Uh...

Quote: "This was a fight on a platform we're not at this point comfortable with..."
Article: "MPAA Admits they're not comfortable with the Internet"
Subby: "MPAA doesn't understand the Internet"

Let's pull that back to reality a wee bit. He's saying their position sucks and they're fighting (and losing) an uphill battle. Not that they don't understand it.

They have been 100% wrong in every new technology since movies began.

"TV will kill movies! ban it!"
(TV rights end up earning them billions)

"Home video will kill movies! Ban it"
(Home video ends up earning them billions in profit)

"The internet will kill movies! Ban it!"

The future is selling movies online for a dollar. At that price they'd sell far, far more than they do now. Basic price elasticity, Economics 101.

Now DVD retail $20. Half goes to retailer. Half of what's left spent on physical manufacture, shipping etc. Profit to studio $5 per DVD. Sell 1 million, profit $5 million.

Offer legal, good quality, online downloads for $1 each. No manufacturer costs, no shipping, no retailer costs, hosting costs almost negligible. At $1 each they'd sell times as many, maybe twenty times.
Even at just ten times they would make $10m profit. Twice as much as before. And millions of people that will download because it is far cheaper than $20 will pay $1 to get a legit, quality, copy. Why pirate, and risk prosecution, viruses and crappy quality, if it is only $1 for a legal, safe quality copy?

That they cannot see, or accept, this is exactly the same as refusing to accept that they could sell VHS movies and make more money.

Flint Ironstag: Half of what's left spent on physical manufacture, shipping etc.

Oh, nooooo. Manufacturing and shipping of a single DVD is negligible. $3 for most mass-market discs, if I had to guess. The vast majority of the costs are in the production of the film itself and the marketing.

t3knomanser: Flint Ironstag: Half of what's left spent on physical manufacture, shipping etc.

Oh, nooooo. Manufacturing and shipping of a single DVD is negligible. $3 for most mass-market discs, if I had to guess. The vast majority of the costs are in the production of the film itself and the marketing.

Well my figure was $5, so not a million miles out. If you take a DVD retailing for $12 then your $3 is half of half of the cost.

Every movie will be different, the point is that at a far lower retail price they will sell far, far more copies and make more money.

Flint Ironstag: Well my figure was $5, so not a million miles out. If you take a DVD retailing for $12 then your $3 is half of half of the cost.

I went and got numbers. A DVD costs $1.70 to replicate, on average. BRDs are similar. So, yeah, $3 shipping costs. But here's the important thing to note: wholesalers do not take a cut of the sale. They sell it, at a price, to the retailer. The retailer then sets a price to recoup their outlay and make a profit. The producers of the film don't care whether the copy they sold retails for $300 or $3- their profit is the same.

My first thought:

The internet is for porn and cats. You will lose this fight, MPAA, no matter what you do.

HawgWild: It's amazing how the libs want to regulate all other aspects of the economy but the internet, and the fundies want to put all sorts of regulations on the internet, but let Wall Street do whatever the hell it wants.

Well, except that the former is bullshiat.

HawgWild: It's amazing how the libs want to regulate all other aspects of the economy but free speech, and the fundies want to put all sorts of regulations on the internet, but let Wall Street do whatever the hell it wants.

FTFM

Theaetetus: Subby: "MPAA doesn't understand the Internet"

It's not that hard to connect the dots.

The MPAA says they're up against an opponent who controls the platform. Uh, who exactly is that opponent?

The mere fact that they think there's an opponent shows they still don't get it.

The distribution models used by the movie, television, and music industries are terribly outdated.
They need to play catch-up, but they've been dragging their feet the whole way.

Rather than modernizing their companies and methods, they're seeking worldwide government assistance in enforcing their failing business models.

Look at what the people are demanding in access, options and content, and then offer that at a reasonable price.
Don't tell people not to take a shorter, easier, less restricting path or you'll sue them. Offer them that same shorter, easier, less restricting path at a price that is more appealing than the risks of pirating.

Note: they're not saying they need to understand how to make money from the internet, it's about dealing with new opponents.

The RIAA and MPAA have to be dragged, kicking and screaming into providing anything more than what they currently do. For some reason, these farkers think that I'm going to pay MORE for an iTunes movie as what I pay for a shiny disc with extras, that I can lend to my friends, sell on and so forth.

Bullshiat. They know exactly what they're dealing with. They feign ignorance so they don't have to own their coontishness.

HawgWild: A Dark Evil Omen: HawgWild: It's amazing how the libs want to regulate all other aspects of the economy but the internet, and the fundies want to put all sorts of regulations on the internet, but let Wall Street do whatever the hell it wants.

Well, except that the former is bullshiat.

Oh, please. You're probably downloading free movies and music right now.

Thief ...

lolwut

I have a question: why is this business still going? It's obvious nobody in charge knows how the fark they make their money. You would think they would make it a priority to figure out HOW THEIR BUSINESS WORKS in order to keep it going.

It's obvious the entertainment industry is full of people who really need to be pushed out. They're paying out more to their bought politicos instead of profiting from this. You would think in between their shouting about making money that they would figure out ways to...well, make money.

It's so sad how these assholes can't figure out how they make their bread, but are damned well and determined to gum up the works. If I was a stockholder, I would just hire any twenty or thirtysomething off the street and pay them 200k a year to run the company because they could not do a worse job.

The best part of this is that they still seem to believe this somehow is all Google and Facebook's fault, like all the big tech giants are gathering in secret in some Palo Alto underground lair to plot their next move. They really have no concept of just average Joe Internet having a stake in this.

I really think this is why some of these chuckleheads are so incredulous about the backlash on this. They really have no concept of an internet that is not Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Twitter, etc. They thought they could push this through and give the large tech companies a "wink wink nudge nudge" assurance that they wouldn't get too evil about it, so long as they played ball, not realizing that there were all these millions of individuals who would rise up and complain.

jayhawk88: The best part of this is that they still seem to believe this somehow is all Google and Facebook's fault, like all the big tech giants are gathering in secret in some Palo Alto underground lair to plot their next move. They really have no concept of just average Joe Internet having a stake in this.

I really think this is why some of these chuckleheads are so incredulous about the backlash on this. They really have no concept of an internet that is not Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Twitter, etc. They thought they could push this through and give the large tech companies a "wink wink nudge nudge" assurance that they wouldn't get too evil about it, so long as they played ball, not realizing that there were all these millions of individuals who would rise up and complain.

Of course not! That's the society we live in, though. There is no society outside of business. It's either a money maker or it doesn't farking exist. It's not just the MPAA and RIAA, it's society at large.

Makh: Well, it's like this.

Let's say everyone wants a drink. Your model requires us to go to the store every time we want water. To bring it back in specially sealed bottles. But now we have pipes. Since receiving them, we have found we can use them for all sorts of services previously not thought of or considered impossible with the current methods thanks to the volume of water now able to come through the pipes. Like bathing, cleaning, playing and removing waste.

You want us to pay by the bottle, or shut down the pipes. We cannot even share a drink with someone else without incurring a fee. It seems like you want us to go back to the days when we didn't have running water because you cannot think of a new sales model.

MPAA: So....what you're saying is that the Internet is like a series of pipes. Or tubes.

HawgWild: A Dark Evil Omen: HawgWild: It's amazing how the libs want to regulate all other aspects of the economy but the internet, and the fundies want to put all sorts of regulations on the internet, but let Wall Street do whatever the hell it wants.

Well, except that the former is bullshiat.

Oh, please. You're probably downloading free movies and music right now.

Thief ...

Mr. Dodd? Is that you?

HawgWild: A Dark Evil Omen: lolwut

Please. This entire fight is about piracy.

MPAA: "Pay for our crap"

Hippie: "No! You have an outdated delivery system, so we're going to steal it. Fark you!"

I believe certain cars are overpriced, too. But I don't steal cars through a third party because of it.

You're a toolbox. First off, none of this is about piracy. It's about corporate and political control of speech. Second, "hippie", really? What is with rightists and their obsession with hippies? There's like five hippies left and they all own big companies that make food.

Dear MPAA

It is not a dump truck. It is a series of tubes.

Hope that helps,

B_W_F

ps - your mother sucks cocks in hell.

This was a fight on a platform we're not at this point comfortable with, and we were going up against an opponent that controls that platform."

No, you weren't up against an opponent who controls the platform, you were going up against the platform itself. That is the reason you lost.

They still don't get it. Like the idiot who suggested that anyone who was against SOPA somehow benefited financially from foreign websites that break copyright. They don't understand why completely normal people without a stake in digital piracy or counterfeit goods would have a problem with their laws.

Their complete failure to understand why people got so upset is exactly the point.

They don't have enemies on the net their enemy is the net itself and it is mostly entirely in self defence.

\They might just as well be surprised that law seeking to censor, control and destroy billboards would suddenly have so many billboards go up against it.

I think we, the people, need to start our own MPAA.

HawgWild: A Dark Evil Omen: You're a toolbox. First off, none of this is about piracy. It's about corporate and political control of speech. Second, "hippie", really? What is with rightists and their obsession with hippies? There's like five hippies left and they all own big companies that make food.

First of all, I ain't no tool. Second, hippies don't make ANYTHING even CLOSE to resembling food. Third, I'm all for the freedom of speech. But does your freedom of speech mean you should be able to steal copyrighted material?

This isn't about piracy.

This isn't about piracy.

This isn't about piracy.

It was never about piracy. It's about corporate and political control of speech. They are interested in destroying the platform so they don't have to adapt their business model to it, and in choking off alternate entertainment sources. You understand that? Steam? Steam is a threat to the MPAA. Netradio stations legally playing music by independent artists? They're a threat to the RIAA. Farking Youtube and livestream and people hosting little flash movies on their own websites are a threat to both.

This isn't and was never about piracy, it was about forcing themselves back into the position of having absolute control of content, even content not yet produced, and more importantly control of content creation.

Why don't they just shut up?

"This was a fight on a platform we're not at this point comfortable with, and we were going up against an opponent that controls that platform."

That's the problem, sport. You are fighting it. Go with the flow and embrace it with some decent business models.

A farking gold mine is staring them in the face and they can't see it because they have their heads buried in the sand.