the use by abusers currently overshadows the legitimate uses.
being a "free" society puts the obligation for responable use on all citizens, the actions of a few percent effect the "rights" of all users. | |
|
 BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Benefit only temporary Once they become big and make the big bucks then it hurts them and they sue. Just like when Metalica first started out they accually encouraged fans to record their concerts now try letting your friend burn a copy of your Metalica CD and let them find out they'll sue you into oblivion. | |
| | | Piracy hurts me directly I mix sound for Movies. If people don't pay for movies, then movies won't be made. Having spent well over 20 years on my craft, the console, speakers, Movie screen , projector etc and now people give the movies away for free because it's "cool' to pass it along. How do you make your living? Just think, today your boss can't pay you anymore because all you work is being given away for free do there's no longer a market for it. We'll that's not too cool anymore is it? Look what's happened in the Music business. What would happen is artists couldn't play live anymore because... | |
| | | | Re: Piracy hurts me directly Playing live is where they make their money. Its always been that way. The corporations are losing money because they refuse to move off of their old marketing and distribution methods. | |
|
|
| |
|
|
