Law firm will fight illegal downloadin of your movie for free

[Blade_Jones]

Anyone pissed that their movie is being GIVEN away on PirateBay? Well now a law firm will file a lawsuit for free on your behalf.

Virginia-based law firm Dunlap, Grubb, & Weaver is filing lawsuits against illegal downloaders.

The enterprising lawyers, under the operative the U.S. Copyright Group, seek out indie filmmakers and offer to sue anonymous movie pirates for no charge. The firm then subpoenas Verizon, AT&T and other ISPs to identify each John Doe user, and threatens to sue each person for $150,000 unless they agree to a $1,500 to $2,500 settlement fee, according to Ars Technica's Law & Disorder blog and Techdirt. Defendants can pony up the cash on a website set up to accept checks and credit cards.

http://www.abajournal.com/weekly/article/lawyers_poised_to_bank_millions_on_p2p_prosecution

 

[chongo]

The bottom line is that with a resurgence of lawsuits people are going to second guess whether it's worth the risk of downloading something when they may get fined $2,500. Word gets around fast.

That's not even remotely accurate. Lawsuits against downloaders didn't stem piracy for the RIAA and its certainly not going to work for the film industry. No matter how many lawsuits the film industry brings against downloaders, the vast majority are still going to get off scott free. So, there's no real incentive to stop downloading since it equates to an acceptable risk. And, while lawsuits might bring in some revenue, the PR damage against the film industry, as with the RIAA, might make the entire effort counter-productive.

Aside from heavily regulating the Internet, there is not a damn thing anyone can do to stop piracy. But, much like shaky claims that illegal immigration steals jobs from real Americans, perhaps Internet piracy is more a scapegoat of a failing industry suffering from a host of far more complex problems. I don't mean to say that piracy isn't a problem, but even retailers like Wal-Mart and Target know there will be theft. That's lost revenue, but they know that strong-arming the general population or setting up draconian pat-downs as shoppers exit would only hurt the consumer. There will be theft, and anyone who tries to sell anything has to understand and accept that. The same goes for films, music and games.

 

[M1chae1]

Back to MOON...

First thing...never trust a movie's IMDb budget listing. They lie...in fact, I was told by a pretty experienced industry person that you always up your budget quote when sharing that info.

Next thing...5 million may not be big budget for some folks...but to me, it's definitely in the big budget range. That's a lot of investment. And breaking even on domestic screenings isn't that bad...there's still a lot of money to be made--especially since it's being talked about a lot in cult circles. It's a sleeper hit. And Sam Rockwell has major clout.

As far as making BR on $5mil? Heck no...but consider how much of BR was practical...built by hand...painted by hand. They didn't have CGI back then...at least not nearly at the level it is today. The things you can create today (at home) might have costed millions a few decades ago...now, a 16 year old kid can make a convincing spaceship land on the ground in a seamless composite for $0 dollars.

Anyway. I'll move on.

 

[sonnyboo]

Aside from heavily regulating the Internet, there is not a damn thing anyone can do to stop piracy. But, much like shaky claims that illegal immigration steals jobs from real Americans, perhaps Internet piracy is more a scapegoat of a failing industry suffering from a host of far more complex problems. I don't mean to say that piracy isn't a problem, but even retailers like Wal-Mart and Target know there will be theft. That's lost revenue, but they know that strong-arming the general population or setting up draconian pat-downs as shoppers exit would only hurt the consumer. There will be theft, and anyone who tries to sell anything has to understand and accept that. The same goes for films, music and games.

I expect there to be heavy regulation of the Internet at some point.

Internet Piracy is NOT a scapegoat, but it is also not the SOLE problem. Netflix's business model is partly to blame because it has lowered the need for buying nearly as many copies of a movie. Amazon.com, as well as the online versions of retail stores like Walmart and BestBuy have also significantly diminished a demand for lowed end, independent titles. Since less people are interested, and they don't have to buy as many copies to stock at physical stores by many thousands of copies, this has greatly affected the bottom line for independent and the "Direct-To-Video" market, as in it has eviscerated profits to practically nothing.

Internet Piracy contributes greatly in that it removes the need to rent or buy a DVD or watch a movie shown on TV in order to see it. Again, all revenues are now lost. Piracy is at least equal to causing the damage that anything else does.

The only ones left standing are the big companies that have the deep pockets to weather this storm, but they are still being heavily pummeled by the loss in profits.

To try to compare the losses from Internet Piracy to physical theft at a retail store is ludicrous. That would be comparable if there was no windows or security at any time at the store, then it might be applicable. Internet Piracy accounts for a much higher percentage than physical theft at stores. And even then, Walmart is the largest corporation in the world, hardly relateable to an independent filmmaker or production company.

 

[Brooksy]

This is a great thread I am learning a lot about everyone on this thread. I just have another question if you folks don't mind.

Do you feel that while you are fighting to get back money that is rightfully yours, that you guys might be alienating yourselves from any aspect of the industry?

Or do you feel that fighting for the money helps your reputation in some way shape or form?

 

[Buddy Greenfield]

I wonder if the once morally outraged victim of $15 suddenly turned 100 fold victimizer in return will be blindly seen not as one who cried out for justice, but as one who sold out to vengeance.

At the Indie level when you don’t represent or hide behind that nameless faceless inaccessible corporate machine (as I think many pirates see Hollywood) but you do start F’ing people to the tune of $1500 a pop for some horrible 99 cent bin (IF you are lucky) flick, then are you inviting the wrath and resentment of the bigger picture to your door step?

-Thanks-

 

[M1chae1]

I'm just being the Devil's Advocate here...but let's be realistic...out of ALL the people buying and renting movies, how many actually know how to use and operate torrents? And how many of those 'savvy' people are actually downloading movies?

In the grand scheme of things...taking the entire movie watching community into consideration, I'd say a very small percentage.

I've been savvy enough to dl movies for quite some time, and do you know how many movies I've downloaded? None. Zip. And it's not because I'm a filmmaker/actor...I just don't do it.

Again...I'm just being the Devil's advocate here...but there are millions of movie watcher/buyer/renters out there...and only a small percentage are pirating.

Am I wrong?

 

[sonnyboo]

Do you feel that while you are fighting to get back money that is rightfully yours, that you guys might be alienating yourselves from any aspect of the industry?

Or do you feel that fighting for the money helps your reputation in some way shape or form?

People "in the industry" are just as pissed and interested in seeing some money back from the thieves who steal all of our profits.

I'm only concerned about my reputation with investors, not people who illegally download my movies. Why would I care what they think? Why should anyone? They aren't buying the movie, they are stealing it. Who cares if they don't like you for turning them in for what they are doing wrong. This isn't high school. This is my livelihood.

At the Indie level when you don’t represent or hide behind that nameless faceless inaccessible corporate machine (as I think many pirates see Hollywood) but you do start F’ing people to the tune of $1500 a pop for some horrible 99 cent bin (IF you are lucky) flick, then are you inviting the wrath and resentment of the bigger picture to your door step?

Nice. Very classy. Anyone can clearly see that the quality of the movie has nothing to do with how it sells and how much money can be made. Take for example AVATAR, or any other movie that is subjectively good or bad. Think of every movie you thought sucked and it might have made a profit. Business and art are separate elements of the same business.

I'm going to get my investors more money. I guess the thing to consider is that for some of us (apparently a vast minority on this site), this is how we make a living. Again, I'm not interested in the outrage of the people who get caught doing something illegal complain that they get caught and have to pay.

Business is business. The law is clear. Don't do something illegal if you can't accept the consequences.

 

[Buddy Greenfield]

On one hand, my words are meant to reflect the possible feelings or thoughts of pirates and those being sued.

On the other hand, sorry if my take on things isn’t nice or classy enough for you Lord Ross, but the world doesn’t revolve around you, and if the shoe fits…

EDIT: In retrospect I should have said "If you don't like it, sue me!", but this is the wrong thread for that come back! lol


-Thanks-

 

[chongo]

I expect there to be heavy regulation of the Internet at some point.

Internet Piracy is NOT a scapegoat, but it is also not the SOLE problem. Netflix's business model is partly to blame because it has lowered the need for buying nearly as many copies of a movie. Amazon.com, as well as the online versions of retail stores like Walmart and BestBuy have also significantly diminished a demand for lowed end, independent titles. Since less people are interested, and they don't have to buy as many copies to stock at physical stores by many thousands of copies, this has greatly affected the bottom line for independent and the "Direct-To-Video" market, as in it has eviscerated profits to practically nothing.

Netflix is the natural progression of how consumers access entertainment. In a free market, convenience and cost triumph... and Netflix (and I'll throw in Hulu and Crackle) offer both better than anyone. I don't think any blame can be placed at the feet of something like Netflix.

I wonder if the once morally outraged victim of $15 suddenly turned 100 fold victimizer in return will be blindly seen not as one who cried out for justice, but as one who sold out to vengeance...

This is the problem I'm having. I realize there's a difference between pirating a movie and shoplifting a DVD, since the filmmaker has still been paid if someone were to lift a copy of Meat Market II from Wal-Mart. However, shaking people down for $1000+ dollar for illegal downloading is fucking ridiculous. If it were a hundred dollars, or even a couple of hundred, it would still serve as punishment, the copyright infringee would still receive compensation, and there would not be nearly the level of pasty Internet denizen outrage.

 

[Buddy Greenfield]

I’m not for pirating (or lawyers), I’m for films and for people myself. I just don’t want to see this go south for someone.

It’s one thing to not be interested in the 10 thousand people sued for downloading your film, but it could be another when that one wrong person become interested in you.

I know that concern will be a part of it no matter what, but I think a one time- limited time amnesty offer at the indie level would be a prudent measure. (Like come forward and pay the films worth to the filmmaker by this date or we come at you.)

I would rather at least try to have half of the people thinking “Okay I stole and had to pay what it was worth, that’s fair.” instead of making sure all of the people are thinking “If I ever catch that guy alone in a dark alley..” , but that’s just me.

-Thanks-

 

[Kosh]

All valid points. I think we all agree that pirating is theft and theft is unacceptable but Buddy and others have also raised excellent points - just because someone steals something do we chop off their right arm? Fortunately we don't serve justice like that in this country. So I suppose penalizing someone $1,500 to $2,000 because they stole a movie (any movie) does sound a tad bit excessive, but that's the call of our lawmakers to define what's fair punishment in this case.

A black-and-white issue (theft) meets a gray area (fairness) with a flavor of bias (lawyers - love 'em or hate 'em). This has all the ingredients of an interesting debate - and since we are on a learning and sharing site, filmmakers (from writers to the business people) I urge you to thoroughly review this thread because you have some textbook definitions of conflict here that you can run with using any of the arguments made here to shape your own social commentary on a strong relevant issue that affects everyone.

Strong and compelling arguments have been made in a decent and respectful nature. This issue is a quagmire that will plague us until our leaders and smarter people (two very mutually exclusive sets) grow the stones and/or come up with a way to address the dark underbelly of our technologies.

 

[M1chae1]

I'm only concerned about my reputation with investors, not people who illegally download my movies. Why would I care what they think? Why should anyone? They aren't buying the movie, they are stealing it. Who cares if they don't like you for turning them in for what they are doing wrong. This isn't high school. This is my livelihood.

We do want a fanbase though--and sometimes this fanbase can grow through illegal sharing. And maybe next time they are looking to purchase a movie, they'll see your DVD and pick it up because they really liked your previous film.

A stretch? Maybe a little...but definitely a reasonable thing to consider.

 

[Zensteve]

I realize there's a difference between pirating a movie and shoplifting a DVD, since the filmmaker has still been paid if someone were to lift a copy of Meat Market II from Wal-Mart.

Not necessarily.

Walmart has many product lines that are essentially on consignment - the products are placed in the store, and a cheque is mailed out at the end of the month for products that have been sold... and that number is exclusively based on what has been physically run through checkout scanners. 100% of inventory loss is passed to the originator/supplier.

I don't know if all their products are handled the same; just sayin' that if they can, Walmart avoids dealing with the negative costs involved with missing or stolen products.

 

[Brooksy]

We do want a fanbase though--and sometimes this fanbase can grow through illegal sharing. And maybe next time they are looking to purchase a movie, they'll see your DVD and pick it up because they really liked your previous film.

A stretch? Maybe a little...but definitely a reasonable thing to consider.

I actually don't think this is a stretch. I would rather have a huge fan base then a few investors. Not to mention that if you get a bunch of hardcore fans, they will hopefully respect you enough to WANT to purchase the movie not steal it. I know that I purposely purchase the films of directors that I love and respect. Could I download it? Sure. But I make it a point to purchase the DVD.

 

[Blade_Jones]

only a small percentage are pirating.

Says who? Actually music sales dropped globally from approximately $38 billion in 1999 to $32 billion in 2003.

They say that 38% of software on people's computers is pirated.

Illegal file sharing has also dropped the prices of CDs.

The MPAA reported that American studios lost $2.3 billion to Internet piracy in 2005.

Record companies have had to change their whole business model. Now it's all about profiting off of touring - not so much record sales anymore.

 

[chongo]

Says who? Actually music sales dropped globally from approximately $38 billion in 1999 to $32 billion in 2003.

They say that 38% of software on people's computers is pirated.

Illegal file sharing has also dropped the prices of CDs.

The MPAA reported that American studios lost $2.3 billion to Internet piracy in 2005.

Record companies have had to change their whole business model. Now it's all about profiting off of touring - not so much record sales anymore.

What exactly do you mean by "music sales"? When stating that music sales have dropped, does that take into account Itunes and similar services, Pandora and streaming online radio, and the ease of sales of used albums through Amazon and Ebay? I won't lie and say piracy isn't a factor, but it's only one factor among many.

The same goes for the prices of CDs, which were overpriced to begin with. Piracy isn't necessarily even the top reason prices have dropped. CDs are losing in competition to legal downloading. That would be the main reason prices have dropped-- to remain competitive.

And, I would like to see where the MPAA came up with their figure of $2.3 billion. In light of the BP oil spill, I think we've all learned that we can't always take at face value what some big conglomerate tells us.

And, yes, record companies have changed the way they do business. But that's not because of piracy... it's because their old business model was outdated.

 

[Brooksy]

Says who? Actually music sales dropped globally from approximately $38 billion in 1999 to $32 billion in 2003.

They say that 38% of software on people's computers is pirated.

Illegal file sharing has also dropped the prices of CDs.

The MPAA reported that American studios lost $2.3 billion to Internet piracy in 2005.

Record companies have had to change their whole business model. Now it's all about profiting off of touring - not so much record sales anymore.

How can they even measure that?

 

[Brooksy]

I have another question pointed at those who have feature films that are getting downloaded illegally: How did your feature film get fully on the internet where it can be downloaded anyway? Could you just not have the entire movie on the internet?

 

[TheOpusFuller]

Sonnyboo, what movie have you made that you feel like you are getting ripped off on? Personally, it seems like you think you are getting ripped off thousand and thousands of dollars. I looked at your listing on IMDB and the first feature I came across was Horrors of War 2006. I looked it up on torrent sites and it's barely active. Has no seeders and or leechers so what's the problem?

 

[sonnyboo]

I have another question pointed at those who have feature films that are getting downloaded illegally: How did your feature film get fully on the internet where it can be downloaded anyway? Could you just not have the entire movie on the internet?

People RIP the DVD, IE they crack the encryption protection, a fairly easy process, and make a copy of the movie from the DVD to their hard drive. Then they encode it to an AVI using DivX or Xvid which maintains most of the DVD quality, but a feature film ends up at about 700 megabytes, just enough to burn to a CD-R. Then they upload it to torrent sites.

The filmmaker was in no way a part of this process. The entire film was put online and shared on Peer to Peer (P2P) sites without the filmmaker being compensated.

I would rather have a huge fan base then a few investors. Not to mention that if you get a bunch of hardcore fans, they will hopefully respect you enough to WANT to purchase the movie not steal it. I know that I purposely purchase the films of directors that I love and respect. Could I download it? Sure. But I make it a point to purchase the DVD.

I guess in your case you are saying "you" make a point of buying the DVD, but the point is that many people do NOT. There is a percentage, either a high one or a low one, but without a doubt there is money lost from those who download and never purchase. That is an indisputable fact, and the core of this entire debate.

Most of the investors I know would never want to put money with a filmmaker who is less concerned with making their money back and more about building fans with illegal copies that don't pay anything. This is a ludicrous business model to HOPE that someone will like the movie enough to buy it after getting it for free. If you can find money people that are willing to go with this plan, I'd love to meet them. I would have a bridge for sale.

Netflix is the natural progression of how consumers access entertainment. In a free market, convenience and cost triumph... and Netflix (and I'll throw in Hulu and Crackle) offer both better than anyone. I don't think any blame can be placed at the feet of something like Netflix.

"Blame" is the wrong word. You are 100% correct; it is the changing system as a whole, and HuLu is another great example of the future of distribution, as we are negotiating with them now. Even then distribution of a feature is not nearly as profitable as it once was, both because of legitimate changes in the business and illegal/amoral ones.

So I suppose penalizing someone $1,500 to $2,000 because they stole a movie (any movie) does sound a tad bit excessive, but that's the call of our lawmakers to define what's fair punishment in this case.

The copyright laws clearly state the penalty is up to $250,000 in fines (see the warning at the head of every legit DVD). The settlement offers are less than 1%-2%, and as much as you might feel that is still too much, that is a very small sum. This is a matter of opinion without one person being more right or wrong than the other. We have to agree to disagree, and move on.

We're working with this law firm, and I honestly have no problem whatsoever with suing people who illegally downloaded our feature film. I think if people want to illegally download then they should have to pay, and just reimbursing the cost of the DVD ain't enough. That's like saying that people who shoplift should just get fined the cost of whatever they stole and not go to jail for breaking the law. The concept of punishment for the crime justifies the costs to me. It is illegal, so if you think that is too much money, then don't download movies illegally.

I do want to apologize to Buddy, as I overreacted. This whole debate on multiple threads has been somewhat civil and not personal. I think we (I) should uphold that.