Via TechDirt, we learn the frequency with which Hollywood insists every new technology will destroy the movie business:

click for full infographic

giant infographic after the jump

Category: Digital Media, Film, Intellectual Property, Legal

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

8 Responses to “How Often Does the Film Industry Cry Wolf Over Piracy?”

  1. streeteye says:

    Interesting to see Rupert Murdoch call out Google for stealing and thievery, while Sky grabs and broadcasts users’ YouTube videos without license or proper credit.

  2. raholco says:

    Go look at the copyright notices on wax cylinders and early records:

    The more things change, the more they stay the same.

  3. Joe Friday says:

    I agree with those that claim this is really about the film industry attempting to hang on to their 20th Century business model. Sure there’s a bunch of piracy going down, but I have serious doubts that if piracy could be magically eliminated at the wave of a hand, that the bulk of those people would then turn around and make their purchases at full retail, so how much of these imaginary losses are they actually experiencing ?

  4. Whiskey Lunch says:

    I recently read from my Time-Life book series on: Hypocrites of History – Volume I, that…

    In the very early 1900′s (pre-1915) …independent movie studios relocated to southern California, not only for the bright sunny climate, but to intentionally evade patent claims by Thomas Edison’s N.J. based Motion Picture Patents Company …since Californian patent law enforcement was pretty lax at the time.

    …and it’s just ’bout a hundred years since it was ruled that Edison’s Trust (MPPC) went “far beyond what was necessary to protect the use of patents or the monopoly which went with them”

    History is Awesome!

  5. Irwin Fletcher says:

    Reporting from Thailand. No copyright laws here. Refreshing actually. Seeing the opposite end of the spectrum here shows me that perhaps ours may be unreasonable?

  6. orvil tootenbacher says:

    lot of loud-mouthed whiners in the biz.

  7. gordo365 says:

    Someday, they may be right. However, as long as there is seemingly endless demand for low quality content, they will be ok.

  8. Francisco Bandres de Abarca says:

    Here’s a TEDTalk providing a bit of a backgrounder, plus possible implications, from earlier this month:

    One question that may be worthy of asking–”How effective would the enactment of SOPA/PIPA be at suppressing production of pirated media content in China?”

    And on the topic of low quality content (Who’d want to protect most of the crap that heavily populates cable programming these days? A-a-a-h, bring back the good ol’ days when A&E was actually Arts & Entertainment.)–I imagine there is not much incentive to invest in a quality production (you know, a presentation which actually involves writers, actors, set design, character development, etc.), when it may be tough to be found among the 200+ channels most people can peruse, and the competition can make just as much money from advertising with their ‘send a cameraman and sound man out into the field to capture the bemusing antics of yokels’ production style, which rakes in the dough with it’s low production cost, high profit margin approach.

    Perhaps that is why the possibility of offering ‘a la carte’ channel selection to cable subscribers may never happen. People just might select channels which offer higher quality programming, and media companies would have to actually invest in something which requires more than a two man field team and time on a video editing suite.