Just a thought about internet piracy

[Browny]

Link to original post: [drupal=5460]Just a thought about internet piracy[/drupal]



So today on the news there was a story here (Australia) about internet piracy. The journalist threw out the statistic that piracy costs the movie/music industry $6.1 billion per year.

However upon hearing this I instantly thought of something... Why don't we look at that from another angle?

The $6.1 billion that is 'lost' hasn't disappeared forever, its simply gone somewhere else. If we consider a country like Australia, every $1 that we dont send to USA will likely be re-invested back into this country. I can honestly say that every $ I haven't spent on movies or music, is $1 that I have spent in this country. With the money people save, this would overall support every single other aspect of the economy. Things like car manufacturers, tourism, restaurants. All positive things for the economy.

Of course paying for music and movies is positive too, except what proportion of those funds are returned to the public? It all goes to the golden coffers of people and stakeholders so rich, they couldnt spend the money if they tried. instead of 1,000 people spending $50 on a restaurant to support this business over a year, the people who take the lions share of profits through movies and music spend that same $500,000 on something which does not actually give $500,000 back. Something like a lambourghini. I believe in this country, it actually BENEFITS australia, to pirate music and movies. To USA it does too, but to a lesser extent. Of course not everyone can think this way or the industry wouldnt exist. But of course, thats what cinema and live shows are for. Its quite clear that without recorded music or DVD's, production companies would still make an absolute fortune. The real losers are the smaller groups who obviously cant simply use their non-existant popularity to make money.

Whilst I normally never care what anyone from those industries says against piracy, this just stuck out to me today.

Am I on the right track here? Is what I'm saying obvious? I just thought it made so much sense, I wan't to know what others think about it.

 

[#HBC | Joker]

It's not the big guys who really get hurt by it (even thought they want you to think it does), it's the little guys.

Unless the music you pirate is from a struggling band who has a small time record deal, you're really not hurting anyone. The movies, from some small time studio. you get the idea.

There are people that get ****ed by piracy though, it's just not nearly as common as the big record/movie companies try to make it look.

 

[Browny]

I know... and thats not my point.

The numbers are skewed. Such a significant portion of this '$6.1 billion' is lost from only the biggest companies. The bigger the company, the more piracy that occurs. Hence such a large portion of this money is only lost from companies that can wear it EASILY. It makes it seem so bad when they lump the big and small companies together, yet the small ones account for a miniscule fraction of this.

 

[#HBC | Joker]

Personally, I've never thought about it from a "piracy benefits the economy" perspective. That just sounds like wishful thinking to me.

 

[Browny]

It makes sense to me though. If I spend $100 on movies/music a year, probably $90 of it goes to USA.

If I keep that $100, it will all be re-invested back in this country somehow. Sure a significant amount of it will go to china and USA anyway with material goods, but its far more than buying music/movies would.

I understand this is quite different from an american point of view, its just the news story today made it seem like the $6.1 billion loss is affecting australia when really, it isnt. the vast, VAST majority of music/movies downloaded is american content/profits lost. Australian companies lose out as well, but the problem isn't anywhere near as bad as they make it out to be.

Basically, the more you have, the more you have to lose. Australian record companies and movie studios have a drop in the ocean compared to what USA has. I wouldnt be surprised if the money lost in australia is less than 0.01% than that lost in USA. Meaning, that if piracy exists at the rate it does now, the potential money re-invested back into the country, is FAR greater than that which is lost. Yes its unfortunate that there will be losers in this scenario but the way I see it, important people like researchers and teachers have been losing since day 1, and they dont complain. If the money spent on useless garbage music and ridiculously overpriced movies (IT COSTS $20 TO SEE A MOVIE IN THE CINEMA IN AUSTRALIA) was spent on ANYTHING else, this country would be a better place. By removing the cost of movies and music and adding to every other aspect of life, that scenario might just happen...

Just remember, if every single person in australia boycotted all movies and music, the USA producers wouldnt even notice. We just dont matter, we contribute like 7% of what USA does to the industry. and IMO, if 90% of americans boycotted it too, the producers would still be rich.

 

[Browny]

Also for the record, I am not biased towards video games, I know they are pirated to hell too. And I appreciate music and movies and I'll pay the ridiculous cinema costs to see them.

I draw a big fat line between games and music/movies though. Since when we talk about the $6.1B figure, we know thats referring to only the biggest earners. Someone like Gaga probably accounts for 10,000 smaller artists in terms of money lost. That huge proportion of the $6.1B is lost on people who dont even notice. If they lost 90% of their income, they would still be rich and continue doing what they do.

With game developers however, you cant do that. There is no exorbitant salaries. Most of the money that goes into these companies, goes to making games. If a programmer says they want $40/hour to make a game, that seems fair to me. Its a tough job. When a movie star wants $1 million for a weeks worth of work, No.

I know im lumping the big and the small individuals here together and its not fair, but to argue that wouldn't be against my point of keeping profits in australia. Im just saying that game piracy is an entirely different scenario. When games are pirated, even from the biggest companies, this has an immediate and potentially severe effect on developers. As oppose to movies and music which dont even notice.

 

[-Jumpman-]

Assuming that pirated content would otherwise be purchased, and that those purchases would largely benefit US companies, Browny has a point according to Keynesian economics. The money that wouldn't be spent on content, would instead benefit the Australian GDP.

If Australia would adhere to an economic policy that benefits only itself, legalizing piracy might actually be responsible choice. However, analysis of the economic costs and benefits of purchasing the content would be necessary.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

On the other hand it isn't a reasonable assumption pirates convert to purchases on a good ratio lol

This is part of the reason the RIAA is so stupid and that their stance makes so little sense.

 

[Teran]

Piracy is sort of why the internet became so popular.

It's a swashbuckling world and **** those big time producers if they don't like getting pirated. First of all in terms of music, records were never actually really profitable for the artists, they acted more like promos for their concerts/gigs, where the artists actually made money. As we all know, one can't exactly pirate a gig.

Sure if an album goes 10x platinum or some **** then the artists will be rolling in it, but by then they'll probably also be producing it, in whichcase then they'll be super rolling in it. **** you Metallica.

Anyway, the point is, it is somewhat objectionable to pirate stuff, I mean, giving artists an incentive to actually create gives us more material to enjoy and thus the arts are better serviced. The problem is that this is not the mentality most take, where people will claim to own a small collection of notes as "intellectual property" , and sue the **** out of anyone who may perhaps be inspired and use a small collection of the same notes in their own music.

Most of them are greedy, self serving ****birds who don't really care for the arts so **** them, I will be greedy and self serving and download their **** for free if I so choose. It just so happens that the cinema experience, for example, cannot be matched with a torrented copy of a chinese dude sitting the back row with a camera, so I watch movies in the cinema.

It just so happens that most of the music I like has expired copyright. The music that I do like that doesn't well... let's just say the indie boys certainly didn't get screwed out of a payday.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

Also as an aspiring music producer for video games (www.soundcloud.com/risemix if you're interested in my work) I hope my initial offerings once I put an actual album up for sale, are heard by everyone. And I don't care about how they obtained it.

It's hard for me to imagine turning my back on piracy if I'm to one day become well-known. I can't imagine myself being like "well if helped me get to where I am now, but now that I'm here I want them to stop and pay me." It's just intellectually dishonest. :\

 

[Steel]

Your money going somewhere else is not an argument. Piracy ****s industries because the money does not go to those industries that are supplying the content.

A lot of people think the big corporations just hate piracy because they're just money gobblers. The money is actually used to continue to make high-budget films etc., or in the music industry's case, the record labels need that money to promote their artists, tour their artists, grant them studio time etc. Without a flourishing record label a lot of artists are screwed.

 

[Browny]

Yes it does go to high budget films, but A LOT of that money goes to the actors, which in turn goes to mansions and other venues which are highly dispropotionate in the return investment to the community.

As I said before, it would be better if 10,000 people go to local aussie restaurants at $50 each than give 500,000 to some american who will waste it.

its all about how this benefits the country, not damages artists. thats my whole point, when the news claimed the money is lost. my argument is that the money is only lost when it goes to the super rich, who dont spend it.

 

[Teran]

Tbh I don't think piracy is that big a deal because the general populace doesn't really partake in it.

I mean honestly ever since stuff like itunes and Amazon mp3, piracy dipped because one of the biggest draws was actually convenience over theft.

Like literally stuff that streams or can be downloaded in a digital format is way easier. Of course people are always not gonna pay for stuff, but in the long run most people most likely will. I feel as long as the companies market towards convenience they will do well enough.

Also as for films, I will say that DVD etc sales will most likely always suffer because they cost a lot and downloading them obviously takes up no physical space, but at the same time stuff which allows you to stream HD or download at a good price would definitely benefit, and it has. I really don't feel the actual box office is really affected. I mean come on, you gonna watch Bond/Batman in some crappy low quality back of the theatre DVD sold by some chinaman on the corner, or are you gonna watch it in cinema with the enormous screen and blasting surround sound?

Yeah.

Again, modern piracy I feel definitely erupted out of convenience, and the best way to combat it is to provide a very convenient and easy to use method for people to buy these products.

 

[Luco]

Again, modern piracy I feel definitely erupted out of convenience, and the best way to combat it is to provide a very convenient and easy to use method for people to buy these products.

I actually really agree with this. For most people, it isn't like 'piracy is wrong and it's gonna destroy such and such blah blah blah', it's 'well I can do this out of convenience and I can use my money on other stuff, blah blah blah'. For the reason that we often believe we are stealing from large companies that can afford it, morality just doesn't come in to the issue.

There is one thing though: For people like me, where the experience MUST be authentic in most cases (not all, but most), games that I value, such as smash bros. are definitely ones i'm gonna be buying for the real deal. I think that some games just have to be played on the system to be played properly and that some games have to be played on the system because they're so good, you'd feel really bad about getting that game off the internet and not from your local store (I know this actually happens with some people, as much as I said morality usually doesn't come in to it).

 

[Claire Diviner]

I do know piracy hurts the workers, like camera crew, stunt doubles, etc. when it comes to movies. Not sure about how the music industries suffer though.

 

[Browny]

How so? They were all paid before the movie ever got released. All the biggest flops in cinema history still paid the staff. The only ones who stand to lose potential profits are the publishers.

I dont believe it is fair to assume that the threat of, or past privacy, is any more likely to not make producers make a movie than the likelihood of said movie being a flop.

Again, the biggest losers in piracy are the ones who can afford the loss since they were hugely popular to begin with. No small time company that lives on paycheck to paycheck is going to lose much.

 

[-Jumpman-]

Your money going somewhere else is not an argument. Piracy ****s industries because the money does not go to those industries that are supplying the content.

A lot of people think the big corporations just hate piracy because they're just money gobblers. The money is actually used to continue to make high-budget films etc., or in the music industry's case, the record labels need that money to promote their artists, tour their artists, grant them studio time etc. Without a flourishing record label a lot of artists are screwed.

Which isn't necessarily a bad thing. Try to avoid this discussion.