Free movies?


.

I’m umming-and-ahhing about an offer from Lovefilm. They’re offering six months for £9.99 via the xbox, which is £2 per month – less than the price of a single rental from Blockbuster. It’s a sweet deal, but I already have Netflix and I’m making good use of that. Netflix is all inclusive but doesn’t have any brand new titles. Lovefilm has a flat subscription rate but if you want to watch the newer films, you have to rent them on a pay-per-view basis.

I was chatting about this with a friend, and they made the comment that the deal was unfair: they’d been illegally downloading films so didn’t see why they should pay for what they had hitherto got for free. This irritated me, because it’s pretty much exactly the same as me saying that I used to shoplift sweets from Woolworths and now I buy sweets, so if I have to pay more for Lindt chocolate than I do for Snickers, that’s unfair because I used to get either for free.

Where do your shows and movies come from? Yes, via your TV set, or via your PC or xbox. Yes, via the internet, but how did they get there? Someone had to make them. Someone had to invest millions upon millions to make them happen. The only way they get to fund the next episode, let alone the next series, is via licensing rights, and that means finding a channel to broadcast them.

Some TV channels recoup the hundreds of millions they spend on buying content through subscription (Sky, and in a roundabout way, the BBC) and some through direct advertising, but the latter’s purchasing power has been diminished because they don’t have as many viewers as they did. Part of that is through legitimate on-demand services like Netflix, Lovefilm and Hulu, and part of that is the eye-watering impact of illegal downloads.

When people download films and shows for free they are devaluing the content: it’s not worth as much to the networks because they can’t ask for as much to sell the broadcast rights, and it’s not worth as much to the broadcasters because fewer people are watching, which makes the channels worth less to advertisers. Less advertising means less original programming, which means less content.  Continue reading

The New York Times: Would the Bard Have Survived the Web?

Picture from NYTimes: Shakespeare/Jennifer Daniel

ARCHAEOLOGISTS finished a remarkable dig last summer in East London. Among their finds were seven earthenware knobs, physical evidence of a near perfect 16th-century experiment into the link between commerce and culture.

Thus begins a very interesting article at the New York Times I read today.

Continue reading

The “real” victims of online piracy

I admit I have an agenda. Almost everyone I know makes some sort of income from the arts. Some are writers, some are artists, some composers and songwriters, and some make video games. None of those people are rich, and every single one of them has been made poorer by piracy. My husband’s in a band who are signed to an indie label and – like Colleen Doran – is “depressed” by the number of people who’d pay £400 for an iphone and £50 for a concert ticket but won’t fork out £8 for an album.

Doran explains:

I spent the last two years working on a graphic novel called Gone to Amerikay, written by Derek McCulloch for DC Comics/Vertigo. It will have taken me 3,000 hours to draw it and months of research. Others have contributed long hours, hard work and creativity to this process. But due to shrinking financing caused by falling sales in the division, these people are no longer employed.

The minute this book is available, someone will take one copy and within 24 hours, that book will be available for free to anyone around the world who wants to read it. 3,000 hours of my life down the rabbit hole, with the frightening possibility that without a solid return on this investment, there will be no more major investments in future work.

The other day I likened it to Morrowind. When starting the role-playing computer game, your character is placed in an unguarded room that is filled with items that can be taken without consequence. I take the bread from the basket, then I take the basket, and the cutlery and crockery, and then I strip the room bare. I take everything that I can carry. I don’t even use, let alone value, everything I take. I take it because it is there and because I can and because it is easy and I won’t get caught.

Spare me any justifications about it being “one in the eye for The Man” or some sort of noble protest against outmoded distribution models. You’re just doing it because you can and because you can get away with it – and this time you’re not just taking from the faceless Imperial forces of some video game.

I’ll let Colleen Doran explain, since she’s much more eloquent than I am:

http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/politics/129741-the-qrealq-victims-of-online-piracy

6 Things People Believe (That Are Wrong)

Much as I want to keep this blog purely for the good things in life, avoiding the indignant shrieks of so much of the web, this comes up so often that there’s no avoiding it. So, once and for all, it’s time to dispel a few myths. What’s true of music is also true of movies and games.

“if u were someone of importance u’d be out there making all that money u claim to have more of than Rihanna … “

That is actually a new one. Normally the conversation ends with the other person saying, “Well, I think if they were real artists they’d give it away for free because it shouldn’t be about the money“. Very few people do their jobs purely for money – prostitutes and call centre workers, mostly – almost everyone else has a certain amount of love for their work (even the prostitutes and call centre workers), and few more so than those in the arts industries. Almost everyone wants to do something they like and get paid for it. Besides, almost everyone in music earns almost f*** all anyway.

That’s how the debate had begun. Someone on Facebook recommending someone just (illegally) download an album rather than bothering to pay for it. I pointed out that this is generally a bad idea because it means labels can’t invest in cool new music if everybody steals it.

MYTH # 1: They can afford it

I used the example of Rihanna, who as I put it, “I earnt more than she did in 2008″. What about the $15m she supposedly got that year? Well, see, this is how it works.

Unusually, Rihanna released her first three albums back-to-back. When the first two failed to sell well and the third had below-expected initial sales despite the single, Umbrella, being #1 for 11 weeks, the label panicked. The amount they would have invested in her was staggering and – like game developers or movie studios – one low-seller can kill your business. Factory Records went bust after the Happy Mondays’ Yes Please cost too much to record, and My Bloody Valentine’s Loveless almost sank Creation. Def Jam were entirely correct, in business terms, to refuse to throw good money after bad on Rihanna, leaving her in limbo. She had to finance the rest herself.

Rihanna’s management used the money from her various sponsorship deals to fund videos, recording and tour costs. Out of the $15m she’d earnt that year, she had just $20k (approx £14k) left by the end. If I say I earnt more than she did in 2008, so did most people.

Luckily such a gamble paid off and the album went on to sell a few million – much less than anything comparable in the 80s or 90s, but enough to leave her in a better position than the thousands of pop stars who’ve filed for bankruptcy over the years.

MYTH #2: It’s OK to hurt those greedy labels

In common with the game and movie industries, piracy is hitting the little guy hardest, but even the biggest aren’t immune. The immediate effect is that the smaller independents without vast reserves of cash go bust right away, and the majors simply downsize (mass lay-offs) and refuse to take risks on innovation and go for boring-and-safe every time. The huge rock acts of the 70s and 80s often lament that if they’d have come out now, they’d never even have been signed. Most acts in Rihanna’s position simply disappear immediately, without having the luxury to promote their own material.

So you wind up with the majors letting their underpaid employees go, and the indies dropping all their interesting acts. There’s no long term benefit to the consumer from this: you might be saving a few quid this year by not buying that album, but in the long term, it’s you who suffers because there just won’t be albums like that in a few years’ time because they’re too expensive to make.

MYTH #3: Bands should be pleased people are “advertising” their music

There are two problems with this. The first is that you are wresting away control from the artist on how and where their music gets to be displayed. One of the most frequent arguments I see is between makers of fan art (game mods, YouTube videos) complaining that someone has uploaded their work without permission. It might be the wrong version, or not have the right artwork with it, or they might have wanted to reissue it in a different format and suddenly that’s not an option they get to make any more. They’re normally furious, and justifiably so. The fan community rallies round them and cheerfully denounces the absolute lack of respect – but is suddenly hypocritical when it comes to those trying to make a living from their love.

The second is that when you download a record, you get to keep it. A song played on the radio is only there for as long as the radio is playing it. When someone made you a mix tape, you were getting one song and if you wanted the rest, you had to buy the album. The “try-before-you-buy” outlets are Pandora, Last.fm and YouTube. Next time you want to “share” music, send them a link to a streaming site – not the album itself.

Myth #4: It’s just like home taping

The issue is one of scale. When we were kids, even with home taping, one album would only be shared between maybe two people. With torrenting, it might be shared between 10,000 people – often much more – with almost no loss of sound quality. There’s no motivation to go out and buy the record. Out of 20,000 albums released last year, only 2,000 sold more than 1,000 copies. If just 10% of those torrenting the album had bought it, it would double the sales of most albums.

Proponents of illegal downloads say that the figures should speak for themselves: that they would prove that most people who torrent music are suddenly inspired to then go out and buy it. The best selling album of 2008 was Tha Carter III by Li’l Wayne. It sold just 3.5 million copies – compared to the best-selling album of 1998, Faith by George Michael, which sold over 20 million copies. Continue reading