Jump to content

Bootleg Sites Take Note


Guest

Recommended Posts

  • Premium Member

Richard, I feel your pain. From 1999-2007 I was an independent software developer who made trialware software (games, mostly) and I would post the demo and direct people to my website to purchase if they liked it. I had good and decent people who paid and then I had people who didn't, wouldn't, and never would no matter what. I tried registration keys, private php links for secure downloads upon payment, emailing links, sending copies through the mail, and even just giving it away for free and hoping for donations. No matter what I did, the results were always the same. The honest people paid and the thieves wouldn't.

 

I had the unfortunate experience of googling one of my titles just to see what advertising sites had listed it and running across a cracking site that had cracked my security code method and posted it along with many other titles. It hurt but then I realized that it wasn't worth my effort. The more I tried to implement security, the more I made it difficult for the honest people who sincerely wanted to use (and pay for) my product and some of them were not very tech savvy. By making things over complicated, I was hurting them. I finally just gave up the indie software because it was too much work for too little reward.

 

I do plan to make my first feature this year and hopefully sell it. I will understand what you are talking about as I already do, just in a different (and arguably worse industry; as software is more pirated than anything). But hopefully I can make enough to live as comfortable of a life as you currently enjoy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Richard, I think part of the problem is that the legitimate industry has priced itself into this position.

 

Between a legit copy and a pirated copy, the pirated copy gets the nod if it's good enough and priced fairly enough.

 

Well George what should the price of a DVD be? As one industry leader once said, "nothing beats free." And how far are we willing to take that argument? The car was too expensive so I just stole it because GM has priced itself out of the market?

 

If DVDs were $500.00 each that still doesn't justify theft and make it ok.

 

R,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But hopefully I can make enough to live as comfortable of a life as you currently enjoy.

 

Yes, my biggest problem this week as an independent film producer is deciding on the interior colour of my new ferrari. :)

 

R,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

 

Well George what should the price of a DVD be? As one industry leader once said, "nothing beats free." And how far are we willing to take that argument? The car was too expensive so I just stole it because GM has priced itself out of the market?

 

If DVDs were $500.00 each that still doesn't justify theft and make it ok.

 

R,

 

Well probably the price breaking point where a bootlegger won't bother, or if he does, then he finds himself in competition with the author of the work instead of undercutting them.

 

The bootlegger is also a businessman. He's a POS in our eyes, but he has a business model. He has to buy raw materials to make his product. I think the best anti-piracy method is to cut your costs and make a good affordable product.

 

When people hear about movie-X or "movie star-Y" making Z-millions of dollars, then I think for the general public that justifies purchasing a pirated disk. So maybe if the hype and actual costs weren't so high, then maybe, just maybe prices could come down, and stolen media would be less of a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you want below the line set technicians to have more of an interest in this topic, you're welcome to offer up some inside information as to how your team secured distribution at a major retailer like Walmart. Share some tips on mainstream traditional distribution methods so that set technicians who might also happen to be interested in producing and getting work out to a larger audience might then also have a better shot at it and therefore a reason to care about the piracy that will no doubt cut into their profits.

 

I'm not sure if you already did this in another post. If so, I missed it. I read articles on newer online distribution all the time but the standard pos display in a retail chain approach is likely less obvious to the kickstarter generation. So if you're an independent producer, did you get a producers rep? Did they presale the distribution of the film before you shot it? Explain the details of how your film ended up in a walmart display. I haven't seen it so this is in no way a critical post. I'm just curious. I think the younger newcomers in the business will benefit greatly from any advice you could offer up on that topic. Moreso than the warnings on the bootlegging stuff. Just my humble opinion.

Edited by Michael LaVoie
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When people hear about movie-X or "movie star-Y" making Z-millions of dollars, then I think for the general public that justifies purchasing a pirated disk. So maybe if the hype and actual costs weren't so high, then maybe, just maybe prices could come down, and stolen media would be less of a problem.

 

I agree that there is a disconnect here, especially with younger people. When it's announced that Sandra Bullock will earn 75 million from Gravity, then many people making $30,000.00 a year will certainly reason that downloading Gravity for free isn't going to hurt her pocket book any. The perception problem is there for sure.

 

The public doesn't think too much about the hundreds of people in the end credits of a movie like Gravity who are earning a working wage, and will all be laid off once the movie is complete and shuts down. As we all know, feature work is temporary, and the people that make films are free-lancers that go from movie-to-movie.

 

The prices of DVDs also vary greatly depending upon the length of time the DVD has been out. Against The Wild only sells at Walmart USA for $12.97, and that's its starting price point. It will only come down from there. One day ending up in the .99 bin. Who can't afford .99 for a DVD?

 

R,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you want below the line set technicians to have more of an interest in this topic, you're welcome to offer up some inside information as to how your team secured distribution at a major retailer like Walmart. Share some tips on mainstream traditional distribution methods so that set technicians who might also happen to be interested in producing and getting work out to a larger audience might then also have a better shot at it and therefore a reason to care about the piracy that will no doubt cut into their profits.

 

I'm not sure if you already did this in another post. If so, I missed it. I read articles on newer online distribution all the time but the standard pos display in a retail chain approach is likely less obvious to the kickstarter generation. So if you're an independent producer, did you get a producers rep? Did they presale the distribution of the film before you shot it? Explain the details of how your film ended up in a walmart display. I haven't seen it so this is in no way a critical post. I'm just curious. I think the younger newcomers in the business will benefit greatly from any advice you could offer up on that topic. Moreso than the warnings on the bootlegging stuff. Just my humble opinion.

 

You wouldn't be the first person to suggest I just write a damn book. :) Maybe after 10 movies, and a proven track record. Three titles doesn't prove a whole lot.

 

There are 100 ways up the mountain in this business, if there was one correct path everyone would use it. For all three of my features that have gone onto major retail the process is pretty straight forward really.

 

I produce the movie, then it is shopped around LA to the various film buyers, a few of them or several will make offers, I select the highest bid with the best back-end possibilities. The money is an advance against future sales. It's the distributor that makes the deals with the US retail operations, not the filmmaker. Each distributor will have possibly hundreds of titles under management, and output deals with companies like Walmart.

 

It's key to know that once the distributor takes the movie they now have to go out and sell it to the retailers to obtain shelf space. Since the number of DVDs being made far outstrips the supply of shelf space, this is where the difficulty comes in, especially for indie films since the major Hollywood studios expect that millions of their DVDs will flow through Walmart and Target, and therefore they will get the lions share of the shelf space.

 

The distributor also has to pitch the movie to all of the VOD and Pay Per view platforms as well. Again, same problem for indie titles, the Hollywood majors have their work there first.

 

In spite of the odds many indie titles do break through in retail and Pay Per view and scoop up dollars, viewers, and shelf space, right off the table of the major studios. Against The Wild is a Walmart exclusive and received the poster art advertising at the fronts of their 3500 stores for three weeks, plus they run the TV spot on their in house monitors. This treatment is normally reserved for studio titles.

 

None of this was arranged in advance. It all happened after the movie was made. So every now and again an indie title competes at the same level in retail as the studio films. My feeling is that Hollywood abandoned the family audience 20 years ago. That void is one I hope to fill. If the five major studios don't want those customers, I'm glad to have them.

 

Since you asked I talk about indie producing in these two interviews:

 

Sirius XM, I start in the second half:

 

http://amberlight.ca/InterviewATWWard&Al.

 

add mp3 to the end of this link then copy paste.

 

and this one:

 

http://www.crafttruck.com/through-the-lens-podcast/business-of-film-7-with-richard-boddington-indie-producer/

 

R,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

 

My feeling is that Hollywood abandoned the family audience 20 years ago. That void is one I hope to fill. If the five major studios don't want those customers, I'm glad to have them.

 

 

So I guess we cannot expect any Richard Boddington movies about 20-something bodybuilding drag queens who are addicted to heroine?

 

I admire your commitment to family films...it is indeed a void.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So I guess we cannot expect any Richard Boddington movies about 20-something bodybuilding drag queens who are addicted to heroine?

 

Brilliant, who has the rights? Will they take a meeting?

 

R,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

 

I agree that there is a disconnect here, especially with younger people. When it's announced that Sandra Bullock will earn 75 million from Gravity, then many people making $30,000.00 a year will certainly reason that downloading Gravity for free isn't going to hurt her pocket book any. The perception problem is there for sure.

 

The public doesn't think too much about the hundreds of people in the end credits of a movie like Gravity who are earning a working wage, and will all be laid off once the movie is complete and shuts down. As we all know, feature work is temporary, and the people that make films are free-lancers that go from movie-to-movie.

 

The prices of DVDs also vary greatly depending upon the length of time the DVD has been out. Against The Wild only sells at Walmart USA for $12.97, and that's its starting price point. It will only come down from there. One day ending up in the .99 bin. Who can't afford .99 for a DVD?

 

R,

I also think it's a self feeding cycle. The on camera talent demands more because there are big dollars at stake, and therefore the costs get pushed up simply because the on camera talent wants X-amount. I don't begrudge anybody earning as much as they can, but if you're producing a film that's banking on some actors name to draw your audience instead of using solid "no-name" talent, then maybe you're in the wrong business, because all you're doing is artificially pushing up your production costs based on a gamble.

 

I think if a film itself, story, shooting style and acting talent perform well, and offer a solid product, then the public will forgive you and pay to see your film regardless if you have whoever's the top name talent these days, verse Solid-Performer-A who'll work for scale.

 

And you're right. The public doesn't see people like me who used to wake up at 4AM so I could brew coffee for the crew at 6AM, so the director could see the setup by 8AM, so we could start shooting by 9AM, and how when I was a teenager still in college I'd do it for $120 a day until the project ended, at which point I was on the phone or passing out my business card to network for my next gig.

 

So yeah, the public doesn't see that. And even if they did, I'm not sure that would be enough tug on the heart strings to shift their psychology. The bottom line is money, and the media consuming public understand their pocket book more than anything else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

And that's why people pirate data or do illegal uploads. The idea is to get the user to click on one of the ads, or for more malicious hosts, to invade the user's computer with a virus or trojan, and then just grab money from their account, and then shut down the site and repeat the whole process with another website and upload.

 

So, a pathology? Maybe for like 5% of the people who do it, but more likely it's just to steal.

 

 

You're conflating multiple parties here, either oversimplifying what's happening intentionally because you're not interested in the phenomenon or motivations of the people Keith and I are referring to or because you legitimately don't understand the number of parties involved and the mechanics of something making its way from DVR to hosting site. Regardless, I'm not talking about or concerned about the hosting sites. That's not an interesting or complicated issue. It's the anonymous army that, at expense to themselves, gather and publish just about everything that is or ever was.

 

They get nothing from the ads, they're not the hosting site. They likely have no interest in the ads or even see them. If they're like me, they have software that blocks all that crap and pop-ups. And you can't embed a trojan or malware into a video stream, one that may or may not be re-compressed by the host site. And these aren't sites that pop up and then down. That's not how any of this stuff works.

 

Thieves steal things they directly benefit from or that they can resell to other people. This is something different. What you'd be looking at would be an epidemic of thieves who are stealing at their own expense and inconvenience and with no compensation but with a level of efficiency, completionism, reliability, breadth and depth that is unmatched by the combined efforts of every multi-national media corporation, their legitimate outlets and offerings for paying customers. I'd say there's a pathology here.

Edited by Sean Cunningham
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

 

 

You're conflating multiple parties here, either oversimplifying what's happening intentionally because you're not interested in the phenomenon or motivations of the people Keith and I are referring to or because you legitimately don't understand the number of parties involved and the mechanics of something making its way from DVR to hosting site. Regardless, I'm not talking about or concerned about the hosting sites. That's not an interesting or complicated issue. It's the anonymous army that, at expense to themselves, gather and publish just about everything that is or ever was.

 

They get nothing from the ads, they're not the hosting site. They likely have no interest in the ads or even see them. If they're like me, they have software that blocks all that crap and pop-ups. And you can't embed a trojan or malware into a video stream, one that may or may not be re-compressed by the host site. And these aren't sites that pop up and then down. That's not how any of this stuff works.

 

Thieves steal things they directly benefit from or that they can resell to other people. This is something different. What you'd be looking at would be an epidemic of thieves who are stealing at their own expense and inconvenience and with no compensation but with a level of efficiency, completionism, reliability, breadth and depth that is unmatched by the combined efforts of every multi-national media corporation, their legitimate outlets and offerings for paying customers. I'd say there's a pathology here.

 

No I'm not.

 

But assume I'm a complete idiot here. Why don't you tell me what the cause and cure is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

No I'm not.

...

 

Practically nothing you said related to the people who actually provide the source of the media contained on various hosting sites, distributed through multiple means. Here, let us count the ways:

 

 

I wouldn't call it a pathology for any but the most crazed "hacker" who stays up late at night trying to crack into servers for the sake of it.

 

 

Did you see that in a movie? So hyper intelligent whiz kids are ensuring that if I want to, I can see every episode that's ever aired of So You Think You Can Dance for the challenge? Or because it was there?

 

 

In the end it actually is all about money. Back in the 90s "spam" sites were in every facet of the net. If you were looking for MIDI files you'd come across someone who had a hub site linked to several dozen sites with lots of ads for all kinds of junk, not just so-called adult sites.

 

 

Um, no, it's not, not for the people I'm talking about. You're talking about hosting sites and aggregators There are totally conflicting motivations here, different skill sets and only one of them has the potential for any direct or tangible reward for their efforts. Hint: it's not the guy actually providing all the honey for the honeypot.

 

 

You get money when you put up ads from the advertiser. The more hits you get, the more money you're paid. Around 2001 the going rate for an ad was a couple cents a click. That pay rate may have changed, but regardless every time someone clicks that ad that's money in the bank.

 

 

Again, not the same people. You're talking about different people than I am and there's no mystery with who you're talking about. Here's another hint: people don't click and never really did and the foundation of almost all online ad sales is a lie between the person paying for ads and the person hosting the ads and guess what, none of these people are acquiring the content.

 

The failure of click-thru ads has S.F.A. to do with the folks who make sure within hours of a new episode airing in Japan for Dororon Enma Kun it would be translated and subtitled for non-Japanese regions with no legitimate access at that time or maybe ever.

 

 

 

And that's why people pirate data or do illegal uploads. The idea is to get the user to click on one of the ads, or for more malicious hosts, to invade the user's computer with a virus or trojan, and then just grab money from their account, and then shut down the site and repeat the whole process with another website and upload.

 

 

 

Nope. Again, different people. The folks doing these sorts of things are not who's recording and then uploading shows. The folks gathering the content do not benefit from, own, operate or otherwise benefit from any of these schemes. You're conflating quite a few different folks here as well as incorrectly generalizing the way multiple types of sites and distribution methods actually work. It's like I'm reading about this stuff in a mainstream media article or something.

 

Anyway, have that discussion about the scary hackers and scammers and people making or trying to make money off illegitimate media. But you quoted the entirety of my post without actually having a relevant thing to say about any of it and I'm not interested in any of that and was responding to Keith who expressed curiosity about something I've long been curious about myself.

Edited by Sean Cunningham
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

 

Practically nothing you said related to the people who actually provide the source of the media contained on various hosting sites, distributed through multiple means. Here, let us count the ways:

 

 

 

Did you see that in a movie? So hyper intelligent whiz kids are ensuring that if I want to, I can see every episode that's ever aired of So You Think You Can Dance for the challenge? Or because it was there?

 

 

 

Um, no, it's not, not for the people I'm talking about. You're talking about hosting sites and aggregators There are totally conflicting motivations here, different skill sets and only one of them has the potential for any direct or tangible reward for their efforts. Hint: it's not the guy actually providing all the honey for the honeypot.

 

 

 

Again, not the same people. You're talking about different people than I am and there's no mystery with who you're talking about. Here's another hint: people don't click and never really did and the foundation of almost all online ad sales is a lie between the person paying for ads and the person hosting the ads and guess what, none of these people are acquiring the content.

 

The failure of click-thru ads has S.F.A. to do with the folks who make sure within hours of a new episode airing in Japan for Dororon Enma Kun it would be translated and subtitled for non-Japanese regions with no legitimate access at that time or maybe ever.

 

 

 

 

 

Nope. Again, different people. The folks doing these sorts of things are not who's recording and then uploading shows. The folks gathering the content do not benefit from, own, operate or otherwise benefit from any of these schemes. You're conflating quite a few different folks here as well as incorrectly generalizing the way multiple types of sites and distribution methods actually work. It's like I'm reading about this stuff in a mainstream media article or something.

 

Anyway, have that discussion about the scary hackers and scammers and people making or trying to make money off illegitimate media. But you quoted the entirety of my post without actually having a relevant thing to say about any of it and I'm not interested in any of that and was responding to Keith who expressed curiosity about something I've long been curious about myself.

 

Well gee, my experience is different. I read your post from beginning to end, and having known a few hackers by virtue of being in the suburbs and halfway mark between San Francisco and San Jose, having played with teletypes in the 70s, build my own PCs, learned to code in 80/81, I think I have a loose handle on the hacking scene.

 

The type of person you're talking about either has nothing else to do, or is just obsessed with the activity. But most of the illegal uploads I've ever seen area nearly ALWAYS related to money, and not the ostracized loner Joe-20-something who wants to "stick it to the man".

 

Besides, I thought we were talking about illegal streaming from hubs; showing sporting events or TV specials without consent of the owner. I mean, that's the issue, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

 

I've "talked" to these guys in the forums on their sites. They all fit the same profile, single males between the ages of 16 and 29ish. They have all failed economically, most live with their parents or groups of other failed single men. They are all very anti-authority, anti-corporation, and of course anti-rules. Basically they are social outcasts, who find acceptance amongst other thieves.

 

What I don't understand is why the studios do not launch a covert operation, hire the best hackers they can find, and task them with taking down sites like Pirate Bay. It may be illegal sure, but it would also be the best example of giving people a taste of their own medicine! Every time Pirate Bay puts the site back up, the studio paid hackers, knock it back down. I can just hear the Pirate Bay guys complaining about how the hackers use the internet to hide their identity so they can commit cyber crime. Gee really?

 

The bootlegging will never stop until the authorities start taking down the sites and putting those behind the sites in jail. Once that happens a climate of fear will begin to spread. Also more can be done to track down and fine those that use these sites. A handful of downloaders have been slapped with fines but nothing significant.

 

R,

 

I think Disney is one of the few who contract security to police their property. I think for the other major studios it's a major expense. They're not the media giant that Disney is. Disney has more than just it's movie studio as a revenue stream, and so can afford to spend the extra dollars to see that Mickey Mouse and gang are above board.

 

I think other studios still rely on an older model for revenue; i.e. money from a release to pay for the next project, and therefore spending cash on policing their properties becomes a big expense. Therefore they rely on law enforcement to act on their behalf.

 

And you've cited how that's worked out; QED.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

 

I think Disney is one of the few who contract security to police their property. I think for the other major studios it's a major expense. They're not the media giant that Disney is. Disney has more than just it's movie studio as a revenue stream, and so can afford to spend the extra dollars to see that Mickey Mouse and gang are above board.

 

I think other studios still rely on an older model for revenue; i.e. money from a release to pay for the next project, and therefore spending cash on policing their properties becomes a big expense. Therefore they rely on law enforcement to act on their behalf.

 

And you've cited how that's worked out; QED.

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to once again remind the world:

Which company sued Sony in the 1970s (and lost!) over the allegedly copyright infringing capabilities of home VCRs, and then turned around and went on to make billions of dollars with home video releases (Beta, VHS, LaserDisc and later DVD) of their precious Intellectual Property?

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for answering some of my questions. I noticed there are a lot of "Walmart exclusive" releases. Where the film goes there first and then the other retailers. It makes one wonder whether Walmart, like blockbuster back in the day is asking filmmakers to do some cutting on the version of the film that they sell in their store. I doubt this is the case with yours since it's a family fllm but have you heard from any other filmmakers that maybe got notes from Walmart about trimming this or that?

 

Also, was the film tested? For how many screenings? How were the scores? That usually influences the degree of marketing. So any specifics of that with your experience are also welcome. Did you happen to notice if the distributor you had also dealt with any more arthouse titles and whether those had the same level of distribution, worse or better? By arthouse I mean, like your typical Atom Egoyan film. Intellectual content, not produced for a mass audience. You mentioned some stats but have you heard from any industry colleagues how those are typically treated by retailers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...