See article here.
DIdn’t stop it becoming the highest grossing film of all time. However it is really disappointing that it came top of the pirated list: why couldn’t a decent film come top? The aesthetic tastes of the public are sorely lacking. That said Toy Story 3 grossed the most this year so maybe I see a ray of hope.
It doesn’t mean that it was the most loved film though - some people may have thought that it wasn’t worth spending money on, so they went for the pirated version.
As the article rightly said the resurgence of the 3D technology (a techno-savvy friend of mine commented “it belongs to the '80s and should have staid there”) did nothing to counter piracy. To add insult to injury Toshiba, Sharp and Hitachi have recently patented a technology allowing a 3D footage to be watched as a regular one on TV’s and PC monitors without the use of glasses. Other Asian consumer electronics companies are reportedly working on similar technologies.
As previously witnessed in the music market a technology touted as the “silver bullet” which would kill piracy is not only failing but is also inconveniencing consumers who “play by the book”. Want to see a 3D movie at home? You have to buy the glasses as well. Have eyesight issues (like yours truly)? You have to be prepared for aching eyes and dizziness or do away with watching a 3D movie. Virgin Music tried implementing a copy protection system which made CD’s unplayable on PC CD-ROm readers, home theaters and the latest car radios. Ironically you could drop them in an old boom box and rip them on a cassette without problems… It cost Virgin millions to replace those CD’s with ones which actually worked. Consumers spoke and Vigin was forced to take action. One of the few times it ever happened.
Piracy kept at the margin is not harmful to the film industry. So long as the marginal cost of fighting pirates is higher than the marginal cost of their piracy, some piracy can be tolerated.
O Stranger…
Anyway, I was one of those pirates too, and I wasn’t impressed by the movie at all. Sure, if I saw it in 3D and especially in iMax (my country doesn’t have this kind of tech), I would probably say otherwise, but… I go to cinema from time to time, but most movies nowdays being released in Hollywood are not worth my money and support.
I think this is a big reason why Avatar was pirated so much (and why pirating is probably going to increase). At my local theater, a 3-D movie costs $13 for admission. I could go to a good all-you-can-eat Asian buffet for less than that. Popular movies on DVD and BluRay aren’t cheap either. 3-D equipment is still relatively new and thus has a large premium on it, and these high costs discourage use by all but the most affluent. People are more likely to pirate movies if the costs of seeing the real thing keep increasing. The costs of being caught are marginal, especially if you don’t get nailed for distribution, so it’s an easy decision for most people with the know-how. I bet pirating would be less prolific if the costs of enjoying the films through legal means were lowered.
I agree. I feel similarly for the video games industry. I have pirated games in the past, but I still find myself buying games off Steam from time to time. Why? Convenience and price. They always have these sales, and as long as you have an account, you can always redownload your game, no cd or box needed. On top of that, there are always updates. That’s good enough reason for me throw money down.
Yes, I agree that Steam is a cheaper alternative. But what happens when Steam goes out of business? What worries me with this new generation of DRM protection is the possibility that you’re not actually buying the game itself, but merely permission to play it. I am a rabid fan of the Command and Conquer series but I will not touch C&C IV because of its DRM. I’ve read that you must have an active internet connection to play it, and should you lose your connection mid-game, it will automatically turn off.
Affluent you say? I just graduated and I’ve had a 3D capable projector for a year. About 15 dollars more that another non-3D projector. I bought it because of slightly higher light output–I agree, 3D is a toy, not for serious people, so long as it requires glasses. Industry, as Mises said, is neither more or less than the bringing of luxury items for the masses.
By the way, there’s nothing quite like reading books and typing documents on the big screen. Be it a $1000, its worth every penny for your health.
[OFF-TOPIC. STRANGER, IF YOU WANT TO PICK A FIGHT OVER IP IN GENERAL, CREATE A SPECIFIC THREAD FOR IT. DON’T DERAIL THIS ONE.]
That’s just correlation, though. It might be the most pirated because people saw it in theaters and loved it so much that they decided to pirate it at home.
Indeed but I would like to hear the pro IP camp argue that the cinema reciepts would have done significantly better in the absence of piracy.
And to think I rented the DVD, of all things…
I’d slap myself if I hadn’t already.
Indeed but I would like to hear the pro IP camp argue that the cinema reciepts would have done significantly better in the absence of piracy.
That is not the point. The goal of IP is not to produce the absence of piracy, but to protect the rights of creators and producers on the marketplace.
The goal of trespassing laws is not to stop children from getting their ball in your yard.
The aesthetic tastes of the public are sorely lacking
I am wondering if the economic downturn and the slump in movies will cause better cinema due to necessity. If that happens and the fetish with CGI diminishes (The Dark Knight hopefully will help with that), there may be a ray of hope.
I hate CGI and all of the new 3D stuff. I enjoy old-school movies like Quentin Tarantino tried to replicate in Death Proof.
I like the usage of CGI in Robert Rodriguez’s Once Upon A Time Mexico.