The Pointless Battle Against Media Piracy
Earlier in the month, the details of the internet chapter of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement were leaked, and it should give anyone who uses the internet cause for concern. Should the treaty go into effect as-is, it has the potential to not simply crack down on piracy, but change the entire nature of the internet.
I’m a music and movie fan, so that’s invariably where my brain goes to when this subject comes up. The ACTA has had me thinking a lot lately about internet piracy and how the entertainment industry in particular is completely backwards in the way they approach it. I’m not an expert on legal anything, so bear that mind.
The first thing that needs to happen is that the industry needs to accept the fact that there is always going to be piracy. They would like you to believe that the internet is responsible for creating it, but the truth is that there has been a thriving market for piracy ever since magnetic tape became the standard delivery method for music and movies. If you were alive and listening to music back before CDs, don’t tell me you never owned a cassette or video tape that wasn’t copied from somewhere else. Granted, the onset of digital technology means that we can now create copies without any loss of quality, but the fact remains, media piracy has been commonplace for a very long time.
Furthermore, pirates are smart. Do what you may to protect your media, but people will always find a way to crack it. Methods for protecting digital media are doing little but giving the studios a false sense of security and wasting their money; if people want to get at something, they will, and usually much more easily than you’d give them credit for.
Considering those very clear facts (And they are facts, unless the world plans on becoming a police state), what can the entertainment industry do to combat piracy? Well, it’s pretty fucking simple: Stop being reactive and start getting proactive.
All the money that’s being invested in putting a stop to piracy (Which is a waste, if we’re accepting the above truth) should be used towards improving overall technology and preparing for the changes to the industry that have been coming down the pike awhile now. You can’t eliminate the piracy, so make legitimacy a better option. You manage that one simple way: Convenience.
Let’s take movies for example. If I could quickly and easily download a copy of a newly-released movie for, say, $5—Significantly cheaper than going to the theatre—I would do that all the time. Maybe I get 2 viewings for my $5. Maybe I decide I really like the movie and pay an extra $5 for a permanent digital copy. Just like when you go to the video store, older films would cost less.
Now, you might be wondering what happens to the theatres in this futuristic scenario wherein new media is available at the click of a button, but as much as I enjoy going to the movies, I think we all need to take a step back and consider the reality of that sinking ship. Slowly but surely, attending the theatre is becoming less about having access to content and more about the ambiance, and eventually theatres are going to go the way of music stores: We’re going to see less and less of them, and they’re going to be more about serving a niche market. This is going to happen whether you apply my scenario or not.
Back to the point, though: I’m not just pulling this concept out of my ass. It’s a proven formula: Just look at the massive success of iTunes. Pirated music are possibly the easiest illegal downloads to find on the internet, and still millions of people give iTunes and other mp3 retailers their money every, single day. Why? It’s more convenient, and the the price is low enough to not be prohibitive to that.
It’s a win-win scenario, too: While downloads will cost less, they will invariably net the studios more money, as they’re eliminating things like middlemen, packaging and shipping costs. They could charge more for the actual product, and we’d all still feel like we were getting a great deal. We’d feel good, they’d make money; everybody’s happy. All that’s prohibiting us at this point is an antiquated way of approaching the situation.
So, what’s up, entertainment big-wigs? When can we expect you to stop telling us to get off your damn lawn and start actually looking ahead? I wouldn’t expect it of you guys, but you’re thinking way too small: There’s a whole, untapped market out there just waiting for you to wake up. Change is scary, I know, but it happens whether you’re ready for it or not.
As said in our discussion of the topic:
Rethinking the movie theater would go a long way to remarketing legitimate copies of films and winning back the people who pirate mainly out of convenience. The business is set up so that, for the first few weeks or months, the only legitimate way to see a new film is to visit the theater–where you can spend almost 10 dollars a ticket to sit through a single viewing of a film you don’t even know if you’ll enjoy. Because box-office numbers are such a focal point of a movie’s success, this strategy makes *sense*, but is less and less pragmatic as people stop going to theaters. Instead of waiting for the film to come out on dvd, to be available for sale or rent, people turn to piracy–either to get their copy of the film or just to find out if it’s a film they want to purchase. Releasing films for legitimate download, sale, or rent at the same time as, or very shortly after their theatrical release, would give those who don’t want the theater experience a means other than piracy access to films they would otherwise like to see.
One could even model theatrical release after the music industry–musicians sell their albums and merchandise at their concerts, so fans can purchase their own copies of the music they just paid to see on stage. One could combine the theater and the movie store, making dvds, t-shirts, applicable book versions or books/comics the film is based on available for purchase in theaters where the film is playing. That way, people would come to the theater either to see the film or purchase it, or purchase their own copy after seeing a film they enjoyed in the theater. Fans of the theater experience would still come for the ambiance; fans of home-viewing would come to get legitimate copies of new releases, and pirates would have the choice of a legitimate, quality dvd with special features over a download of a cam-version or lower-quality rip.
@bzzinglikeneon
13 November 2009 at 5:27 pm Permalink
I love this idea so much I can’t even stand it. You’re talking about harnessing the after-viewing high and turning it into what I think would be a very powerful money-making venture. It’s not unlike the checkout line at the market: You’ve been shopping for food for awhile but not eating anything, and the fact that you’re probably mere minutes from home makes little difference when you get in the line and spot a Snickers bar. Can you imagine how much revenue a theatre could rake in if they sold, for instance, Twilight merch on the way out? This is a model used in pretty much every large theme park, ever: You have to walk through the gift shop to get out.
Amazing.
“If I could quickly and easily download a copy of a newly-released movie for, say, $5—Significantly cheaper than going to the theatre—I would do that all the time.”
I’m sure you’ll be shocked to know that this would never, ever be appealing to me as a movie goer. My sister and I are attending an HD screening of “Gone With The Wind” tomorrow even though we both have the movie on DVD — I can’t replicate the theatre experience on my 42″ television no matter how hard I try.
I’m also never sure about the arbitrary price points people decide on when this subject comes up; $5 might seem reasonable to one person but not to another. I certainly wouldn’t pay $5 to watch a movie on my computer; I’d rather pony up the additional $5 to watch it properly in a theatre, you know? I also still maintain that movies are not expensive: $10 for two hours of entertainment is about as cheap as its going to get. It gets expensive only when people add in all the other unnecessary stuff: you don’t have to get expensive concessions (although they help keep the theatre open), you don’t have to go out for dinner first, etc. The ticket price itself is pretty good for what you’re getting.
I think there’s a big difference between pirated movies and music in terms of home-replication of quality of experience, though. iTunes is successful because it’s easier to purchase a song than to go out and buy the CD, no question, but the instant gratification of portable music doesn’t require the same monetary and technological investment on the part of the user. If you have a computer (which in this situation is a given), you can get the free software that lets you download music onto the MP3 player you can now purchase for $30 at Walmart. Obviously there are different levels of quality here, with $300 iPods still being a hot ticket item, but if you’re looking at getting an equivalent movie experience at home as you would at the theatre, you’ve got to spend thousands and thousands of dollars. That’s a huge financial barrier a lot of people are not willing to take on. Given the infrequency with which most people go to the movies, $10 a pop isn’t really that big a deal.
I do like the idea of movie theatres and video stores becoming one in the same though; as I see fewer movies multiple times because I’m trying to see more but different movies (rather than more of the movies I’ve already seen once), it would be nice to have the DVD option waiting when I got out. They already fuck this up with other tie-ins, though; many soundtracks aren’t available until weeks after a movie comes out, which seems to be a poor marketing strategy.
Also, this text box is really small. People who design Wordpress themes never think about this.
@bzzinglikeneon
13 November 2009 at 8:04 pm Permalink
The $5 price point was really just what I, personally, would think completely reasonable to pay for something like that; obviously, I’ve not done extended research into what would be a good price point.
I’m also not talking about replicating the theatre experience. People like yourself, who are very attached to actually going to the theatre and having the traditional experience aren’t the issue; you’re obviously going out and spending money on movies rather than downloading pirated copies. But there are a lot of people who don’t really care about having the theatre experience for films in general, or who prefer to have an idea of what they’re going out and paying for if they do. As for the financial barrier, that’s what I was talking about when I mentioned improving the technology. When mp3 players first came out, they were ridiculously expensive. Like any technology, the more it advances, the less expensive it becomes. You’re a serious movie buff, so quality is important to you, but you also have to remember that most people don’t give a shit—I mean, full screen movies are still available for purchase, for god’s sake.
I love the idea of having the DVD to purchase at the theatre. I never would have thought of it, but it seems like it would be a really good compromise.
And yes, this text box is ridiculously small. I obviously need to change that. I will probably forget. XD
See, I think what upsets me is that I get offended by people not caring about the quality of their experiences, especially if catering to those people means that those of us who DO care will have a harder and harder time getting those experiences (e.g. increased convenience of legitimate downloadable content means fewer people go to theatres which means more theatres will close down, etc.).
“or who prefer to have an idea of what they’re going out and paying for if they do”
This I disagree with. There are so many shitty movies that do well in theatres that I refuse to believe most people actually care about the dollars-to-value ratio. Plus, this is the role of the movie critic: to tell you what you might like (you don’t have to listen, of course, but it’s they get paid to watch movies for a living so they might be a good source to consult before shelling out $10). In this day and age, it’s almost impossible to NOT find a way of making informed movie going decisions.
I think mostly I want people to own up to being lazy and cheap, but no one’s willing to do that.
@bzzinglikeneon
13 November 2009 at 8:26 pm Permalink
Oh, I will fully own up to being lazy and cheap, mostly because my situation demands it. I love going to the theatre, but I cannot afford it. We had been going to the movies once per week, and right now we can’t even do THAT.
I hate the idea of theatres closing, but at the same time, I really don’t see how we’re going to avoid it, regardless of what the industry does. Home theatre is evolving so rapidly that even if you ignore the piracy issue, more and more people are opting to stay home and watch that way.
Even your former once a week habit is way above average, though; I remember reading somewhere that the average person goes to the movies twice a year. TWICE. OMG. Unfathomable. I’ve gone twice in one DAY on multiple occasions. And I have difficulty believing that most of the people who only go twice (or less!) are doing it for financial reasons; I think most just have other interests, which is totally fine, of course.
I just keep thinking of the stupid people who ask me to go see movies for them because they’re not sure if they want to see them themselves. I should start a thing where people can pay ME $5 to go see a movie for them in advance, see how that flies.
@bzzinglikeneon
13 November 2009 at 8:35 pm Permalink
LMFAO, that is what people have been saying to me since I said I’m going to review one movie per day next year! Maybe we should start a service: Snarky chicks who will see potentially-dubious movies for a fee and be honest about whether they suck. XD
LOL Can you legally charge people for that kind of service? I could totally go for that.
@bzzinglikeneon
13 November 2009 at 9:04 pm Permalink
I don’t see why not. It’s like a consulting service! I’m not sure what sort of market there would be for it, but now you’ve got me wondering. XD
Also, I feel like theatres might make the move into a general entertainment complex area. The theatre in my parents’ town recently gutted 1/4 of their theatres to put in this ridiculous arcade/bar/gaming area; I’m assuming this was to lure in that elusive teenage audience. Because I list it as one of my favourite theatres in my account on the movie chain’s website, they sent me a survey about the new game space and they were like “If you have not used the new gaming space yet, why not?” and I’m like “Um, because you gutted FOUR THEATRES to put in a useless space that has nothing to do with movies, thus reducing the number of screens I can see stuff on?” Fail.
@bzzinglikeneon
13 November 2009 at 8:41 pm Permalink
We haven’t had any of that around here, although we HAVE had several theatres recently totally renovated. We had a Rave theatre move in several years back, and it was so swanky that the others in the area were forced to step up their game, and thank god for that. People around here love going to the movies, though; we’re only a mid-sized city and we have something like 6 or 7 major theatre complexes in the metro area.
I can’t help but thinking gaming/bar/etc. is kind of gimmicky and doomed to fail. Why would you ever go for drinks at a theatre, where there are probably kids running all around, and crazy parents yelling about popcorn and Raisinets? I don’t drink, though, so maybe I’m missing the point. I think I would want a more sophisticated atmosphere for it, but I may be giving the average person more credit than I should.