The Happy Ending of Internet Piracy

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

How to defeat Internet piracy?


Let’s start with the premise that Internet piracy is technically, economically and psychologically invincible. The reason for this is the nature of human beings, the Internet and digital technology. I have an in-depth analysis on why Internet piracy is invincible in the full version of this article. I have written it a bit like a story. Check my extensive arguments there, if you like:

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=7753

Given that invincibility, what can be done?!

The Short Version:

If piracy is invincible, the only way to defeat it is to actually legalize it, regulate it and incorporate its technology [p2p] in a new and superior home distribution system of the future.

Let’s call this system Electronic Media Distribution System [EMDS].

What does all that mean?

Fundamental principles of the eventual EMDS:

1. Link the very use of Internet access to a monthly payment of an EMDS fee. Whoever wants to use the Net, has to pay the EMDS fee. No exceptions whatsoever! No EMDS fee – No Internet. Fixed by law. If this rule is not applied, the EMDS won’t work. [Remember that we’re fighting something invincible].
2. Every consumer pays the same fee - no differentiation! If this rule is not applied, the EMDS will again not work.
3. After that, every user has the right to legally download every song or movie that he wants. Unlimited times. The same as in the pirate network, but – legalized, regulated and pre-paid.
4. The money from all the user’s fees goes into the EMDS gross profit – the budget of the System. There we have categories for “Movies”, “Music”; sub-categories for “Singles”, “Albums”, “Shorts”, “Features” etc. For example 50 % for movies, 50 % for music, etc. Or whatever is appropriate. Whatever.
5. The downloads for every song, album, movie or whatever are counted by a very secure system.
6. The products that have been downloaded most times, get the most money from the EMDS gross profit. For example: a movie is released in the EMDS and it has 6 % of all movie downloads for that month. The result is that it takes 6 % of the gross profit that has been accumulated in the “Movie” category of the EMDS for that month.
7. The EMDS system is administered and controlled by the 1. Entertainment Industries themselves [not state owned or regulated, which would be communist-ique], 2. Unions of EMDS users [acting as counterbalance and protecting the interest of consumers]; 3. The Internet Service Providers [ISPs] who technically provide the Internet access; 4. The Government, whose judiciary system would intervene if some fraud has occurred in the process.
8. These four parties form the EMDS committee. Full accord of all these parties is needed for every decision concerning the system. They also monitor and control the download-counting process for frauds and mistakes. Every party has a right of veto over any EMDS fee increase or whatever change to the system. The monthly EMDS fee is formed by the committee.
9. The EMDS is nation-based. Every country [or every state in the US or wherever] would establish its own EMDS system. EMDS systems in different countries [states] will be coordinated among each other, which means, for example: Local [legal] release of “Die Hard 5”, in the Bulgarian EMDS [whose fee is appropriate for Bulgarian salaries, etc.]. Whatever % “Die Hard 5” takes here – it goes to the authors\companies. The same as current home video distribution but- 1. Easier to administer and control; 2. Easier to use; 3. Possibly cheaper for the common consumer; 4. More profitable for the Industries; 5. [Almost] Perfect :greedy: .

Direct consequences of the eventual EMDS system:

1. Points 1., 2., and 3. [above] annihilate the very temptation and need to use pirated material and thus - annihilates piracy by actually legalizing its technology. This annihilates the demand for pirated content.
2. People get to download freely and legally whatever they like. Their average monthly expenditure for the EMDS fee will be equal or slightly smaller than what they currently spend on CD\DVD purchases and rentals. The reasons for that are: 1. Every Internet user pays the fee; and 2. This fee is the same for all home users.
3. The gross profit that the Industries will have to share will be bigger, guaranteed and – most importantly – progressively increasing, because: 1. The number of Internet users will rise; 2. The EMDS fee will be gradually increased over time [the process is controlled by the EMDS committee]; 3. More countries will eventually establish their own EMDS systems; etc.
4. The money will go where it should – to the most successful authors\companies – those that have been downloaded the most – a fair and just system for distributing profit.
5. The artists\Industries are saved and piracy disappears :sorcerer: .

These and many other reasons and consequences you can read in the full version of this article, here:

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=7753

The article is huge, but to fully understand what I mean, you have to read all of it.

I consider this text as a kind of open-source and non-profit material. My intention is to help. Anyone can criticize or add suggestions to it. I haven’t written this to profit from it but if some part of it has any value - > I wouldn’t want anyone else to individually profit from it either. I’ve already sent it to many institutions in the USA, UK, the EU and my own country. Let’s see what happens.

Being an aspiring artist myself, I’m only looking for solutions to problems.

Everything that I’ve written comes from my own personal experience, my personal use of pirated content and observations on the Internet, piracy and everything else. I’m no expert in hacking, cracking, wacking, smacking or any one of these. I’m just trying to express my POV and hoping that it might help.

And a final word:

All this, is already happening. Millions of people in the world [incl. me ] are already using this system, the number of piracy using users WON'T decrease [read the article to see why]. There’s nothing that can stop this, it’s progress. It’s just that the artists\Industries are currently not profiting from it.

That’s it.

And that’s the shortest I can make it.

Best regards.

EDIT: Please read the word "tax" in the big thread as "fee". It causes some misunderstanding, I have explained the reason in this individual post:

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showpost.php?p=139796&postcount=6

[noclip]

I think it's incredibly self-important and out of touch to assume that the entire internet revolves around the entertainment industry (and the pirating of its content) as the major companies and industry organizations do. The system you are proposing is technologically infeasible and massively invasive of personal privacy. If you're going to track who downloads what, you might as well just send them a bill every month for the stuff they downloaded and scrap the tax altogether. That's not even to mention the social problems with treating everybody like a criminal.

I definitely agree that piracy is unavoidable but the best solution is for the industry to adapt with new business models that are less dependent on the prevention of piracy, not massive subsidies paid for by innocent internet users to boost the already healthy profits of a criminally inefficient industry.

[Tom Lowe]

Jeez, that's a lot of read. I think the movie and music industries could take a huge chunk out of piracy by simply pricing their CDs and DVD and HDDVDs at a more reasonable price - like 5 bucks a disc. This notion of paying $27 for a little plastic disc of a movie I probably already paid 10 or 20 bucks (with a date) to see at the theater is nutso, if you ask me.

A typical Bluray disc takes about 2 days to download, so if they sold it for 5 bucks, it wouldn't be worth it to download it. The sheer volume of sales would skyrocket, as well, if the prices were very low.

[James T Mather]

How to defeat Internet piracy?


Let’s start with the premise that Internet piracy is technically, economically and psychologically invincible. The reason for this is the nature of human beings, the Internet and digital technology. I have an in-depth analysis on why Internet piracy is invincible in the full version of this article. I have written it a bit like a story. Check my extensive arguments there, if you like:

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=7753

Given that invincibility, what can be done?!

The Short Version:

If piracy is invincible, the only way to defeat it is to actually legalize it, regulate it and incorporate its technology [p2p] in a new and superior home distribution system of the future.

Let’s call this system Electronic Media Distribution System [EMDS].

What does all that mean?

Fundamental principles of the eventual EMDS:

1. Link the very use of Internet access to a monthly payment of an EMDS tax. Whoever wants to use the Net, has to pay the EMDS tax. No exceptions whatsoever! No EMDS tax – No Internet. Fixed by law. If this rule is not applied, the EMDS won’t work. [Remember that we’re fighting something invincible].
2. Every consumer pays the same tax - no differentiation! If this rule is not applied, the EMDS will again not work.
3. After that, every user has the right to legally download every song or movie that he wants. Unlimited times. The same as in the pirate network, but – legalized, regulated and pre-paid.
4. The money from all the user’s taxes goes into the EMDS gross profit – the budget of the System. There we have categories for “Movies”, “Music”; sub-categories for “Singles”, “Albums”, “Shorts”, “Features” etc. For example 50 % for movies, 50 % for music, etc. Or whatever is appropriate. Whatever.
5. The downloads for every song, album, movie or whatever are counted by a very secure system.
6. The products that have been downloaded most times, get the most money from the EMDS gross profit. For example: a movie is released in the EMDS and it has 6 % of all movie downloads for that month. The result is that it takes 6 % of the gross profit that has been accumulated in the “Movie” category of the EMDS for that month.
7. The EMDS system is administered and controlled by the 1. Entertainment Industries themselves [not state owned or regulated, which would be communist-ique], 2. Unions of EMDS users [acting as counterbalance and protecting the interest of consumers]; 3. The Internet Service Providers [ISPs] who technically provide the Internet access; 4. The Government, whose judiciary system would intervene if some fraud has occurred in the process.
8. These four parties form the EMDS committee. Full accord of all these parties is needed for every decision concerning the system. They also monitor and control the download-counting process for frauds and mistakes. Every party has a right of veto over any EMDS tax increase or whatever change to the system. The monthly EMDS tax is formed by the committee.
9. The EMDS is nation-based. Every country [or every state in the US or wherever] would establish its own EMDS system. EMDS systems in different countries [states] will be coordinated among each other, which means, for example: Local [legal] release of “Die Hard 5”, in the Bulgarian EMDS [whose tax is appropriate for Bulgarian salaries, etc.]. Whatever % “Die Hard 5” takes here – it goes to the authors\companies. The same as current home video distribution but- 1. Easier to administer and control; 2. Easier to use; 3. Possibly cheaper for the common consumer; 4. More profitable for the Industries; 5. [Almost] Perfect :greedy: .

Direct consequences of the eventual EMDS system:

1. Points 1., 2., and 3. [above] annihilate the very temptation and need to use pirated material and thus - annihilates piracy by actually legalizing its technology. This annihilates the demand for pirated content.
2. People get to download freely and legally whatever they like. Their average monthly expenditure for the EMDS tax will be equal or slightly smaller than what they currently spend on CD\DVD purchases and rentals. The reasons for that are: 1. Every Internet user pays the tax; and 2. This tax is the same for all home users.
3. The gross profit that the Industries will have to share will be bigger, guaranteed and – most importantly – progressively increasing, because: 1. The number of Internet users will rise; 2. The EMDS tax will be gradually increased over time [the process is controlled by the EMDS committee]; 3. More countries will eventually establish their own EMDS systems; etc.
4. The money will go where it should – to the most successful authors\companies – those that have been downloaded the most – a fair and just system for distributing profit.
5. The artists\Industries are saved and piracy disappears :sorcerer: .

These and many other reasons and consequences you can read in the full version of this article, here:

http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?t=7753

The article is huge, but to fully understand what I mean, you have to read all of it.

I consider this text as a kind of open-source and non-profit material. My intention is to help. Anyone can criticize or add suggestions to it. I haven’t written this to profit from it but if some part of it has any value - > I wouldn’t want anyone else to individually profit from it either. I’ve already sent it to many institutions in the USA, UK, the EU and my own country. Let’s see what happens.

Being an aspiring artist myself, I’m only looking for solutions to problems.

Everything that I’ve written comes from my own personal experience, my personal use of pirated content and observations on the Internet, piracy and everything else. I’m no expert in hacking, cracking, wacking, smacking or any one of these. I’m just trying to express my POV and hoping that it might help.

And a final word:

All this, is already happening. Millions of people in the world [incl. me ] are already using this system, the number of piracy using users WON'T decrease [read the article to see why]. There’s nothing that can stop this, it’s progress. It’s just that the artists\Industries are currently not profiting from it.

That’s it.

And that’s the shortest I can make it.

Best regards.

can you elaborate?

[Jay A. Kelley]

Jeez, that's a lot of read. I think the movie and music industries could take a huge chunk out of piracy by simply pricing their CDs and DVD and HDDVDs at a more reasonable price - like 5 bucks a disc. This notion of paying $27 for a little plastic disc of a movie I probably already paid 10 or 20 bucks (with a date) to see at the theater is nutso, if you ask me.

A typical Bluray disc takes about 2 days to download, so if they sold it for 5 bucks, it wouldn't be worth it to download it. The sheer volume of sales would skyrocket, as well, if the prices were very low.

I think the Writer's directors, and actors would have something to say abou that...

jay

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

I found the reason for a BIG misunderstanding in my text.

It's the word tax. Sorry, my English is not perfect.

In English tax means tax :), the money you pay to the government for different services - police, education, etc.

But in Bulgarian, the word tax [taksa, такса], means fee or charge :). It all comes from Latin and\or Greek. And we have another word for "tax".

So it's not tax, it's fee or charge. And the EMDS FEE doesn't go to the government budget but to this privately owned and privately controlled system - EMDS.

So, forget tax, please. It's fee - EMDS FEE.

Oh, I need an English editor :).

The Tower of Babylon....

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

I think it's incredibly self-important and out of touch to assume that the entire internet revolves around the entertainment industry (and the pirating of its content) as the major companies and industry organizations do. The system you are proposing is technologically infeasible and massively invasive of personal privacy. If you're going to track who downloads what, you might as well just send them a bill every month for the stuff they downloaded and scrap the tax altogether. That's not even to mention the social problems with treating everybody like a criminal.

How can you track a billion people? That's impossible even for the KGB :matrix:... Hell, f*ck the KGB, it's impossible even for the Matrix :). Neo hacked it, right?

The only thing that would be tracked in the EMDS is how many times a specific movie has ben DLed, nothing else.

And if you think that the Government doesn't track people anyway, you're not well informed.

The question is whether the Gov. has the legal right to use that tracking info or not, but that's a HUGE off-topic.

And the Internet is revolving around the entertainment, I don't have exact figures, but I bet that 2\3 of the traffic in the Net is entertainment.

If it weren't music and movies I'd be using dial-up maybe :). Or at least - I'd be chatting, emailing and browsing for a subscription that costs 1\10 of what I pay now.


I definitely agree that piracy is unavoidable but the best solution is for the industry to adapt with new business models that are less dependent on the prevention of piracy, not massive subsidies paid for by innocent internet users to boost the already healthy profits of a criminally inefficient industry.

This is one of the reasons why piracy exists. When things go wrong, the Universe invents a solution - communism, piracy, barbarian hordes, etc. :)

Communism obviously wasn't the solution for the problems of capitalism. It was a symptom.

Piracy isn't the solution for the problems of an inadequate industry. But it's a symptom, all right.

What are the real solutions?

Well, it's not easy...

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

can you elaborate?

I see that you're making fun of me. That's fine. :)

The HUGE elaboration is in the HUGE thread. :red_bandana:

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

Jeez, that's a lot of read. I think the movie and music industries could take a huge chunk out of piracy by simply pricing their CDs and DVD and HDDVDs at a more reasonable price - like 5 bucks a disc. This notion of paying $27 for a little plastic disc of a movie I probably already paid 10 or 20 bucks (with a date) to see at the theater is nutso, if you ask me.

A typical Bluray disc takes about 2 days to download, so if they sold it for 5 bucks, it wouldn't be worth it to download it. The sheer volume of sales would skyrocket, as well, if the prices were very low.

M-hm. And that's the exact reason why RED will decapitate the big bois, it's just a smarter approach. Riskier, but also smarter and better.

Of course the two fields aren't completely comparable.

[Craig W. Bickerstaff]

Jeez, that's a lot of read. I think the movie and music industries could take a huge chunk out of piracy by simply pricing their CDs and DVD and HDDVDs at a more reasonable price - like 5 bucks a disc. This notion of paying $27 for a little plastic disc of a movie I probably already paid 10 or 20 bucks (with a date) to see at the theater is nutso, if you ask me.

A typical Bluray disc takes about 2 days to download, so if they sold it for 5 bucks, it wouldn't be worth it to download it. The sheer volume of sales would skyrocket, as well, if the prices were very low.

Geez Tom your one hell of a cheapskate. Distribution isn't exactly cheap you know you gotta make money on these movies somehow.

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

Geez Tom your one hell of a cheapskate. Distribution isn't exactly cheap you know you gotta make money on these movies somehow.

Internet distribution is cheaper. And the plastics go away.

[noclip]

And the Internet is revolving around the entertainment, I don't have exact figures, but I bet that 2\3 of the traffic in the Net is entertainment.

If it weren't music and movies I'd be using dial-up maybe :). Or at least - I'd be chatting, emailing and browsing for a subscription that costs 1\10 of what I pay now.

Actually, roughly 80 percent of all internet traffic was spam as of 2006 [ref (http://www.maawg.org/news/maawg060308)], and that number has only gone up.

[Tom Lowe]

Geez Tom your one hell of a cheapskate. Distribution isn't exactly cheap you know you gotta make money on these movies somehow.

The idea that we should be paying $27.99 + tax for a flimsy HDDVD disk that costs about dollar to make seems crazy to me. Especially when most of us already paid full price to see it at the theater! Digital P2P is a reality. You cannot put the toothpaste back into the tube. So they can either deal with reality, or continue this insane policy of attacking average Americans with lawsuits and harassment.

If you priced Blurays at $5.99 or something, you would see the total number of units sold soar by 1000% probably, and piracy would plummet.

[luis bustamante]

I read your HUGE thread and this one as well. I can see how you've really thought about this and it's great that you've taken the time to publish it here.

Here's my thoughts on your proposal:

I agree that the Internet as a mass media channel and business model doesn't quite fit in the capitalistic world we live in and makes it clear that a new economic system will have to emerge in the near future but, that being said, I don't see your solution for the piracy problem as a viable one in the current state of things.

I can't see how it would be implemented in a global scale. Even theoretically speaking, if it somehow were to be implemented, a lot of factors, such as corruption, would get in the way of getting the global EMDS fee to the hands of the producers and studios.

The way you put it, it seems only large studios would have the resources to accurately measure how much their stuff has been downloaded, Independent producers would have a real hard time getting their fair share of the pie. Even the system used to keep track of downloads could be hacked and it seems like a nightmare logistically to implement such a huge control system. Remember there would be millions of dollars involved, and human greed can go a very long way.

The solution I see is simple (call me crazy): Content will have to be free. And I believe eventually it will get to that point (look at youtube and similar sites). In fact, if you ask the internet pirates and leachers, it already is!

From my point of view, any type of product that is trafficked with in a pure data state will have to be free or else it will be pirated. Revenue will have to come from other sources. I think people will eventually buy less dvd's, cd's or digital copies of whatever they want (including software) as piracy becomes more accessible and condoned by legal systems globally.

Either the studios will have to adapt to a model similar to free access TV or they will have to come up with innovative ways to get money off people (something as simple as a good, solid theatrical experience comes to mind, but even something as simple as that has been almost destroyed by the lack of interest and overconfidence of the theater owners in general).

On the other hand, solutions like the itunes store seem to be giving people who want to be honest an easy way to get their content fix. But I would say that for 1 willing to pay there's a 100 who won't (that's my estimate, do not take seriously!). Or, on the other hand a good model could be the one proposed by Radiohead, let people decide if they pay or not.

So, in the end, for me at least, it all comes to the content producers and distributors admitting they're fighting an already lost fight, regrouping and start looking for innovative and viable alternative sources for income. They have to start being less optimistic (greedy?) and more realistic on the returns for their investments, and this will inevitably shrink budgets to more conservative and manageable figures.

This will cause reductions in crew sizes and will embrace the use of cheaper technologies in all aspects of production (cue in RED as a herald of this revolution) and new production philosophies such as the one presented (brilliantly) in the DV REBEL GUIDE by Stu Maschwitz.

If this were to happen we could even get to a point in which huge corporations/studios might lose a lot of their current grasp once they see that the revenue is not big enough for them to care and we will (hopefully) get to a point in which the majority of the content is produced independently and with other purposes than just making huge amounts of money. It's a fact that a vast and almost infinite audience is ready and craving for good, entertaining content for free via the internet.

That's my POV, what do you think?

The best,

[luis bustamante]

Just read Tom's last comment and he also has a point. Decrease price, increase volume sales (and maybe gross margins). But I don't know, I still think a lot of people will prefer FREE to 5 or 3 dollars. Piracy won the battle a long time ago, me thinks. Just my $.02

[Aiden Cornwell]

A few points.

1. The U.S. needs to open up selling t.v. shows and movies online to the world not just the U.S. By limiting the legal access to purchase online content it leads to people having no other option but to learn how to use file sharing programs in order to download the missed episode of 24, Lost or what ever show was missed.

2. SPEND THE MONEY TO SHUT DOWN PIRATE SHOPS. Instead of suing 12 year olds and college students go after the massive pirate shops overseas.

3. Lower prices for online content. Right now $1.99 for a tv show is nuts. According to the Digital production buzz per person per show is about 5 cents. Charge 5.00 for the season. Or introduce advertising models that work.

However the biggest mistake they made is blocking international sales. They have told everyone outside of the U.S. that they do not want our money so what do they expect.

[Craig W. Bickerstaff]

The idea that we should be paying $27.99 + tax for a flimsy HDDVD disk that costs about dollar to make seems crazy to me. Especially when most of us already paid full price to see it at the theater! Digital P2P is a reality. You cannot put the toothpaste back into the tube. So they can either deal with reality, or continue this insane policy of attacking average Americans with lawsuits and harassment.

If you priced Blurays at $5.99 or something, you would see the total number of units sold soar by 1000% probably, and piracy would plummet.

When you buy a Blu-ray disc an HD DVD or a DVD your paying for more than a couple bucks worth of manufacturing and material. Your buying a Product that artists have put hundreds and thousands of man hours and creativity into $12 - $18 would be a more reasonable number in my mind seeing as thats how much DVDs tend to go for on Amazon.

Personally I don't think P2P is a threat at all, If anything the best way to counter stuff like that is to provide cheap online downloads for the P2P users and hope that they either go for that or are simply the type that will grab a movie just to watch it once before purchasing it.

[Craig W. Bickerstaff]

Internet distribution is cheaper. And the plastics go away.

To me internet Distribution is no more than a secondary format. What I want is a product something I can hold in my hand and admire the artwork or the build quality. Those aluminum cases they sometimes ship in the rack in another $10 - $20 for example.
Something I can hook up to a projector and blow it up to 15 feet with out seeing macro blocking up the wazoo, Behind the scenes multiple audio tracks Directors commentary.

This shitty internet downloads crap isn't for me.

[Gavin Greenwalt]

The solution to piracy is to offer convenience.

Those who have the time to spend 15 minutes searching for a torrent and then another 2 days downloading are the same individuals who don't have the money to buy it in the first place. Problem solved.

The market who purchases DVDs are the same market who has a lot of disposable cash. You get these people impulse buying 5 movies a month and they'll never pirate a movie.

The demographics of piracy usually weight towards those who either A) consume an enormous amount of content on an order of magnitude which vastly outgrosses their income and B) Those who just don't see it as worth their money.

Neither market is the prime market and fighting it isn't going to increase revenues. You have to go after the affluent, impulse viewer who watches a lot of movies and barely thinks of the costs. These are the people with the 1000 DVD collections. Little timmy who would have purchased 5 or 6 DVDs a year is your prime pirate and but not your prime customer.

Make it a hastle to pirate and painless to buy. That's how you do it.

[James T Mather]

I see that you're making fun of me. That's fine. :)

The HUGE elaboration is in the HUGE thread. :red_bandana:

Only kidding :) - good that someone is considering a solution. Keep it up.

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

Only kidding :) - good that someone is considering a solution. Keep it up.

I know :).

I'm planning to attack local authorities with my crazy theories.

The problem is that some local :red_bandana: might pay me a not-so-nice visit.

But they should be happy actually, cause they will also become legal distributors, sharing a bigger profit.

[ColinSmith]

I've read an analysis of this kind of proposal, and the economics came out quite surprising, as remember, an additional charge of about $25 per month on everybody's internet connection is enough to give the media industries the same income they currently get from sales.........

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

The idea that we should be paying $27.99 + tax for a flimsy HDDVD disk that costs about dollar to make seems crazy to me. Especially when most of us already paid full price to see it at the theater! Digital P2P is a reality. You cannot put the toothpaste back into the tube. So they can either deal with reality, or continue this insane policy of attacking average Americans with lawsuits and harassment.

If you priced Blurays at $5.99 or something, you would see the total number of units sold soar by 1000% probably, and piracy would plummet.

That's another similar approach which would also work, IMHO.


I agree that the Internet as a mass media channel and business model doesn't quite fit in the capitalistic world we live in and makes it clear that a new economic system will have to emerge in the near future but, that being said, I don't see your solution for the piracy problem as a viable one in the current state of things.

Please, let's keep it just about Internet distribution. A debate on economic systems could become catastrophic. ;)

And you're right. Things aren't there yet for a system like the EMDS to work.


I can't see how it would be implemented in a global scale. Even theoretically speaking, if it somehow were to be implemented, a lot of factors, such as corruption, would get in the way of getting the global EMDS fee to the hands of the producers and studios.

I don't think that a global system would work. Each nation [and even state in the US or.. India] should have it's separate system. Otherwise it will become too big to operate.


The way you put it, it seems only large studios would have the resources to accurately measure how much their stuff has been downloaded, Independent producers would have a real hard time getting their fair share of the pie. Even the system used to keep track of downloads could be hacked and it seems like a nightmare logistically to implement such a huge control system. Remember there would be millions of dollars involved, and human greed can go a very long way.

The accent that I tried to put is on making home users and Indie artists happy. The system should not give privileges to big studios. Small and big subjects should have equal right to upload their stuff and then - let the best ones win. That will take a good bite off the big Studios' cake, but will also keep them from collapsing.


The solution I see is simple (call me crazy): Content will have to be free. And I believe eventually it will get to that point (look at youtube and similar sites). In fact, if you ask the internet pirates and leachers, it already is!

It is.


From my point of view, any type of product that is trafficked with in a pure data state will have to be free or else it will be pirated. Revenue will have to come from other sources. I think people will eventually buy less dvd's, cd's or digital copies of whatever they want (including software) as piracy becomes more accessible and condoned by legal systems globally.

By then we will both be grandpas. :)


Or, on the other hand a good model could be the one proposed by Radiohead, let people decide if they pay or not.

I was recently on an open-culture theater performance and it was just like that - you pay if you want. It was good and all people paid, some paid two times. But this is for more cultured people, the mass audience would cheat like hell :).


They have to start being less optimistic (greedy?) and more realistic on the returns for their investments, and this will inevitably shrink budgets to more conservative and manageable figures.

And that can't be bad. 300 mln. $ budget for something that's usually crap [not always!] while people die of hunger and disease... not good.


If this were to happen we could even get to a point in which huge corporations/studios might lose a lot of their current grasp once they see that the revenue is not big enough for them to care and we will (hopefully) get to a point in which the majority of the content is produced independently and with other purposes than just making huge amounts of money. It's a fact that a vast and almost infinite audience is ready and craving for good, entertaining content for free via the internet.

That's an absolute fact. People will ALWAYS need good stories. As long as there's people - there will be need for movies.

Whatever the future is... I think it can only get better....


2. SPEND THE MONEY TO SHUT DOWN PIRATE SHOPS. Instead of suing 12 year olds and college students go after the massive pirate shops overseas.

How will that happen? :mellow:


3. Lower prices for online content. Right now $1.99 for a tv show is nuts. According to the Digital production buzz per person per show is about 5 cents. Charge 5.00 for the season. Or introduce advertising models that work.

Yes, that's in the same vicinity, me thinks.


To me internet Distribution is no more than a secondary format. What I want is a product something I can hold in my hand and admire the artwork or the build quality. Those aluminum cases they sometimes ship in the rack in another $10 - $20 for example.
Something I can hook up to a projector and blow it up to 15 feet with out seeing macro blocking up the wazoo, Behind the scenes multiple audio tracks Directors commentary.

This shitty internet downloads crap isn't for me.

You don't know where to look ;).

720p HDRip and BDrips are beautiful. My PC is too slow for the 1080p ones, but 720p copies are also very good.


Those who have the time to spend 15 minutes searching for a torrent and then another 2 days downloading are the same individuals who don't have the money to buy it in the first place. Problem solved.

The market who purchases DVDs are the same market who has a lot of disposable cash. You get these people impulse buying 5 movies a month and they'll never pirate a movie.

The demographics of piracy usually weight towards those who either A) consume an enormous amount of content on an order of magnitude which vastly outgrosses their income and B) Those who just don't see it as worth their money.

Neither market is the prime market and fighting it isn't going to increase revenues. You have to go after the affluent, impulse viewer who watches a lot of movies and barely thinks of the costs. These are the people with the 1000 DVD collections. Little timmy who would have purchased 5 or 6 DVDs a year is your prime pirate and but not your prime customer.

Make it a hastle to pirate and painless to buy. That's how you do it.

2 days download, what r u talking about? 1-3 hours max for a 4.5 Gb DVD and double for the 9. And speeds will go up.

In this way a huge part of the world audience is lost for legal payment forever.

And a big part in rich countries too.


I've read an analysis of this kind of proposal, and the economics came out quite surprising, as remember, an additional charge of about $25 per month on everybody's internet connection is enough to give the media industries the same income they currently get from sales.........

Good too hear that. Actually, one doesn't have to bee a genius to see the obvious. :sorcerer:

Do you have a link? I'm curious of what "the competition" is up to? ;)

[Nathan Buxton]

paying a fee to access the internet? i already do that. I dont download music that i dont own and i dont download movies at all. this is not a very good idea... it is fundamentally flawed.

[luis bustamante]

Whatever the future is... I think it can only get better...

Totally agree.

I think it won't be as long as you imply to start seeing the true effects of the internet on mass media distribution. Because of the nature itself of the internet, it's really the end users who have the true power to decide how things will work. The thing is that neither them or the corporations have realized this shift in power yet. But the realization is coming, we're getting closer every day.

Regarding the Radiohead model, it might be one of the most viable options for the time being. As you say, a lot of people would cheat (not pay a dime). But those are the ones who would pirate the content anyway, so, judging by the current state of things, going after their money is already a lost cause (because you can't really fight piracy, as i explained in my last post). Better to let them have it free and retain control of the channel, the quality of the product and delivery and effectively limit trafficking of hard copies via black markets, which won't cease to exist no matter what, but at least would be severely impacted if the goods were easily accessible, free and in better quality than the low quality copies they distribute.

Also, a model like this is a godsend for independent content producers: It allows to communicate directly with the audience and bypass all other intermediate parts of the chain. This way you maximize profit and retain full control of all aspects of production and distribution.

Also, as I mentioned on my last post, the accessibility of newer technology (like RED) plus this new ways of getting the content to people are what will truly revolutionize our industry.

Just Like R. Stallman said: we'll leave the big cathedral model to favor the small, hectic bazaars. Open source! I can see a future which has thousands (or even millions) of really tiny 'studios' making available all kinds of content to the public, some good, some bad, and some amazing. The good stuff will float to the top as it usually does. Blogs and sites like Digg are a clear example of how the voice of the end user is starting to get a lot of power, and traditional communication channels are losing ground every day.

We're still a long way before the content producers realize that we don't really need the big studios or the big established channels to reach the huge audience that's sitting behind their computers right now. As it won't be long before users realize that they indeed have final say on what products they buy and how they do it.

The true power of the internet is something that we haven't fully understand yet and the effects it will have on every aspect of our life are still to be seen at its full.

I apologize if it seems I got a bit out of topic, but I think that if we want to find a real, viable solution to piracy we must first understand the changes that our industry is going through to be able to see the whole picture.

[Gavin Greenwalt]

I've read an analysis of this kind of proposal, and the economics came out quite surprising, as remember, an additional charge of about $25 per month on everybody's internet connection is enough to give the media industries the same income they currently get from sales.........

And then what economic incentive would they have to improve and compete? If $25 a month for unlimited downloads in high quality is ecnomically feasible for them... then offer $40 a month subscription service to all media. I'd pay it.

We already have the blank CD/VHS Tax. I would rather not extend it to the internet as well.

[number6]

karapetkov, your solution, even if the fee were to be tied to an internet users bandwidth usage as a method of assessing the fee, is too elegant. Therefore, it can not be implemented.

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Yeah but what about people who move gigs of footage? They would be taxed along with the pirates. The distribution industry might be happy but the production and post production industry would be getting shafted. What are they going to tax? $14 per 600MB? (The cost of a DVD?) How do you count IPTV? If I watch a day's worth of IPTV I've probably downloaded a few GBs. But I'm also watching ads?

And what about datacenters? The people who contribute the least to piracy per MB. Google's fees would skyrocket.

And what about those of us who are already paying for our online media? Double dipping is it not?

[number6]

Yeah but what about people who move gigs of footage? They would be taxed along with the pirates. The distribution industry might be happy but the production and post production industry would be getting shafted. What are they going to tax? $14 per 600MB? (The cost of a DVD?) How do you count IPTV? If I watch a day's worth of IPTV I've probably downloaded a few GBs. But I'm also watching ads?

And what about datacenters? The people who contribute the least to piracy per MB. Google's fees would skyrocket.

And what about those of us who are already paying for our online media? Double dipping is it not?

Don't know if there would be some way to identify media content as separate from other traffic or not... but even if they could, it's too late. It seems the norm has become that it takes a catastrophic occurrence to initiate change after something has become ingrained.

The model A Ford was built to run on ethanol, but apparently it didn't get a hold on the fuel market before gasoline became ubiquitous. Too bad. Seeing what will work better and causing it to happen are two different things entirely.

edit: just realized this thread was complementary to another one posted by Karapetkov. Tried to read it but he lost me when he said that the thread was not about scantily clad women. Sorry.

[Priyesh P.]

I've read an analysis of this kind of proposal, and the economics came out quite surprising, as remember, an additional charge of about $25 per month on everybody's internet connection is enough to give the media industries the same income they currently get from sales.........

That sounds waaaay too much for me. That must be Theatre fees, DVD rentals and sales, Free tv licenses, CD sales and all other revenues together. Anyway, since people in poorer countries can't pay that much we in the richer countries would have to compensate. what'd that cost? 50 bucks? or 100?

[Andrew Kimery]

When you buy a Blu-ray disc an HD DVD or a DVD your paying for more than a couple bucks worth of manufacturing and material. Your buying a Product that artists have put hundreds and thousands of man hours and creativity into $12 - $18 would be a more reasonable number in my mind seeing as thats how much DVDs tend to go for on Amazon.


You are also paying for all the R&D that went into creating the players and discs so I don't think it's unreasonable for a brand new format to cost more than a decade old one.

Tom, the bulk of the costs isn't in the medium itself, but what's contained on the medium. If you think movies are overpriced I don't want to know what you think about video games ($50-$60 per plastic disc) or editing software (hundreds of dollars per plastic disc).:ohmy:


-A

[Mark Thorpe]

I dunno what it is with you guys......the ONLY way to beat Piracy is to sink their boats!!

[conrad gaunt]

There`s no point being a pirate, if it ain`t illegal. My sister works on a cruise ship, but I`m still not sure I want to ban pirates.
Apparently, according to my sister, if the ship is attacked they would use a sonic gun to deafen the pirates. its quite effective apparently, and fires out a mixture of popular western music. I`m not sure which is the bigger crime. keep illegality. The thing your talking about is called `free marketing`. It seems to me, at least 9 out of 10 films I watch (approx.), are total crap. Crap writing, crap acting, crap characters (whom I rarely feel empathy towards), wrapped up in, generally speaking, unoriginal, crap plots. Often these films have perfectly acceptable cinematography and sound. Makes you wonder why the producers don`t just re-make old films, cash in on the brand, and reduce the risks. Oh, yeah,they do, often. Its about money, more than art, too often. I don`t usually see the best films advertised, strangely, so I stick mainly to watching documentaries. I hope some of my work gets pirated in the future. Long live blue beard.


I found the reason for a BIG misunderstanding in my text.

It's the word tax. Sorry, my English is not perfect.

In English tax means tax :), the money you pay to the government for different services - police, education, etc.

But in Bulgarian, the word tax [taksa, такса], means fee or charge :). It all comes from Latin and\or Greek. And we have another word for "tax".

So it's not tax, it's fee or charge. And the EMDS FEE doesn't go to the government budget but to this privately owned and privately controlled system - EMDS.

So, forget tax, please. It's fee - EMDS FEE.

Oh, I need an English editor :).

The Tower of Babylon....

different services = `merit` and `public` goods, goods that it is impossible or not practical to charge for on an individual basis (eg street lights / air forces etc)

My one shillings worth, Personally, I`ll start paying tax again when Britain and its allies stop dropping bombs onto afghan schools from 40 thousand (killing 175), and justifying it by saying "intelligence reports suggested Osama Binladen might be in the area" .Yeah right, so lets kill the kids just in case. W****ers. Tax funds governments, and sponsors politicians, so should be avoided at all costs. Give to charity, friends and family instead.

[conrad gaunt]

!!!!!

[Tom Lowe]

You are also paying for all the R&D that went into creating the players and discs so I don't think it's unreasonable for a brand new format to cost more than a decade old one.

Tom, the bulk of the costs isn't in the medium itself, but what's contained on the medium. If you think movies are overpriced I don't want to know what you think about video games ($50-$60 per plastic disc) or editing software (hundreds of dollars per plastic disc).:ohmy:


-A


Movies have dozens of ways to make money, especially starting with theatrical runs. Plus cable, TV, merchandising... etc. Again, if you ask me to pay 30 bucks for a plastic disc of a movie I already paid to see at the theater, I probably won't buy many, thanks to the ease of digital technology. But if you price the disks at 6 bucks, I would probably go out and buy 20 of them in a day, to build up a collection.

This is just my personal opinion. Digital technology is real. It's here to stay. So the industry should deal with the realities of the situation, not stick to the old ways.

[Tom Lowe]

Let's look at this way:

If they priced the discs at $5.99 and managed to squeeze a $1.00 profit out of each disc, and they sell 20 discs = $20 profit.

If they try to squeeze $10.00 out of each disc sold at $25 dollars and only sell one disc = $10 profit.

Most people I know would pay the 6 bucks and build up a huge collection of their favorite movies in HD. But digital sharing technology makes paying 25 bucks unreasonable, when I could download it so much easier, for free.

I'm not saying it's right or wrong; I'm saying this is the reality. Let's remember that this industry has always had trouble coming to grips with the realities of technology. Remember all the lawsuits against VHS and BETA manufacturers back in the 80s?

[ColinSmith]

The two I've found are linked below, but are mostly based on music only

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/09/23/orlowski_interactive_keynote/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/02/01/free_legal_downloads/

If you want to imagine all the music/tv/film available on public P2P services for free, with id tags to do the accounting and split the monthly charges up between the IP holder..... the only downside would seem to be that it would likely reduce demand for new material, in a similar way to the iPod has, by giving easy access to older "favorites".



That sounds waaaay too much for me. That must be Theatre fees, DVD rentals and sales, Free tv licenses, CD sales and all other revenues together. Anyway, since people in poorer countries can't pay that much we in the richer countries would have to compensate. what'd that cost? 50 bucks? or 100?

Yeah, it could be that number is high....... the links I've found are talking on $6 a month for music.....I thought there was one that covered film too and came out at £10ish....my bad memory maybe.

The numbers are calculated on current broadband usage though, as far as I make out that means people in poorer countries could get it all for free and the media associations still get their same income.

[Gavin Greenwalt]

There is something to what Tom is saying:

It all goes back to impulse buying. If you stop and think about it piracy is cheaper. It's going to win. You have to catch people off guard and have them put down money before they think too carefully about it like "Is this a good movie? Have I heard anything good about it from friends? Is this worth the money? Should I go home and pirate it?"

If people start thinking about it they're going to rationalize all sorts of reasons why they should just pirate it.

If however films are priced at around $6 it's descended into the impulse buy economics. "Oh hey XYZs from Mars. I've heard that name before, sure why not." They have to get it into their hands and to the checkout counter before they've realized that they've wasted $6.

I've spent SOOOooo much more money on Xbox Live in $2 increments then the entire year in purchases previously because it's practically nothing (what 5 minutes of wages?) and it's right there ready to go, you don't even have to leave the couch.

You defeat piracy through exploiting people's laziness.

The most brilliant marketing move I"ve ever seen was 28 days later. Put up 15 minutes of the film... and then provide a link to buy it. Imagine if downloads were available back then. Watch the first 15 minutes free... then provide a link to pay to see the rest for $3. That's a gold mine right there.

[conrad gaunt]

Create machine to `scratch` discs as they`re produced (in a controlled/psuedo random manner), then adjust software to check scratch is in correct place by attempting to read `scratched` area during install (by changing a few bytes in each executable printed to disc, so it can find the scratched sector, making each disc unique). If scratch isn`t in the right place (ie, data can be read from `scratched` disc sector), allow installation of software anyway (so hacker thinks his job is done), but stop it functioning after,say , a month (which would be annoying). Confuse pirate by reporting false system errors when shutdown happens (so he thinks the software is buggy, rather than savvy). Periodically, make software check install disc. Since `Scratches` can`t be copied, and often prevent software from copying such discs, distributing uncracked discs would be slightly harder too. Hacker will adjust executable from correctly installed software, eventually, but traditional software based anti-crack techniques could be deployed also. I`ll try to imagine a better method. Er, actually, I won`t bother.

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

The most brilliant marketing move I"ve ever seen was 28 days later. Put up 15 minutes of the film... and then provide a link to buy it. Imagine if downloads were available back then. Watch the first 15 minutes free... then provide a link to pay to see the rest for $3. That's a gold mine right there.

But if it still sucks? :) [not 28, in general]

A very common practice among my friends, and also in trackers is that - people download the pirated copy, watch it, and if they've liked it they comment like "Oh, I gotta see it in the theater". And they do.

Why should I pay and also waste time for something if I'm not sure it's worth it?

Of course, there's always a risk, but I'm not a gambling person and legal downloads would be cheaper on that too.

[ColinSmith]

You defeat piracy through exploiting people's laziness.


I think this is a big issue, from both sides.

iTunes works because it makes buying music easy, almost to the extent that it is not worth hunting down a decent torrent. The price is a little high, because people still do that, but if it dropped a little..... could tip things over that "laziness" edge.

The other side is when your DRM / protection scheme causes more work for your genuine customer than a cracked copy does for the downloader - if you loose their sympathy.....

[Andrew Kimery]

Movies have dozens of ways to make money, especially starting with theatrical runs. Plus cable, TV, merchandising... etc. Again, if you ask me to pay 30 bucks for a plastic disc of a movie I already paid to see at the theater, I probably won't buy many, thanks to the ease of digital technology.

Prices for HD movies will come down just like prices for DVD movies did. Speaking of DVDs, the DVD market (sales and rentals) accounts for the majority of a movie's revenue (and many times means the difference between profit and loss) so it's not surprising that people trend lightly when it comes to messing w/their golden goose. The multiple revenue streams is what allows DVD's to have a lower sale price compared to production costs when compared to things distributed on optical media (music, video games, etc.,.). Your average video game budget is much lower than your average hollywood movie budget (around 15mil compared to around 70mil, IIRC) but that flimsy plastic disc holding video game data is $50-60 where as the same disc holding movie data is $15-$30 (depending on if it's SD or HD).



Let's look at this way:

If they priced the discs at $5.99 and managed to squeeze a $1.00 profit out of each disc, and they sell 20 discs = $20 profit.

If they try to squeeze $10.00 out of each disc sold at $25 dollars and only sell one disc = $10 profit.
What if they sell 3 $25 discs? I'm assuming you've done the research to show how a business model like that would be successful. :biggrin:



I'm not saying it's right or wrong; I'm saying this is the reality. Let's remember that this industry has always had trouble coming to grips with the realities of technology. Remember all the lawsuits against VHS and BETA manufacturers back in the 80s?
Remember when the movie studios wanted to offer on-line stores like the iTMS lower prices for downloadable movies, but B&M retailers like Wal-Mart and Target rattled their sabers loud enough to scuttle those plans?

I'm not saying I don't want cheaper prices, and I'm not saying I don't think prices could be cheaper. I'm just not sold that the seemingly arbitrary price of $5.99 is the magic number.


I've spent SOOOooo much more money on Xbox Live in $2 increments then the entire year in purchases previously because it's practically nothing (what 5 minutes of wages?) and it's right there ready to go, you don't even have to leave the couch.

It's interesting you bring up micro-transactions because that's a pretty touchy subject in the gaming world. Many people are upset by it because they see it as a way for game makers to charge for things that normally would be offered free or included in the game in the first place. Of course game makers basically ignore the criticism 'cause they know eventually people will get tired of complaining and accept micro-transactions as standard operating procedure.

EDIT: If you dropped the price down that low so you had to depend on huge volume sales do you think that would further "degrade" the quality/originality of movies because you'd have to a appeal to an even wider audience that you do now?


-A

[Craig W. Bickerstaff]

Let's look at this way:

If they priced the discs at $5.99 and managed to squeeze a $1.00 profit out of each disc, and they sell 20 discs = $20 profit.

If they try to squeeze $10.00 out of each disc sold at $25 dollars and only sell one disc = $10 profit.

Most people I know would pay the 6 bucks and build up a huge collection of their favorite movies in HD. But digital sharing technology makes paying 25 bucks unreasonable, when I could download it so much easier, for free.

I'm not saying it's right or wrong; I'm saying this is the reality. Let's remember that this industry has always had trouble coming to grips with the realities of technology. Remember all the lawsuits against VHS and BETA manufacturers back in the 80s?

And just like back in the 80s VHS and Beta didn't bankrupt the movie business.
Your approaching this like there's only one type of person in this world or maybe even 2, Yourself and everyone else. Fact is there will always be people who wouldn't buy a movie after they've seen in the movies but there will also be plenty of people who do.
There's also the rental market on tuesdays I can get a weekly DVD up the road at the video store for $1NZD each I've seen a lot of movies this way sure as hell beat the hell out of the download I could have got.
There's always the cheap people who would rather not pay to rent or own but that doesn't mean we have to start selling discs at lower prices they aren't going to buy them no matter how much they cost.

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

paying a fee to access the internet? i already do that. I dont download music that i dont own and i dont download movies at all. this is not a very good idea... it is fundamentally flawed.

CD\DVD rental and sales expenditures would disappear. Noone would ban these practices but they would become unnecessary.

Time\energy\extra money lost on ordering, going back and forth to the rental, etc., would also disappear.

The only thing left would be one monthly payment (along with the Internet access fee) and the possibility for unlimited legal clicks. The result - time and money saved.

From the moral POV - you would also be supporting [and actually saving] independent artists and giving them bigger chances for success and income.

[Musicians in my country are in a financial and social knock-down, if not - knock-out].

The very purpose of such a system is to protect and benefit the:

- home users;
- indie artists.

One thing is certain - people will always want to listen to good music and watch good films. And they will always be ready to pay a reasonable price for that.

Big companies and established artists are already wealthy and powerful. It's the new talent that need protection and support.

Which makes me think more and more that such a system should be under constant and intensive public control - individual consumers, unions of customers, citizens, unions of indie artists, etc.

Someone said that "The road to hell is covered with good intentions...".

[For reference - check the "communist" "revolution" in Russia and "communist" regimes of Eastern Europe in the years 1917-1991.]

I come to realize that such a system, as attractive as it may seem in theory, may become something really ugly...

So, the big boys and the eventual legal trackers should be closely and constantly watched for frauds and trying to steal the success of smaller indie artists\companies.

And also for trying to raise the monthly fee out of greed and without good reasons.

The small should have an equal power like the big ones and even bigger. Just like economy and a democratic society:

- Small and middle businesses are the backbone of a healthy market economy. Not the huge companies; and...

- The middle class is the backbone of a healthy democratic society. Rich people are a necessary evil. Poor people are [maybe] unavoidable collateral damage...


We already have the blank CD/VHS Tax. I would rather not extend it to the internet as well.

Really? I didn't know. Where does it go? In your federal budget or?


karapetkov, your solution, even if the fee were to be tied to an internet users bandwidth usage as a method of assessing the fee, is too elegant. Therefore, it can not be implemented.

Well, thanks :). I actually thought it was a bit brutal :devil: ... Let's hope you're wrong ;).


edit: just realized this thread was complementary to another one posted by Karapetkov. Tried to read it but he lost me when he said that the thread was not about scantily clad women. Sorry.

I knew it. I should've based it all on "Amsterdam". Basic instincts... ;)


I dunno what it is with you guys......the ONLY way to beat Piracy is to sink their boats!!

LOL. "Captain... Jack Sparrow!" ;).


The two I've found are linked below, but are mostly based on music only

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/09/23/orlowski_interactive_keynote/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/02/01/free_legal_downloads/


They beat me to it, hehe. :bleh:

This reads 2004 but still, nothing has been done? Maybe the Big Bois need to lose a little more to consider it.


I think this is a big issue, from both sides.

iTunes works because it makes buying music easy, almost to the extent that it is not worth hunting down a decent torrent.

Not buying music is even easier ;). Or buying cheaper. Especially if I can spend the money for something else.

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Oh micro-transactions are the customers worst enemy no doubt. Especially with Microsoft's obfuscation of removing dollars from the equation with spending "Microsoft Points". 160 Microsoft points? No problem! That's not real money!

They're also an elegant way to fight piracy. I think I had on average purchased about 3 games per console for the N64, Dreamcast and Xbox. Since buying my 360 I've easily spent $300 in the movie and arcade marketplace and have about 10 games. Microsoft has perfected the art of the impulse sell. The wii might be selling pretty well but I just can't imagine Microsoft not making a killing off the 360 even with the high failure rate with the downloads and software attach rate.

If they could manage to halve their prices I would probably exclusively get my TV through them and increase my volume of downloads by 4x. That's the economics of the impulse sell. You get people hooked on it and you save marginal amounts of money and in response spend rediculously amounts more. You make movies feel like they're free and people will pay through the nose.

I'm also not sure that lowering prices requires you to be even more 'accessible to a wide audience'. In a lot of ways it makes you inherently more accessible. Instead of seeing that art house film and thinking to yourself: Hmmm $18 for something that might be worthless. It's: $5 whatever if it sucks I didn't lose much anyway. I'm feeling that exact pain right now with the Sundance downloads. $2... whatever if it sucks I'm only out $2.

IF I made a short film and tried to sell it on REDUser I imagine if I charged $8 I would get 10-15 buys unless I was well known. If I put up my short film on REDUser for $1 I imagine I could probably get 100 buys. If the independent film makers wants to make money they need to sell at a price where the risk of failure on the consumer's side is so low that they don't second guess the purchase.

Movies are like food there are tons of great restaurants all around you, but you only eat at the places you know are good. Because it's just too great of a risk to waste a meal on bad food.

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

Movies are like food there are tons of great restaurants all around you, but you only eat at the places you know are good. Because it's just too great of a risk to waste a meal on bad food.

But bad movies usually don't make you vomit ;).

Just regret...

... wait... Actually, that's debatable - the AVP BULLSH*TS ! came pretty close to making me puke. :angry2:

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

I have another suggestion.

It's about the pirated "CAM" copies of new movies - the ones that are captured with small cameras from a real theater and distributed in the pirate network. Most of the time this happens even before the official release of new movies.

Now that HD video is becoming more and more popular, the companies can kill the CAM releases by simply releasing their own crappy SD copy of the new movie. For free.

Minimum visual and sound quality.

Every user would be able to download it for free and decide if they want to go to the theater and\or purchase the HD-DVD copies, which are way better.

This would kill the CAM releases by accepting them.

Actually I suspect that it's the companies themselves that tolerate and allow the CAM releases and the "leaked" DVD-Screener copies... to create buzz.

Only good movies should receive revenues.

[Andrew Kimery]

The wii might be selling pretty well but I just can't imagine Microsoft not making a killing off the 360 even with the high failure rate with the downloads and software attach rate.
The Wii is still outselling the PS3 and 360 like mad *and* the Wii console has been a profitable sale since launch (traditionally hardware sales are at a loss for the first few years of a console's life). The Wii has "vintage" game sales as well and the 360 has already lost like 1-2 billion dollars due to hardware failures (D'oh). MS made the classic "indie mistake" of apparently saving a nickel on Friday even though it'll cost'em a dollar on Monday.

When looking at the price point of games in the XBL Arcade, PS Network, or Wii Virtual Console you should keep in mind that the games being sold there are either very inexpensive games to make or they are "classic" games that recouped their original costs years ago (possibly even decades ago) and are now being resold at pretty much pure profit. We aren't going to see Halo 4 or the next Mario Kart released for just a few bucks at the on-line store next to Joust or ToeJam & Earl.




IF I made a short film and tried to sell it on REDUser I imagine if I charged $8 I would get 10-15 buys unless I was well known. If I put up my short film on REDUser for $1 I imagine I could probably get 100 buys. If the independent film makers wants to make money they need to sell at a price where the risk of failure on the consumer's side is so low that they don't second guess the purchase.
But they also need to set a price that has the best chance of generating a return on investment given the estimated number of sales, and then there's always the perceived value conundrum. If you price something too low people could perceive it as being crap and not worth their time. I mean, if I see a cool looking movie for $10 and a "meh" looking movie for $1, I'm gonna buy the cool looking movie
cause the $1 movie is only $1 for a reason. Would it be awesome if the cool looking movie was $1 too? Sure, but why sell a movie for $1 if people willing to buy it for $10?

I think Radiohead's sales experiment w/"In Rainbows"is pretty telling as well. Something like 40-50% of the download the album w/o paying anything and of the people that did pay for the download I think the average amount was $2-3. I don't know if Radiohead will release all the numbers, but I think it would be interesting to compare the numbers generated by the price-it-yourself downloads and the numbers generated by more traditional sales means (CDs, iTMS, etc.,).

On a somewhat related topic a few years ago I helped out w/some fundraising for a friend of mine who was taking part in a charity bike ride. My plan was to cast a very wide net and only ask for a donation of $5 and reach my goal by volume. I reached my goal, but my plan of getting a lot of people to contribute a little bit of money each was a colossal failure. A handful of people accounted for the vast majority of the donations I collected. Granted it's not an exact parallel, but "offer it cheap and they will come" is not necessarily a recipe for success.


Movies are like food there are tons of great restaurants all around you, but you only eat at the places you know are good. Because it's just too great of a risk to waste a meal on bad food.
If two guys are selling burgers & fries on a street corner and vender A is charging $1 and vender B is charging $5 I'm probably gonna go w/ vender B 'cause I don't even want to know what goes into the $1 meal.:biggrin:



Now that HD video is becoming more and more popular, the companies can kill the CAM releases by simply releasing their own crappy SD copy of the new movie. For free.

Minimum visual and sound quality.

Every user would be able to download it for free and decide if they want to go to the theater and\or purchase the HD-DVD copies, which are way better.


I think that idea makes the false assumption that people that download and watch these movies care about the quality. Releasing an SD-DVD quality file for download would be a significant step up in terms of quality compared to the majority of pirated stuff that's out there now.

It's kind of ironic that HD is the big buzz right now, but so are downloadable movie sales/rentals (iTMS, Netflix, Amazon, etc.,.) that are no where near HD quality.

W/all that being said, times are a changing in every aspect of the industry and I think it's a very exciting thing to be a part of. It's a bit like the wild west... but not as violent.



-A

[Dylan Reeve]

The problem with a system like the one in the OP is that it's impossible. To be usable it requires worldwide 100% buy in. Every ISP in every country has to take part. Somehow the media has to be tracked, and any system that works outside that tracking has to be ended.

There are a few issues, I think that drive piracy. One is lack of reliable payment system - not everyone has a credit card or wants to use it, without one it's pretty much impossible to get any legitimate media. DRM crippled media is another issue - I've had really bad DRM experiences, and I won't be going there again anytime soon, I want to play programs on my Modded XBox, not Windows Media Player on my Laptop. Availability is another - I can't get TV from most of the US-based services at all. I'm not allowed. If I want it, I need to find a torrent.

I think dropping price of home-video (DVD, Blueray, that other dead HD media) is a good idea. The loss in outright profit is likely to be offset by the increase in sales. But at the same time, studios need to stop abusing customers. I have DVDs that force me to sit through trailers and anti-piracy promos everytime I play them. I paid for it, let me watch it.

[Petr Dvorak]

Piratebay on Vanity Fair
http://www.vanityfair.com/ontheweb/features/2007/03/piratebay200703

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

The problem with a system like the one in the OP is that it's impossible. To be usable it requires worldwide 100% buy in. Every ISP in every country has to take part. Somehow the media has to be tracked, and any system that works outside that tracking has to be ended.

Not at all.

But first let me repeat that with the current state of affairs - everything is already lost. Face it...

Establish a working system in just one country [which will be tough, no doubt] and start bringing back revenues in the new way... the others will join in like an avalanche... and for the portion of the world that hasn't already joined - it is inevitably lost mate :), nothing can be done there by fighting.


I think dropping price of home-video (DVD, Blueray, that other dead HD media) is a good idea. The loss in outright profit is likely to be offset by the increase in sales. But at the same time, studios need to stop abusing customers. I have DVDs that force me to sit through trailers and anti-piracy promos everytime I play them. I paid for it, let me watch it.

That will also work, but I think that legalized torrent-trackers will work even better.


Piratebay on Vanity Fair
http://www.vanityfair.com/ontheweb/features/2007/03/piratebay200703

That's what I'm talking about.

It is inevitable...

And ThePirateBay is just a tiny crumb in comparison to what is happening in some other particular countries.

What ya gonna do? Filter them out?! That's communism...

I see that it'll take time and inevitably increasing losses for the Industries to accept the obvious and understand that they can actually profit from it...

Love your enemy...

[Dylan Reeve]

Legalised trackers are only as good as the people using them. As most internet users don't torrent media warez, or even know how, a blanket fee is unreasonable and would be really hard to introduce.

If the legalised service were good enough (not DRM crippled, fast, well managed) then it would probably attract a reasonable audience. But being limited to a single country is still a problem. Look at the big torrent sites and the comments on new TV torrents (Lost, Heroes, Prison Break, etc) it's people from almost every country but the USA saying thanks and complaining about their local broadcast being 8 months behind.

Living in NZ, it's really really common for shows to be ruined for viewers - go to an entertainment site as see the huge 'WhatsHisName WINS SURVIVOR' headlines... It's hard to avoid. Many people I know download TV to stay current so they can take part in discussions online, and generally not have the show ruined.

If I could pay a reasonable fee to download legal non-DRM TV shows fresh from US broadcast, I would. But trying to force everyone into that system would be impossible.

[Radoslav Karapetkov]

Small correction to my piracy legalization scheme.

The monthly fee is not obligatory.

But torrent trackers are legalized and a user can join by paying a monthly fee [if he wishes]. Once he stops paying - his account is deactivated.

All regular users pay the same fee, business users [profiting from downloads] pay slightly higher.

After that, every user can download whatever he wants from that tracker, unlimited times.

Content-uploaders also pay a higher fee, which is again the same for all content-uploaders, regardless of whether they're Universal Pictures or an indie artist. This "uploader" fee is acceptable [not super-high], giving equal terms to indies for uploading their content.

Legalized torrent-trackers become movie\music\games distribution portals - virtual videotheques\musicshops\gamespots.

Different fee-plans - "Movies", "Movies+Music", "Movies, Music + Games". Etc. [these are just outlines]

BUT, no additional payment other than the monthly fee and - the most downloaded content gets the most money. This - for the trackers only. The option for individually paid downloads stays, of course, as an alternative, but I doubt that many people will want that. It's not financially attractive cause the price of individually paid downloads will be higher.

This works for entertainment content only. Professional software is another story... I'm working on it too .

No content may be uploaded on those trackers without the permission of the author. They're legal. Strict public and authors' control.

Legal trackers also get their % of the cake.

Different legal trackers compete among each other for customers - with different prices and conditions, better web-design, forums, critic reviews and rating, etc.

Just like current rentals, but virtual and download-based.

And of course - acceptable monthly fees and no further individual payments [within the tracker], cause "Free China" is one click away... and always will be ... or we can call it "Free USA" or "Free Sweden" to disperse the suspicious humor of my article.

The main difference is that the fee is not obligatory, but if the user wants to join the tracker he simply pays the fee and has all the fun.

Anyway, if the Studios want to survive they will be forced to lower prices considerably and adapt to the new technologies.

Otherwise "Free China" will inevitably kill them.