Digital piracy robbing music artists and filmmakers worldwide

Digital piracy has spiraled out of control in 2011 with film studios, distributors and retailers anxiously looking for a solution to stop the upward trend of illegal digital copies leaked online.

People downloading movies and music illegally are unaware that their actions are damaging the economy and in turn, inflicting harm on their own employment opportunities. In fact, when you download a song or a movie from the internet without paying for it, the revenue from selling a physical copy is lost which would have gone to the artist/ film studio, and in turn would finance other movies and albums.

Some argue that music artists earn too much, like Beyoncé, who seems to have record breaking music tours, and earning millions of dollars. Lady Gaga and Justin Bieber haven’t done so bad in the downturn, topping the Forbes 100 most powerful celebrities and earning millions of dollars from tours, sponsorship and album sales.

But for independent artists, who make up the bulk of the entire industry (not those at the top), its a painful reality. How to get people to notice you when you can only get attention from viral videos on youtube? With all these viral video covers, the only people getting a real benefit are the original artists, who get additional marketing for their song. Then when an indie artist has a shot at making it big, labels will no longer pay for artist development, and will cut as many corners as possible because they themselves are losing money on their own music sales.

What is more frustrating is filmmakers are left to shoot their short, or indie features and struggle to find distributors who are also losing money from mainstream releases from piracy. So how does it affect the wider economy?

Well in India for example, the film industry lost $1 billion in revenue this past in year in a report that puts a grim milestone on the economic damage. But then what about those who make money out of selling illegal DVDs or CDs? They might be turning a profit on the bootleg distribution, but even that is heading for a downturn because no one wants to spend any money on physical products.

When I spoke with Olivier Tena, VP of Paramount, he gave a bleak assessment of piracy and its effects on the business:

“Piracy is a major issue for the entire entertainment industry. Studios and governments are working hard to address it around the world, but it clearly impacts our business.”

I also asked him about film investments, and whether digital piracy would mean there are fewer films made. He replied:

“This is a possibility. Movies have to be cost effective and if piracy continues to erode profits, then it will be difficult to continue investing in as many films.”

How did this happen? Napster was the first real network that took p2p sharing to a whole new game, but with bitorrents and other file sharing platforms still around, there is no end to digital copying, piracy and free movies. Websites are shut down, but days later appear back up.

In a landmark case, Hollywood is attempting to force an ISP (British Telecom) to cut off its customers from a website called ‘Newzbin’ that recently went into administration but appeared elsewhere under new management soon after, which revived the case. The site earns money from memberships and shows people where to download free movies and software. However it seems even shutting down sites, and suing individuals who share illegally is not enough to stop the upturn in piracy.

Is it time for government to regulate the internet when it comes to file sharing without affecting human rights? This is the biggest challenge the entertainment industry faces this decade. If it can stop digital piracy, then economies will benefit, not just the industry itself. After all, making a movie is not just about shooting the film itself, it encompasses many skills, industries and communities.



What do you think?

  • Jerry G

    this is so false, you can not download a movie. A movie is when you watch a high quality flick. These so called downloads are of poor quality so how can they even relate ? Blue Ray, Pay Per View, ect. This is where money is lost. People these days would much rather wait for the movie to appear on Pay Per View for what $4 compared to spending $20 at a movie. There was a time when going to the movies was sweet, to hang out with your buddies but these days homes have more technology that you can play games, watch movies, listen to music, share on the fly all in one location & it saves on gas to. You can have your buddies come over. Back in the 80′s this was not the case, there was no technology in the home, if you wanted it you had to pay for it & could not be owned by the average person. Today is much different. If you expect to be one step ahead, you have got to have something which others do not have easy as pie. By allowing technology in the homes, you make it harder for companies to profit while you make it easy for customers to prosper. C. Parker knew all this to well as Elvis Presley manager. The success of Elvis came from the man Parker by limiting how much the public can have his boy. Elvis was highly exposed while at the same time harder to get while the other artist of the day people got tired of because it was so easy to get close but not with Elvis. Elvis gets a 10 year contract with the movies & what did this did ? drive people nuts, they could not have access to Elvis as they would any other artist.. Elvis did not tour & any promotion for his records were through his movies.. a marketing strategy from Parker. When you limit how much the public can have, they go plum crazy & when you allow the public to gain to much access.. interest slows over time. Here is the king of the 50′s & the only way you can get a glimpse of him is in a movie. If you cant have something by gosh in your mind you want it so bad. If you limit how much technology the average person can receive in the home then you create greed & the people will come rushing to see what the fuss is all about. To say piracy is at fault is not the case.. it’s simply the digital age ran to fast to soon where anything & everything is very easy to obtain. There is to much information these days & that would create losses in sales. For example, what happened to newspapers of the 80′s ? they have been replaced with yahoo, msn & many other online media. It is much easy to read msn for the day & so much cheaper then to pay .50 cents for a newspaper. In short it all comes down to how much information is given to you which sets the success & failure of companies.

  • http://www.twitter.com/mathew30 mathew lisett

    I have been in recent talsk with people in the “know” with industries that try to combat aginst piracy and but specifically cams etc. was asked why it happens and what could be done to stop cams and piracy.

    i explained piracy will never stop as it will simply evolve into a different method all the time.

    explainedover a period of 2 hours that becuase of the bad attitudes and the “naa naaa im not listening” approach of all industries and the distributors doing the same, they are both not listenign to the consumer and are simply ignoring that times are and have been changing for years.

    explained that a major music company 100% admitted that they should have listened to the p2p users of the product and should have listened and gone with the online movement and then stated that apple took the bai and look where they are now, so this major company lost big time becuase they didnt listen.

    the uk copyright law from 1988 is still used in todays technology, and you even have the house of commons saying its out dated and clearly stating (a youtube clip) saying that avatar which the movie industries claims piracy severly cuases the loss of profits, when the house of commons strongly states that BECUASE of piracy and p2p avatar became the 2nd biggest profitable movie of all time, they are also heard saying the reports coming from the industry claiming they make a hugge loss is false and with made up theoritical losses.

    you still have many boss’s in music, tv, film blaming piracy for a drop in hard format sales and giving reports stating theoretical loses, when its a basic fact that they simply are blaming somebody else and not taking the blame themselves for seeing the change and accepting we the consumers found and understood the changes before they did. so what are they doing, well they are blaming us blaming the downloads and sayign they are a huge loss when thats not true as many people actually download content and stil go to the cinema or download the music file legally, so not a single loss.

    they are doing exactly what happened when the first ever video stores came into effect and cinema chains blamed those stores of the sales drop they experinced. the sales of cd’s and dvd’s blamed the next format aswell as piracy even back then when they were changing to mp3 and HDDVD.

    so each time the delivery of format changes and the consumer shows and tells the companies its what were after and they dont like it, they simply go after a scape goat with false numbers and give a load of bumpff just to try and convince those not in the know to stand by them.

    we now have a hope in the uk copyright law , where cameron has requested it to be drawn up, and its actually very intelligent move of whats been said, as it states that the consumer should not be punished and should be legally allowed to convert and transfer any content from music to dvd formats to other formats and to any device.

    now from what i have read, it would also mean that you would legally be allowed to use dvd software that by pass’s encyrption to watch on you pc and rip it to watch on any device and to allow you to do a backup aswwell.

    how ever it also states that if you were to borrow content and watch it, you would be breakign the law…which still doesnt make sense becuase thats essentially the same as doign the same thing when vhs was about yet nobody even in 1988 got sued for doign such a thing, and also ppv’s at your home, they have never sued anybody body for being in the house and not themselves payign for the service.

    and yu also have the fact that they still havent a clue about certain services sayign that they are the top dog and the REASON to why piracy is there, such as newzbin. its this that makes them look like idiots, and stating that they will cut off ips users connections is also being faught due to human rights.

    so theres still a lot of BS walking about and piracy being used as a bad scapegpoat, but it seems things will be looking up for users of content due to the new proposed copyright law in the uk.

  • nelli

    I agree with janey on all points.

    Maybe movie producers / studios would make better profits if they reduced what they spend on the actors themselves and stopped paying them themselves stupid amounts of money ?
    There are people in the world doing things much more valuable and worthwhile that are paid a fraction of the wages these “celebrities” are paid, it’s very sad.

  • janey

    “the revenue from selling a physical copy is lost”

    False assumption that each download = lost sale. This has not been true for ages.

    “Is it time for government to regulate the internet when it comes to file sharing without affecting human rights”

    No, it isn’t. It’s time for the music industry to evolve. More overbearing legislation is not the answer to an outdated business model.

    FYI, newzbin does not host the files. There is also more perfectly legal content there than not. These articles are always written with a bias, trying to paint them as nothing more than a piracy site like The Pirate Bay. Usenet has been around for many years. While there is some ‘infringing content’ the majority of it is not.