Megaupload Shutdown Hurt Box Office Revenues

Ernesto
November 24, 2012
260
MegaUpload
Print

A new paper suggests that box office revenues were negatively impacted after the shutdown of Megaupload. The dip in revenues was most visible for average size and smaller films. According to the researchers this may have been caused by the loss of word-of-mouth promotion by people who used the popular file-hosting site to share movies. For blockbuster movies the Megaupload shutdown had the opposite effect.

In common with every file-sharing service, Megaupload was used by some of its members to host copyright-infringing movies.

For this reason the MPAA was one of the main facilitators of the Megaupload investigation, which ultimately led to the shutdown of the company in January.

The movie industry was quick to praise the government’s actions, but a new report suggests that Megaupload’s demise actually resulted in lower box office revenues.

Researchers from Munich School of Management and Copenhagen Business School published a short paper titled “Piracy and Movie Revenues: Evidence from Megaupload.” The study analyzes weekly data from 1344 movies in 49 countries over a five-year period, to asses the impact of the Megaupload shutdown on movie theater visits.

The researchers theorize that some films may actually benefit from piracy due to word of mouth promotion, and their findings partly support this idea.

Comparing box office revenues before and after the Megaupload raids shows that overall box office revenues went down. The effects are small, but consistent across different sample designs when taking into account factors such as inflation, Internet penetration and the popularity of Megaupload in each country.

“In all specifications we find that the shutdown had a negative, yet in some cases insignificant effect, on box office revenues,” the researchers write.

The researchers therefore believe that their findings may support the notion that piracy can act as promotion. Those who pirate movies may talk about them to friends, who unlike them do pay for movie tickets.

“Our counter-intuitive finding may suggest support for the theoretical perspective of (social) network effects where file-sharing acts as a mechanism to spread information about a good from consumers with zero or low willingness to pay to users with high willingness to pay,” they write.

The researchers did find, however, that this effect does not occur for blockbuster movies that are shown on more than 500 screens. For these films box office revenues got a relative boost after Megaupload’s demise.

This suggests blockbuster movies may be less prone to word-of-mouth promotion by movie pirates.

“The information-spreading effect of illegal downloads seems to be especially important for movies with smaller audiences. ‘Traditional’ theories that predict substitution may be more applicable to blockbusters,” the researchers explain.

While the results are promising and controversial, more research is needed to prove causality of the effects that were found. Whatever the case, we don’t think the MPAA will cheer on Kim Dotcom anytime soon.

Previous Post | Next Post

Follow @torrentfreak

Bo

Why does not the MPAA buy some research company and refute these outrageous findings?
- http://torrentfreak.com/ Rob8urcakes
  
  “… a new report suggests that Megaupload’s demise actually resulted in lower box office revenues.”
  
  Told you so!!
  - JordanKratz
    
    Need to get the World to Boycott the fuckers of the MAFIAA !
    Then I will truly be happy…………..when they are Dead.
    - Tman
      
      That’s exactly what we need, but the problem is getting people to completely boycott by not downloading any of their shit (and most of it is shit) during the boycott period. Otherwise MAFIAA will just go to government and want more draconian laws.
      If the boycott is in place and no one downloads their crap, there is no longer an excuse for them to fall back on, they’ll have less power and revenue. Less of those and they’re done.
    - Anony
      
      If no one buys their content then the MPAA points to piracy again. It’s a vicious cycle stemming from the arrogance that only what they own is worthwhile.
- Guest
  
  Well they won’t cause they are assholes. They would rather make the researches in their own favour.
- MadAsASnake
  
  Doesn’t matter what you think of piracy, there is increasing evidence that movie company revenues are not harmed by “piracy”. In terms of “damages” to the movie industry, this is a big fat zero.
  - JG
    
    “there is increasing evidence that movie company revenues are not harmed by “piracy”.”
    
    You mean like how for the last 5 or so years simultaneously they’ve been complaining that piracy is causing the industry to go bankrupt resulting in poor defenseless “Best Boys” not being able to get a pay check to feed their families thanks to piracy, while also celebrating record breaking years at the box office bringing in what $10 billion a year….
    
    Or that Avatar happens to be the top downloaded film while also being the top grossing film…. I’d assume the rest of the top 10 for both categories probably contain similar titles (at least for the titles released during the 2000s)
    
    Or all the various studies that show pirates are 3 times more likely to actually buy a movie ticket, or album or whatever than someone who doesn’t pirate…
    - CandyBum
      
      people who stream/download illegal content. Sometimes do it to weed out which movies are worth spending the money and which movies are not worth it. I am one of them. If i come across a really good movie before online then yes it would either encourage me to
      A, Recommend it to friends
      or
      B, See it in the cinema’s again because it’s soo good i have to watch it on the big screen and not some lame 20 inch screen computer monitor. lol
- Bananas
  
  I have not seen any movies since the Mega shutdown so i can’t recommend any.
  - IHaveNoBalls
    
    Go on a torrent site, and i recommend a film called Misery (1990) and ILL Manors (2012). There’s two films to get you started
    - Bananas
      
      The issue is that i don’t like to download movies, i just like to stream them…There was that Megavideo thing that movie blog would use.
  - CandyBum
    
    haha yes that is what’s so great about mega.. They were the only filehosting that had streaming. Most people with low bandwidth use streaming. I admit watching movies on megavideo but you know what. I agree with Bananas. If i saw a good movie. I would recommend it to everyone on my twitter and facebook friends and be like.. wow this is a good movie. I maybe streaming illegal content but my word of mouth sure would get at least 2 people walk into the cinema’s and PAY for it who would not have done so. With blockbusters my word of mouth doesn’t do anything because they are already on heavy promotion but the recommendations work on lesser known movies. sometimes I’ve been impressed with some independent movies that i actually would go watch it in the cinema too. I mean you got to admit. Watching a great movie on a 20 inch screen moniter is just not the same as watching it in the cinemas.
    
    The thing with the movie industry today is that MOST movies these days are LAME! why would people want to spend $20-30 per person in a movie theater to go see a LAME movie?? The movies from the 90′s were fantastic and awesome. I have actually bought alot of movies on DVD legally and most of my legal collection is movies before 2002 because they are quality good movies.
    
    I think the point i am trying to make is that people who stream/download illegal content. Sometimes do it to weed out which movies are worth spending the money and which movies are not worth it. I am one of them. If i come across a really good movie who i never heard of before on megavideo then yes it would either encourage me to A, Recommend it to friends or B, See it in the cinema’s again because it’s soo good i have to watch it on the big screen and not some lame 20 inch screen computer monitor. lol
    
    It’s not our fault that hollywood has decided to make shitty movies with lame ideas in the last 10 yrs. Like the shitty remakes and recycled storylines. Come up with new ideas like you used to do back in the day and Maybe it would encourage people to go back to BUYING these legally because who the hell wants to spend money on lame movies?
    - 7th_Guest
      
      >haha yes that is what’s so great about mega.. They were the only filehosting that had streaming.[...][
      Too young to remember Stage6?
      
      >[...]It’s not our fault that hollywood has decided to make shitty movies with lame ideas in the last 10 yrs.[...]
      I’m as avid and ardent a file-sharer as the next guy here, but this is a notion that’s always baffled me as a moviegoer. I mean, I get that the movie industry’s behind several detestable – sociopathic even – schemes, what with its multi-decade-long flagrant tax dodging and the systematic legislative onslaught against civil liberties they’ve been engaging in since the turn of the century, but still, to oppose that by denouncing as shitty from first to last everything they’ve produced in their craft of choice and through the work of hundreds of indeed talented individuals that have next to nothing to do with their corporate behaviour seems about as illogical and black-n-white fanatical a world view as the MPAA’s own toward piracy. I mean, hell, just going by what’s in the current HDD partition viewed in my windows explorer window, here’s a some movies from the last 10 years that no sensible person could get away with calling shitty:
      
      13 Assassins (2010)
      28 Days Later (2002)
      Avatar (2009)
      District 9 (2009)
      Equilibrium (2002)
      Hot Fuzz (2007)
      How to Train Your Dragon (2010)
      Ice Age (2002)
      Iron Man (2008)
      Mr. Brooks (2007)
      Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl (2003)
      Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011)
      Shaun of the Dead (2004)
      Spider-Man 2 (2004)
      The Bourne Identity (2002)
      The Dark Knight (2008)
      The King’s Speech (2010)
      The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003)
      The Raid: Redemption (2011)
      There Will Be Blood (2007)
      Up (2009)
      V for Vendetta (2005)
      X-Men 2 (2003)
      
      So, yeah, shitty stuff, huh? Careful with that first aphorism step there, man, it’s a doozy…
- Who
  
  “refute these outrageous findings?” how can they be outrageous? so what you are saying is that you believe the MPAA is in the right? the tittle says
  “Megaupload Shutdown Hurt Box Office Revenues” the key word was “HURT” as the shutdown hurt sales.
  
  @Tman: *down below* do you even know what BOYCOTT means? it 1st involves NOT buying ANY of there crap, this includes tickets to theater showings, video rentals *including streaming* and home video releases, AND 2nd hand sales *used*. then slowly the sharing will stop.
  BUT there’s about 3billion in just the US alone that think P2P is stealing and agree with the MPAA that P2P users should be stopped and punished. when only about 2billion would wide do P2P. so unless the MPAA really pisses off billions of people world wide a boycott will not happen.
  - Uhhuh
    
    nothing wrong buying second hand
    - Who
      
      no nothing wrong with it, but a FULL boycott means to NOT buy/trade/share ANY of there crap period. best thing to do, to make a stand would be to make a video of you TROWING there shit in the garbage. or breaking it 1st.
- Shamu
  
  Hella tired of reading about megashitload.
torrent freakster

So much proof and MPAA still refuses to admit they lied and manufactured stats.

Why is the law system accepting this bullshit from MPAA to begin with ?

It sounded shady to begin with since MPAA didn’t provide any facts to verify their claims.

How come some companies (interestingly only american companies) are allowed to walk all over the law system and publicly lie without getting punished for it ?

Is the american economy so bad that they allow companies to break the law to help the economy ?
- MadAsASnake
  
  Because people like Chris Dodd have big slush funds to bribe the establishment.
- UraPhake
  
  “Is the american economy so bad that they allow companies to break the law to help the economy ?”
  
  As an American, I can (sadly) reply with a firm, “Yes.”
  
  If you’ve read the article on Falkvinge dot net regarding the fact that the U.S. may have apparently invaded Iraq because it had suddenly started selling its oil for Euros instead of for US Dollars and that the Bush administration went to extremes in manufacturing lies to convince the public that an invasion of Iraq was warranted (actually they convinced our Congress because most of the public did NOT want a war with Iraq), then you can see how truly corrupt our system here is.
  
  People get tired of hearing the phrase, “Corporate Fascism” (as overly used by the Occupy movement) and become enured. The lobbyists in Washington with all their money seem to get what they want and the ruling by the Supreme Court giving corporations “personhood” is just gravy for them. The public here seems to take what corporations do here where the law is concerned for granted.
  
  Apple gets patent protection for rectangles with round edges. Public reacts with a collective yawn.
  
  But my main point was this: Corruption starts at the top. The flow of the dollar is all that matters. Whether the flow comes about justly or not doesn’t seem to matter.
  
  The MPAA/RIAA have been corrupt in their existence forever and nothing is going to change that mindset until their business model is dead and stinking at their feet. The aroma is beginning to enter their noses but they refuse to accept the fact of what it is and instead of cleaning up their act, they simply spray money at politicians as though it was air freshener. It may work in the short term, but the smell returns ever stronger with each passing day.
  
  Some of us here are trying to stem this scourge, but without more of the public becoming enraged at the actions of the corporations and the government, the fight will be over before it’s barely begun.
  - Dondilly
    
    I agree with your point on Iraq, that theory has been around since before the actual invasion.
    
    As for the MAFIAA, published or not, both we and they have known that their figures and claimed losses are utter hogwash.
    
    If direct financial loss from sharing is not the real reason for their rabid anti p2p stance (and the internet in general for that matter), what is the real reason.
    
    If you consider where the real power of media companies resides it is that until the net, the media companies grew fat by controllong the means of distribution and publicity. With music it has been difficult if not impossible for unsigned or indie label artists to get airplay or records stocked in major outlets. Often there is cross ownership between film,tv,radio and music
    
    We have all seen how difficult for independent production companies to gain access to more than a handfull of screens without signing over their crown jewels to one of the majors. Likewise, if an independent music label succeeded in getting a string of hits bypassing the majors to get product to retail outlets (Island records in uk springs to mind), you can bet a major will offer the owners wads of cash to buy them out. In the process shutting their own distribution and reducing what was once a company into nothing more than a boutique label under direct control of the major.
    
    Fans/consumers might not see any difference at first (other than minimal new artists on the label). The ones that saw the difference are artists themselves as an avenue to market where they retained greater control vanishes.
    
    The net is leveling the field, the power of the MAFIAA to control distribution and promotion are comming to an end. Anyone can go to a cd pressing plant and order CDs. Anyone can setup on amazon or sell via their own site or submit to download sites like amazon,google or itunes or release free via bittorrent and include tour schedules in the download.
    
    They will no doubt buy prominence on music sales sites trying to bury the indies. That leaves torrents. That is why they ignore the fact most torrent sites are at worst copyright neutral with many honoring dmca takedowns counting for nothing. It is about constraining the power of artists rather than unquantiable lost sales. Without artists, they don’t have a product.
    - asd
      
      If indie artists can see the problem so well then why don’t they provide their products gratis or for free over as many medias as possible?
    - Anyone
      
      they do
      see for example Promobay
    - Dondilly
      
      @asd one of the differences between film and music is as i tried to point out, the film companies still hold control over most screens. In the states, the studios may have been forced to sell their cinemasz 60 years ago, but they still dictate terms. There is no such control on music venues
  - Anony
    
    You forgot to mention that the RIAA has the monopoly on royaty collection in the U.S. too.
    
    Another factor that may answer why some bought tickets after Mega went down is that many file hosts were blocked by VISA and PayPal.
- Who
  
  its because the world is corrupted.
- Guest321
  
  If they admit the truth, they would be out of business. MPAA and RIAA need to keep the labels and studios convinced that piracy is bad or else their funding would be cut.
- http://twitter.com/EvanKnz Evan Kennedy
  
  That’s simply the American justice system at work. No special tricks required.
Pingback: In the News.. | TorGuard.net Blog - Anonymous VPN Services
Guest

This will no doubt be ignored by the MAFFIA and if they are pushed for a response then they will only debunk it and wave there hands in the air and magically appear figures that will show that the money for them is more plentiful then before Megauploads shutdown.
- Anon
  
  Yes, that’s actually what Ernesto reported.
  
  “this effect does not occur for blockbuster movies that are shown on more than 500 screens. For these films box office revenues got a relative boost after Megaupload’s demise.”
  - MadAsASnake
    
    So if we assume that box office takings have a reasonably direct relationship with promotion, this makes sense. The block busters get promoted to death, so extra exposure from file sharers won’t help them. For the smaller movies, sharing ends up promoting these movies to a wider audience that can turn into greater success at the box office. Now if we take the US constitutions view on the purpose of copyright (to maximise the creation and availability of such material) it would seem that piracy serves the function of both promotion and distribution that leads to more variety. The world of entertainment, it seems wants more than the usual over-hyped blockbusters.
  - Guest
    
    And they’ll expect us to care whether or not a blockbuster makes a little extra money on top of its 500+ million dollar gross.
    
    nope.jpg
FuzzyDuck

I don’t go to movies anymore because I don’t want to fund these organizations that are trying to undermine our freedoms.
- http://nejtillpirater.wordpress.com/ Nejtillpirater
  
  Right… They only want to get paid, that’s their lawful and fair human rights.
  - joexxx
    
    There is nothing inherently lawful or human about getting paid. Nothing!
    - http://nejtillpirater.wordpress.com/ Nejtillpirater
      
      It is, when the person is getting an item or a service that requires payment and is protected by law.
    - Fredrika
      
      > “It is, when the person is getting an item or a service that requires payment and is protected by law.”
      
      There is not. Two things gives you the right to payment. Sales or employment. Neither applies to the argumentative thread you’re in right now.
    - Anyone
      
      when I download something over bittorrent no payment is required
    - Jatillpirater
      
      @Nejtillpirater
      
      I think you misunderstood the OP. FuzzyDuck merely stated that they “don’t go to the movies anymore because [they] don’t want to fund these organizations…”. That statement doesn’t mention anything about downloading movies, it just mentions a boycott of movies at the cinema. As such there is absolutely no right, human or lawful, which compels people to pay movie companies for something they refuse to watch.
    - Anony
      
      Copyright owners are NOT the creators. Big difference there.
  - Anyone
    
    then they should take that up with their employers
    look up Hollywood Accounting to see why they aren’t getting paid
    - Vincent Giannell
      
      They’ll just blame that problem on piracy.
  - Fredrika
    
    > “Right… They only want to get paid, that’s their lawful and fair human rights.”
    
    You seem confused. Entrepreneurs have no human right to get paid when they don’t sell anything? Or are you advocating communism or a planned economy?
  - Guest
    
    They only want to get paid… and undermine our freedoms in the process.
    
    The last part, the one in bold?
    
    That’s the problem.
    - Pelham123
      
      “They only want to get paid… and undermine our freedoms in the process.
      
      The last part, the one in bold?
      
      That’s the problem.”
      
      Exactly, and a troll who pretends to not understand this is even more morally offensive than the MPAA, IMO.
  - Pelham123
    
    “Right… They only want to get paid, that’s their lawful and fair human rights.”
    
    Shell only wanted to be paid … that’s why they (probably) had those activists murdered in Nigeria.
    
    Chevron only wanted to be paid, which is why they fought tooth and nail to duck responsibility for cleaning up polluted villages in South America.
    
    Monsanto only wants to be paid when it sues farmers for copyright infringement because Monsanto pollen blows onto their fields and fertilizes their crops.
    
    As always, your argument in favor of anti-piracy activism is more morally depraved than piracy. It’s also more morally depraved than anti-piracy activism. With friends like you the MPAA does not need enemies.
    - http://nejtillpirater.wordpress.com/ Nejtillpirater
      
      There’s nothing deprived with getting paid for your work, it’s universal. Buy the product if you want it – otherwise buy something else. Stealing a copy of it for free is not a fair or legal option unless you’re a greedy person without conscience.
    - Fredrika
      
      > “There’s nothing deprived with getting paid for your work, it’s universal.”
      
      You seem confused, or ignorant. Thre nothing universal about entrepreneurs getting paid for their work, they are only paid for one thing, sales, which is a completely different thing than getting paid for work. Only employees are paid for their work, but entrepreneurs are not employees. Do you not understand the fundamental difference between an entrepreneur and an employee?
      
      > “Buy the product if you want it – otherwise buy something else.”
      
      Or manufacture the product yourself as a smart capitalist.
      
      > “Stealing a copy of it for free is not a fair or legal option unless you’re a greedy person without conscience.”
      
      A claim which is irrelevant because no pirate steals copies.They manufacture them themselves instead.
    - Violated0
      
      I wonder Nejtillpirater what you would do on the day politics made non-profit file-sharing lawful? Many people now call for real copyright reform where even in the heart of Congress have these words now been spoken.
      
      It has been 14 years now and the World did not end. There are plenty of official choices about should people choose such but it helped them little to only emerge years behind the piracy choice. My point is that beyond politics bending to the will of special interest groups their main job is to serve the needs of the population.
      
      So politics now has two choices where the first of these I would call the prohibition choice where they serve the demands of these special interest groups and to further clamp down on piracy harming both these special interest groups and the Internet in the process. This would of course be ultimately futile and would fail when you can’t win against the will of the population.
      
      Then we have the real copyright reform choice to reaffirm the public domain, to better stage the term of copyright, then to make non-profit file-sharing lawful which would then change the World forever more. Sharing between friends has always been a good thing and yes the entertainment industry would live on quite happily.
    - Anyone
      
      @NTP
      when will you learn that making a copy is not stealing?
    - http://twitter.com/EvanKnz Evan Kennedy
      
      Nejtillpirater, the traditional paradigms of property don’t necessarily apply here. I think part of the problem in these debates is that the real issue, the nature of intellectual property, isn’t discussed as much as it should be.
      
      Should copyrighted rights be afforded the same rights as their scarce physical property counterparts? In many ways they have more rights. When copyrighted works are “stolen” [infringed], there’s a statutory penalty of $150K, however, with regular property, there’s only damages (actually not 100% sure on this point, but I’m confident you wouldn’t be fined $150K for stealing a toaster…).
      
      Furthermore, stealing tends to imply depriving another individual of their property, however in the case of copyrighted works, the original party is not deprived of their copy, so the idea of stealing copyrighted works doesn’t quite work with the traditional definition.
      
      However, I agree that people should have a reason to pay for content they want, but assuming greed or a lack of a conscience is going a bit too far. In my country, NZ, most content that you take for granted is simply unavailable.
- 4 99
  
  I don’t go to the movies anymore cause Hollywood makes dung but people accept it.
- Rojov123
  
  Right. How about you boycott movies entirely to show your protest? No theatre, no downloading, no rentals, nothing! Are you willing to do that? Or are you just trying to save the money by downloading for free?
  - Fredrika
    
    > “Right. How about you boycott movies entirely to show your protest? No theatre, no downloading, no rentals, nothing! Are you willing to do that?”
    
    Why should he boycott downloading? A boycott is usually directed at the products that are sold(as in goods and services) by the boycotted company. Downloading does not fall into that category.
    
    > “Or are you just trying to save the money by downloading for free?”
    
    What’s wrong with following the free market principle to save money? That’s one of the cornerstones of capitalism. Do you have a problem with capitalism and people wanting to save money? Are you advocating communism or a planned economy?
    - Sense
      
      Marry me! :)
    - Fredrika
      
      > “Marry me! :)”
      
      Open your eyes boy, i’m way to young to marry!! =)
    - Who
      
      correct….a boycott don’t start @ the stop downloading, its starts with the not buying. people don’t buy the stuff and then no one can upload to share it.
    - Obvious
      
      Who ever sense is might want to hold off on that marriage proposal, I doubt a older female would have a picture of a powerpuff girl as a profile pic.
      
      Just saying
    - Fredrika
      
      > “Who ever sense is might want to hold off on that marriage proposal, I doubt a older female would have a picture of a powerpuff girl as a profile pic.”
      
      You silly person, intelligent super fantastic people of all ages have pictures of a Powerpuff Girls as their profile pic, because the Powerpuff Girls are super fantastic!!! =P
      
      > “Just saying”
      
      Stop saying things that makes no sense!!!
    - Sense
      
      @Fredika
      
      I doubt that a young girl with such knowledge and well written comments is too young. You seem very educated and I don’t judge by the account picture :P
      
      Btw, I love to read your comments agains pathetic troll.
    - Fredrika
      
      > “I doubt that a young girl with such knowledge and well written comments is too young.”
      
      It’s actually proven that girls mature intellectually way faster than boys. Take any boy in the age of 5-25 and he’s most like more stupid than a 5 year old girl. =)
      
      > “You seem very educated..”
      
      Well i did attend Pokey Oak’s Kindergarten.. =)
      
      > “..and I don’t judge by the account picture :P
      
      Nor should you judge anyone by their exterior or real picture.
      
      > “Btw, I love to read your comments agains pathetic troll.”
      
      Yes yes yes!! Love is good good good!! Spread the word!!
  - http://nejtillpirater.wordpress.com/ Nejtillpirater
    
    Good point. Most pirates are not willing to do this since they do want the stuff for free, even if it involves breaking the law.
    - Anyone
      
      free stuff is free, no matter what the law says
      
      if I create something with my own materials, why should I pay someone something?
    - Fredrika
      
      > “Good point.”
      
      His point is illogical because all sane people want to save money.
      
      > “Most pirates are not willing to do this since they do want the stuff for free.”
      
      You seem confused. Downloading is free regardless of if you boycott the products and services that are sold or not. And the price can never be anything else than free, free is the only price possible, so the price is not up for discussion. What anybody wants does not change that fact.
    - http://nejtillpirater.wordpress.com/ Nejtillpirater
      
      @Anyone
      
      “free stuff is free, no matter what the law says”
      
      Right? If I open your wallet and take your money, it’s for free for me but not for you. So it’s OK if I take money from your wallet, no matter what the law says? It’s for free for ME.
      
      “if I create something with my own materials, why should I pay someone something?”
      
      You’re not creating anything if we’re discussing piracy, you’re making an illegal copy. Pick up a guitar and compose your own song, then you actually create something.
    - Fredrika
      
      > “Right? If I open your wallet and take your money, it’s for free for me but not for you. So it’s OK if I take money from your wallet, no matter what the law says? It’s for free for ME.”
      
      What does that illogical comparison have to do with this? Manufacturing something yourself is free, and nothing is taken as a result of it, which makes your comparison irrelevant.
      
      > “You’re not creating anything if we’re discussing piracy, you’re making an illegal copy.”
      
      Creating a copy is creating a copy, whether it legal or illegal. Do you not understand this simple logical fact?
      
      > “Pick up a guitar and compose your own song, then you actually create something.”
      
      You seem confused. When you create something you create something, whether, it’s a song or a copy.
    - Anyone
      
      if you take my money, I no longer have it
      I will object to that
      
      but I am more than happy to let you photocopy my money (as long as you pay for the paper, ink and electricity, I’m not a charity ;))
      
      and it’s interesting that you are not demanding royalties to whoever invented the guitar when I play something on it. that would fit your world view
      or maybe pay the guy who taught me to play the guitar every time I play it
      or stand in the street, play my guitar and then sue every passer-by because they now owe me money!
    - Guest
      
      “Most pirates are not willing to do this since they do want the stuff for free”
      
      Wrong. As usual.
      
      http://www.google dot com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=filesharers+buy+more
      
      I thought I told you to stop lying, Nej?
    - IDIOCRACY
      
      @ the Swedish non pirate hehe, when you take money from my wallet that is not free for you, you will be hit so hard you need to see a doctor, THAT my friend is really not free, also not in Sweden. Why I do that, I don’t want you to touch my wallet, it is physical my property like my underpants. hehe
      If however you see a way to get it out of my wallet without me seeing it… (I wish you luck) then you’re lucky and yes then it was for free, but for me too, the money in my wallet is equal to zero. (My bank card however….) hehe.
    - Guest
      
      You’re an idiot, Nej. Boycott or no boycott, if revenues drop pirates (or, rather, the man on the street) get the blame anyway. Why suck it up if either way you’re going to be treated like a thief, and not a customer?
    - JG
      
      Out of curiosity, by any chance do you list a MAFIAA related/friendly company as your employer? Or maybe receive “donations” from one?
      
      Please review the studies that have been posted here (there’s been 3 or 4 in the last month or so). Random J. Pirate is considerably more likely to buy a movie ticket or an album or whatever than their non-pirating counterpart – a UK study suggests up to 3 times more likely. Getting stuff for free isn’t the main motivator for pirates. Numerous studies have shown that most pirates would actually prefer to purchase their content legally given options that are at a fair market value & not artificially locked down with unnecessary DRM restrictions.
    - http://nejtillpirater.wordpress.com/ Nejtillpirater
      
      @IG
      
      “Out of curiosity, by any chance do you list a MAFIAA related/friendly company as your employer? Or maybe receive “donations” from one?”
      
      No doing this as a “hobby”. Do you by any chance get paid by the pirate lobby? Such a lobby exists, unfortunately financed by tax payers (Sweden has 2 “pirate MEPs” in the European Parliament).
      
      “Getting stuff for free isn’t the main motivator for pirates.”
      
      It is for about half of them, only about one quarter of them download for “try before by”, according to a recent study referred to by TF.
      
      From the study linked to by TF from here:
      
      http://torrentfreak.com/uk-movie-pirates-spend-way-more-at-the-box-office-121122/
      
      “When asking infringers why they download or stream/access content illegally, the most common reasons cited for doing so were because it is free (54%), convenient (48%) and quick (44%). Close to a quarter (26%) of infringers also said they do it because it means they can try before they buy.”
    - Fredrika
      
      > “Do you by any chance get paid by the pirate lobby? Such a lobby exists, unfortunately financed by tax payers (Sweden has 2 “pirate MEPs” in the European Parliament).”
      
      Are you completely stupid? Democratically elected politicians do not constitute a lobby or a lobbyist? They are by the people and the democratic process democratically elected representatives who’s job is to represent their electors.
      
      Lobby refers to a lobbyist, which is a person who is paid for by private interests, to put their opinions forward to the elected politicians, and convince them to put their interest before the interests of the people, society at large and the democratic process.
      
      Do you seriously not understand the fundamental difference between a politician and a lobbyist?
      
      Secondly, exactly what do you find unfortunate with that correctly elected politicians should receive a salary for the job they perform for their electors?
      
      You don’t like basic democracy and the well established democratic process? Because elected politicians receiving salary is a firm part of that.
      
      Seriously, your true beliefs become clearer by the day, and they are identical to those of a mentally retarded full blooded fascist.
    - Anyone
      
      you draw the wrong conclusion
      
      because it is free people download it, because there is no cost involved, so it is an easy decision compared to actually spending money
      
      also don’t disregard the second point, where also half the people say the illegal offers are more convenient. that right there shows you how to beat piracy, make it more convenient than the unlicensed offers. UltraViolet is an example of how not to do it (having to register with multiple websites)
    - Guest
      
      Of course Nej doesn’t like it, because democracy is how his beliefs are getting torn apart. Few people would agree with the suing of children, but it doesn’t bother extremists like Nej, Anon and Pelouzey.
      
      For someone who whines that pirates must use democracy to change laws or suck it up, democracy takes a severely low priority in the tactics that his side uses. What a gasping waste of space Nej is.
    - http://nejtillpirater.wordpress.com/ Nejtillpirater
      
      @Guest
      
      “Of course Nej doesn’t like it, because democracy is how his beliefs are getting torn apart.”
      
      Democracy will be the best medicine against piracy – which essentially is anarchy.
      
      “Few people would agree with the suing of children, but it doesn’t bother extremists like Nej, Anon and Pelouzey.”
      
      It does bother me if children are being sued. Would you care to give me an example of a case where a child has been sued?
    - Fredrika
      
      > “Democracy will be the best..”
      
      But you just opposed democracy!? You just called democracy unfortunate?? Now you hail it?
      
      > “..medicine against piracy..”
      
      First of all, since piracy isn’t a problem, the term medicine is not appropriate.
      
      Secondly, if you refer to use of legislative tools to stop piracy, well that’s impossible, any 15 year old tech savvy kid can inform you of that fact. Ask China if you don’t believe him or me.
      
      But yes, democracy will put an end to piracy, because democracy will pretty soon dismantle the copyright monopoly. As you may or may not be aware of, the only parliamentarian group in the parliament of the worlds biggest and strongest economy has already copied the Pirate Parties political copyright program, and they are now proposing a partial dismantling of the copyright monopoly, including an end to the regulation of non-profit filesharing.
      
      > “..which essentially is anarchy.”
      
      Acting according to the free market rules and offering entrepreneurs competition regarding manufacturing, distribution and sales of certain goods and services is anarchy?
      
      Well, i guess anarchy is yet another concept which you don’t grasp, because no definition of the word agrees with your warped belief on that either.
    - Anyone
      
      http://torrentfreak.com/police-raid-9-year-old-pirate-bay-girl-confiscate-winnie-the-pooh-laptop-121122/
    - Guest
      
      “No doing this as a “hobby”.
      
      Yeah, you just plaster pro-filesharing sites with lying pro-industry propaganda. As a hobby. I really believe that.
      
      It makes sense for us to be here, on a pro-filesharing news site, because we’re either filesharers ourselves or we oppose what the copyright industry is doing or both.
      
      It makes no sense for you to be here. Hanging out daily. Denying reality and lying. You certainly don’t work for the industry in some capacity, and nakedly so. Definitely not.
      
      You’ve got us all fooled. Really.
    - http://nejtillpirater.wordpress.com/ Nejtillpirater
      
      “It makes no sense for you to be here. Hanging out daily.”
      
      It actually does, since there is so much propaganda being spread here, in many cases very far from reality. Many pirates don’t have a clue regarding the legal issues and in many cases also the technical issues. A better informed pirate might be a less greedy pirate.
      
      TF is not officially pro-filesharing:
      
      “TorrentFreak is a weblog dedicated to bringing the latest news about BitTorrent and everything that is closely related to this popular filesharing protocol.”
      
      The purpose is bringing the latest news, not propaganda.
    - Fredrika
      
      > “It actually does, since there is so much propaganda being spread here, in many cases very far from reality.”
      
      But that’s coming from you? You come here to spread false propaganda, and there’s still no reason for you to do that.
      
      > “Many pirates don’t have a clue regarding the legal issues and in many cases also the technical issues.”
      
      Coming from the person that hasn’t even grasped his own’s country’s
      copyright law. The person who shows no understanding for the concept of due process or the judicial system.
      
      > “A better informed pirate might be a less greedy pirate.”
      
      You seem confused. Every sane person desires to save money. That natural desire is not called greed. Greed is something completely different, which refers to economical assets, which non-profit piracy hasn’t got any.
    - Guest
      
      “Democracy will be the best medicine against piracy”
      
      Piracy is the Democratization of distribution”.
      
      You fail, Nej. You fail very hard.
    - http://nejtillpirater.wordpress.com/ Nejtillpirater
      
      “Piracy is the Democratization of distribution”.
      
      No, it’s anarchy and similar to a theft legue. You pirates can’t or don’t want to differentiate between distribution and access, both are connected to each other with the purpose ensuring that the creator will get paid according to his legal rights. If not getting paid, the “customer” should have no access and hence no distribution.
    - Fredrika
      
      > “No, it’s anarchy..”
      
      You seem confused, there’s not one single definition of anarchy that corresponds with performing an intrusion into a legislative monopoly. Anarchy refers violent objection of the state, not disobedience of civil law or legislative monopolies. Did you not know this fact?
      
      > “..and similar to a theft legue.”
      
      Stop lying, there’s no similarities at all, only differences.
      
      Property rights exist for a completely different reason than copyright.
      
      Property rights are necessary for society, the copyright monopoly isn’t.
      
      Property rights are natural. Legislative monopolies are unnatural.
      
      Intrusions into property rights give a very exact result and actual harm. Intrusions into legislative monopolies gives a completely different result, and no harm.
      
      Do you see? Only differences, no similarities. Not one.
      
      > “You pirates can’t or don’t want to differentiate between distribution and access, both are connected to each other with the purpose ensuring that the creator will get paid according to his legal rights.”
      
      Stop lying. There’s no legal right to get paid, unless you are an employee or sells something, and neither applies in this case.
      
      > “If not getting paid, the “customer” should have no access and hence no distribution.”
      
      If nothing gets sold there is no customer, and the seller should most definitely not be paid, unless you advocate communisms or a planned economy? Access to copies is not restricted in any law.
    - Who
      
      um….you don’t make any sense with this comment.
    - Who
      
      OFMG: “Right? If I open your wallet and take your money, it’s for free for me but not for you. So it’s OK if I take money from your wallet, no matter what the law says? It’s for free for ME”
      
      the DMCA was put in to play to go after internet users for so called copy right infringement. NOT theft fuck nut. so in order to do this they MUST ease drop on your internet activity correct? yep….so what about the IPA? so they are allowed to break a law just the same to go after people for infringement? well it seams that way.
      
      so its free for them to take away my privacy to sure me for taking a movie from them? and how is downloading from some user over in say the UK stealing from them?
      
      GET YOUR SHIT STRAIT!
      
      “this is in reply to a comment of yours below” your just a stupid as the copy right trolls.
Violated0

Blockbuster movies are subject to much promotional hype but if people see these early word of mouth can spread that they are not worth the ticket price. So by cutting down on file sharing they can indeed boost ticket sales through hype / lies.

Lesser known movies have the opposite effect when they spend less on advertising which is then greatly benefited by people enjoying free showings and spreading word to others that these are good. So the less people who see means less income is to be made.

In that regard I should point I found both “Starship Troopers: Invasion” and “Halo 4: Forward Unto Dawn” as good movies recently when I like sci-fi. Much more interestingly this got me thinking that the large attack on Hollywood’s monopoly may not actually come from Indie movie makers and Kickstarter but from the (bigger than Hollywood) computer games industry expanding into movies. They after all already have great movie ideas, they are experts in specials effects, they have huge budgets, then they are one sector that better understands the Internet.

So based on these movies Hollywood and the computer game industry could soon go head to head in major movie productions, This may not be the perfect open market world we are looking for but anyone who can take Hollywood and the MPAA down a few notches should win our support.
Anonymous

‘Those who pirate movies may talk about them to friends, who unlike them do pay for movie tickets.’

sorry Ernesto. have to disagree a bit with this comment. the majority of people who download movies etc for free also pay to go to the theater. i think this applies to music as well. i think the difference lies in the word of mouth comment. if a movie is good, it is recommended. if it is crap, like so many movies today with the best 20secs being shown as the TV trailer, it is not recommended. that word of mouth recommendation is worth so much more than any advertising or trailer could ever be. as usual, though, all the entertainment industries see is what they want to see. the number of times something is obtained for free, to them, far outweighs any positive effect that downloading has. shortsightedness and stupidity is their middle name and no matter what is said or done, that attitude will never change. shame!
- Rojov123
  
  Uhm.. “most people who download movies also go to the theater.”? A few years ago when I was in my teens, my friends and I used to skip school and go to the theater at least 2 or 3 times every month. Nowadays, I download most movies. I go to the theater to watch only the big-budget movies(transformers/avengers/blah blah).
  So, file sharing has bought down my theater going to about a third of what it used to be. So, yes! I pirate and I go to the theater. But The movie industries make only a 3rd of what they used to make from me. And that is what they are fighting about.!!
  - Anyone
    
    this study disagrees with your anecdotal evidence
Pingback: Megaupload Shutdown Hurt Box Office Revenues | Best Seedbox
http://nejtillpirater.wordpress.com/ Nejtillpirater

“The researchers theorize that some films may actually benefit from piracy due to word of mouth promotion, and their findings partly support this idea.”

I actually believe there are such cases but even if there are, this does not make piracy OK in general or in each individual case since all the other cases may be harmful to the creators. It’s like making a study regarding shoplifting and perhaps finding out that shops with the highest level of losses from shoplifting also have the largest profits, shoplifting is still not acceptable.

Apart from that studies like this usually only show a connection, not a causality. The main problem is that each shop or creator is not subject to this “ideal” or even average condition, hence must each shop or creator make their own decisions regarding giving away stuff for free or not, this decision shall not be up to either shoplifters or pirates.
- Anyone
  
  how can you still claim that piracy is harmful after so many studies disproving this very myth?
  
  and you still haven’t learned that copying is not stealing
  
  bad troll!
  - joexxx
    
    Well, you can claim whatever you want. Logic or reality doesn’t have to back up your claims.
  - asd
    
    You stupid guy! Do you still go to the cinemas as often as you used to, before filesharing?
    Earlier, people used to go to the cinema to watch any and all movies. Now we pick and choose a few movies we want to watch. That means less money gets transferred from your pocket to the movie industry. How hard is it to warp this around your head. Idiot!
    - Fredrika
      
      > “That means less money gets transferred from your pocket to the movie industry.”
      
      That’s their problem, not anyone else’s. The responsibility for an entrepreneur to succeed falls solely upon the entrepreneurs themselves.
      
      Secondly, no, the movie industry currently makes more money than ever before. Please do not base your worries on an imaginary world that doesn’t exist.
    - Anyone
      
      I do go about the same amount (2-3 times a year) as before, yes
      before internet I simply waited until the movie was shown on free TV or borrowed the VHS/DVD from a friend
      
      all piracy has changed for me is that it is now more convenient, I no longer have to abide by the TV schedule but can make my own
    - IDIOCRACY
      
      Actually I stopped going to the cinemas before I even heard of file-sharing, just because they started to charge 17,50 euros for a ticket (10 years ago), now I use try before you buy, that means I watch what I can find and all that is good, I also buy. I have a huge (legal) collection, I can tell you that. PS all my pirated versions are legal too, where I come from. hehe
    - BuddhaFacePalmed
      
      You mistake watching movies at the cinema as willingness to watch at the cinema. People used to not know how good a movie was and had to rely on critics and movie reviews to determine whether the movie was worth watching. Nowadays, with the internet you could decide for yourself whether watching the movie at the cinema is money and time well spent.
      
      Plus, the BS that movie industry is suffering from loss of profit? I guess you forgotten the blockbusters that came out the past decade, i.e. Transformers, Batman: The Dark Knight Trilogy, the Avengers, Avatar, Lord of the Rings, etc,etc.
      
      What you forget is that no longer are we forced to watch movies that are total BS that the movie industries churn out just to fill their quarter reports. We live in the Information Age, where info can instantly appear at our fingertips. As such, the market for movies are becoming a true free market where good movies are rewarded and bad movies are ignored.
    - joexxx
      
      You’re the stupid one.
      Before file sharing there was VHS, DVD, film, etc…
      
      I can go to movies for free (perks of the job) and I, essentially, stopped going about 7 years ago. Movies got worse, theater experience got unacceptable.
      
      People go to the movies for the last 60+ years not because they can’t watch the movie at home. Get that through your thick skull!
    - Who
      
      NO YOU ARE A IDIOT!
      
      I know people that work for theaters and they just told me that you are so full of SHIT!
      
      ALL TICKET SALES besides maybe a $1 goes to the MPAA
- Guest
  
  sup MAFIAA troll u mad
- joexxx
  
  If you want to present a credible argument regarding piracy, don’t compare it to shop lifting.
  Do you want to try again?
  - http://nejtillpirater.wordpress.com/ Nejtillpirater
    
    The comparison is quite valid, even if you dislike the fact that I’m doing it. I’m not saying they are equal, just similar in many senses,
    - Anyone
      
      in what way are they similar?
    - Fredrika
      
      > “The comparison is quite valid..”
      
      You claim this, but when actually looking into it, it doesn’t.
      
      > “I’m not saying they are equal, just similar in many senses,”
      
      There are no similarities at all. Property rights exist for a completely different reason than copyright. Property rights are necessary for society, the copyright monopoly isn’t. Property rights are natural. Legislative monopolies are unnatural. Intrusions into property rights give a very exact result and actual harm. Intrusion into legislative monopolies gives a completely different result, and no harm.
      
      As you can see there are only differences, and no similarities at all.
    - joexxx
      
      There is no similarity between the two because the cost of making a copy in the case of digital media is, essentially, zero and the value of the distribution channel is close to zero.
      Doesn’t matter if I like it or not.
  - Guest
    
    Come on everybody, they’re totally similar!
    
    To shoplift is to remove a physical item from a store shelf, thus depriving the store of merchandise.
    
    To fileshare is to replicate a virtual file, which doesn’t deprive any store or seller anywhere of their merchandise.
    
    So you see… They’re, uh… It works like… THEY’RE JUST SIMILAR OKAY!? DON’T SCRUTINIZE IT WITH YOUR FUCKING LOGIC!!1!!!
- Fredrika
  
  > “I actually believe there are such cases but even if there are, this does not make piracy OK in general or in each individual case..”
  
  Correct. Non-profit piracy is ok in general and in each individual case because society has no proven need for the copyright monopoly to control non-profit use of creative works.
  
  > “..since all the other cases may be harmful to the creators.”
  
  Which they obviously aren’t. No harm occurs from someone following the free market principles through manufacturing something. Do you not understand the concept of harm?
  
  > “It’s like making a study regarding shoplifting and perhaps finding out that shops with the highest level of losses from shoplifting also have the largest profits, shoplifting is still not acceptable.”
  
  No, it is not because shoplifting and permanent appropriation of property has no similarities with an intrusion into a legislative monopoly. Shoplifting is an intrusion into property rights. Copyright infringements is non-acceptance of having one’s property rights intruded into by a legitimate monopoly, it’s the exact opposite. Do you not understand the concept of legislative monopolies?
  
  > “The main problem is that each shop or creator is not subject to this “ideal” or even average condition..”
  
  Your personal opinon on that constituting a problem does not make it an actual problem for society.
  
  > “..hence must each shop or creator make their own decisions regarding giving away stuff for free or not, this decision shall not be up to either shoplifters or pirates.”
  
  They do? They make their own decisions regarding if they wanna create the work, and if they wanna give away copies of services for free. The copyright monopoly is not needed for them to be able to make that decision.
  
  What you are actually talking about is that they should be able to force others to not giving away copies and services, but again, society has not proven need for something so unnatural.
  - joexxx
    
    Really well written. Post of the week!
- MadAsASnake
  
  If they don’t want to “give their stuff away” as you put it, they should not put it in the public domain. Sharing movies is nothing like shoplifting. In shoplifting, the shop owner is deprived of goods. Sharing a movie does not remove the movie from the producer, and, plainly obvious, sharing is up to whomever wants to do it.
  - http://nejtillpirater.wordpress.com/ Nejtillpirater
    
    Doesn’t matter if a movie is removed or not in a physical sense since this doesn’t apply to immaterial rights using files, streams etc. The creator is subject to a potential loss of income, how much that loss is depends on many factors but is not the same for all artists, movies etc.
    - Fredrika
      
      > “Doesn’t matter if a move is removed or not in a physical sense since this doesn’t apply to immaterial rights.”
      
      Well then you shouldn’t compare it, now should you?
      
      > “The creator is subject to a potential loss of income..”
      
      The correct term to describe loss of income for an entrepreneur is failure to sell. The responsibility for failure to sell falls upon the entrepreneur alone. It is not the responsibility of any other party to make sure he sells. Again you seem to be opposing the free market rules, and instead advocating some bizarre mix of communism and a planned economy.
    - Anyone
      
      “potential loss of income” is not my concern
      he should offer a better service if he wants my business
      
      and since we are making silly material comparison, I’d like to add my own:
      when people buy Toyotas Mercedes suffers a “potential loss of income”
      so why aren’t all people that buy Toyotas arrested? or at least sued by Mercedes? after all they are costing Mercedes billions
    - http://nejtillpirater.wordpress.com/ Nejtillpirater
      
      @Anyone
      
      “when people buy Toyotas Mercedes suffers a “potential loss of income”
      so why aren’t all people that buy Toyotas arrested? or at least sued by Mercedes? after all they are costing Mercedes billions”
      
      That’s fair and legal competition. Toyota and Mercedes have to make products that the customers want. Their own and different products. Piracy is unfair and illegal “competition”.
    - Fredrika
      
      > “That’s fair and legal competition. Piracy is unfair and illegal “competition”.”
      
      Competition is competition whether you personally feels it’s fair or not. What the law currently says regarding some competition is irrelevant, referencing the law would only make it circular reasoning.
    - Anyone
      
      @NTP
      because piracy IS simply competition, all the MAFIAA has to do is offer a better service than pirates
      or at the very least a service people actually want
      if you look at their latest attempt (UltraViolet) it’s clear that they can’t do that
      
      and it’s easy to compete with piracy, while piracy has gotten much easier over the years, there is still room to improve
      
      Steam is a shining example of a successful model
      of course videogame piracy exists, not least of all because many games are crippled by DRM, but Steam is a huge success and it succeeded even in “piracy havens” such as Russia, where everyone else has given up.
    - Violated0
      
      What you most ignore here is that file sharing has been with us in a major form since 1998 where now every day that passes hundreds of millions of people in every country on this planet share media.
      
      Unless you want to cut the cables then the Genie is long out the bottle and there is no way in hell you are getting it back in, So here you are wasting your days romancing about what could have been.
      
      What did happen is that the public has seized back control of the market. They will now dictate when, how and where media will be consumed where they do say to you serve my needs or get the hell out of my way. Just be thankful they do grant you the one right of no one can profit from your media but you.
      
      So here we are 14 years later and just where is the devastation to the entertainment industry promised us along with the hundreds of thousands of job losses? The latest global income reports for movies and music show a very rosy market and just to look around the Internet well highlights that content creation has bloomed to high levels never before seen in history.
      
      There is no negatives here beyond the one fact that you no longer control your media in the global marketplace. I do say to you that you should not have had this power to begin with and your known history has well demonstrated monopoly market abuse harming consumer choice.
      
      File sharing is only a problem if you want it to be a problem. Many people have moved on into the new World and have earned good money there.
      
      Well moan on all you want about the fantasy figures you may have earned but you can never turn the clock back. So file sharing is here to stay and your one choice is to serve the public need or to fail trying.
    - IDIOCRACY
      
      So what about this: I have a photographic memory and on an evening with friends I tell them from a till z what is written in for example 50 shades of grey (sucks but just an example). I have the copy in my brain and reproduce it verbally. So according to you: Can or can’t I tell people what is in my brain (the copy). The creator is subject to a potential loss of income, my friends will not buy the book anymore. But it is in my brain and from memory I reproduce… so does this count as a copy? The belgiums think it is, but they have no brains (their anti piracy outfit).
    - Jatillpirater
      
      “potential”
      
      That’s your problem right there. Potentiality is entirely subjective. Unfortunately for you, most studies are finding the opposite of your worldview to be the truth – that whilst shoplifting does cause a verifiable loss to the shop owner, file-sharing is more likely to lead to a tangible net gain for the creator.
    - http://nejtillpirater.wordpress.com/ Nejtillpirater
      
      @Jatillpirater
      
      “file-sharing is more likely to lead to a tangible net gain for the creator”
      
      If this were true, why does the music and movie industry fight piracy? Greed usually find the “best” ways for the greedy part. It seems that if the industry fights it, piracy is not a way for the industry to maximize their greed, instead maximizing the greed for the pirates.
    - Anyone
      
      @NTP
      because they are losing their gatekeeper role
      nowadays musicians can release without going through the labels, so they don’t have to give up 90% of the earnings for the privilege of being published
      
      piracy doesn’t cause any harm, but the artists leaving the MAFIAA does, so they are fighting for a censored internet where artists cannot directly interact with their fans anymore, but have to once again go through them
    - http://nejtillpirater.wordpress.com/ Nejtillpirater
      
      @Anyone
      
      “piracy doesn’t cause any harm, but the artists leaving the MAFIAA does”
      
      Artist leaving the “MAFIAA” will suffer from piracy just as the artists not leaving.
    - Fredrika
      
      > “Artist leaving the “MAFIAA” will suffer from piracy just as the artists not leaving.”
      
      First of all your not even responding to what was actually written. Why is that? Because you couldn’t come up with an answer?
      
      Artists leaving the Mafiaa will hurt the Mafiaa. But no, neither suffer from piracy. Stop making ridiculous claims. The thesis of harm remains unproven after 15 years of filesharing, and nothing even indicates it’s true, everything indicates the exact opposite.
    - Anyone
      
      no
      this study (and many others) show that artists that left the MAFIAA and embraced the new technology prosper, not just despite piracy but because of it
    - Jatillpirater
      
      @Nejtillpirater
      
      “If this were true, why does the music and movie industry fight piracy?”
      
      Because I said it leads to a net gain for the creator, not the now unnecessary middleman. The ‘rights holders’ in the music industry (in particular) are very rarely the creators. The creators no longer need the industry and the industry ‘fights piracy’ in a vain attempt to regain their monopoly control despite already having lost it many years ago. For the greedy middlemen there is no other way to regain monopoly other than to lobby for legislative change and the way they can best do this is to find a scapegoat in their biggest competition, the general public. If you support these monopolies, despite claiming you’re just a hobbyist, you are fighting against the creators.
- Guest
  
  “this does not make piracy OK in general”
  
  Yes it does. If pirates generate more revenue than non-pirates do, then from a business and economic point of view that makes piracy very much OK.
  
  The only way a business could have a problem with it is if they were stupid, had an ulterior motive, or both.
  
  “all the other cases may be harmful to the creators.”
  
  Prove it. Because right now there’s a mountain of evidence that says you’re wrong.
Guest

The answer to most of the questions about why is quite simple. In America as with most countries what you can and can’t do or get away with legally depends on how deep your pockets are. We have not seen justice for all in many decades. it’s more like Justice for the rich everyone else best of luck too you.
- http://nejtillpirater.wordpress.com/ Nejtillpirater
  
  In that sense the pirates have really deep pockets, while the record and movie companies must follow the law when competing with others, pay taxes etc.
  - joexxx
    
    Even though they must follow the law, they often don’t.
    - http://nejtillpirater.wordpress.com/ Nejtillpirater
      
      Often?
      
      It happens that some companies (or rather individuals at companies) break the law, in all types of companies. There are no indication of that the media industry is worse than others.
      
      When comparing even the proven cases of breaking the law done by record companies or movie companies, to the number of times the pirates break the law, the ratio must be similar to 1:100 000 000 or similar.
    - Guest
      
      The copyright industry breaks laws so major – and they do it so brazenly – that copyright infringement doesnt even begin to compare to it.
      
      For example, they had Kim Dotcom raided by an anti-terror unit based on an illegal search and seizure warrant. They kidnapped Gottfrid Svartholm without the due process that both Sweden and Combodia legally guarantees its citizens. The MPAA via Chris Dodd threatened U.S. politicians to do what they say or else, which is all kinds of illegal.
      
      Meanwhile, we download some fucking MP3′s.
      
      Who are the most heinous lawbreakers, Nej? Please tell me.
    - IDIOCRACY
      
      @ swedish net troll
      Most pirates (fact) only download, and in most (fact) countries this is legal… so I think it is more close to 1:1
      Why? do you know how many people have been illegally robbed from their legal content by the unlawful MU take-down…ah you don’t know.. well then you cannot be possibly thinking anyone takes you seriously.
    - SomeYahoo
      
      @Guest well you can’t expect them to admit that, if they actually told the truth for once nobody would buy into copyright bullshit
    - qwerty
      
      @Guest He doesn’t respond to legitimate arguments.
    - Ardvaark
      
      @Nejtillpirater
      
      I’m sorry but I can’t just let this one pass
      
      So you’re comparing the act of SHARING (harmless act that’s even legal in some countries) with the crimes a company commits?
      
      Those two acts aren’t even in the same scope! how can you compare sharing media with, for example, the way the movie industry avoids paying taxes by not claiming revenue because they sell the movies to publishers (owned by them) by absurdly made-up amounts so the profit evens with the “price”? (of course when later it comes the time to bloat about the sales you won’t see that).
      
      or maybe how some studios listen to good scripts, deny them, then a couple years later produce an “original” movie based on said script? THAT right there is IP stealing.
      
      or maybe we should talk about how the record labels grab the profits from record sales leaving the artist with incredibly small amounts (if you’re lucky!) simply because they own the rights and sit on said paper doing nothing?
      
      or maybe the soon-to-be outlawed copyright trolls using “legal” extortion?
      
      how about how companies keep lobbying the government to pass unfair laws that crush general population in competitors to gain a “few” more millions?
      
      shall I go on?
      
      It’s not a matter of the media companies committing more crimes than other companies (although they are among the ones at the top of the list).
      
      seriously how can YOU compare the scope of such acts with sharing media specially when those acts involve DIRECT LOSS to the losing part while sharing at worse involves no losses at all? I hope you know what multiplying by 0 means…
      
      finally since your lobbying friends made corporations = people then yes a company CAN break the law and unfortunately they do!
  - Anyone
    
    you mean screw over other people with Hollywood Accounting (did you know for example that the Lord of the Rings trilogy did not make any money? amazing after $6 billion of world wide revenue)
    - Guest
      
      Of the several hundred big budget movies that flopped due to file sharing in the past few years, you decided that Lord of the rings(which is probably one of the most watched movies ever) would be a good choice here? Hypocrite!
    - Fredrika
      
      > “Of the several hundred big budget movies that flopped due to file sharing in the past few years..”
      
      First of all big budget movies seldom flop, they all make their investments back in one way or another within 5 years. That you can’t tell that is because of a concept called Hollywood accounting.
      
      Secondly, if any flops, that’s not because of piracy, that’s because the customers feel that the products and services that were sold didn’t have enough economical value, and as such, they should flop according to all free market principles that exists.
    - Anyone
      
      I choose it because according to New Line the movies WERE a flop, they officially lost money on it
      
      of course they only claim that so they don’t have to pay Peter Jackson and the Tolkien estate a % of the earnings, but that’s my point
    - theyeehawpeople
      
      lord of the rings FFS really? there’s no way in frozen frakin hell that movie didn’t make any money, but of course, hollywood accounting wasn’t built to speak the truth
  - Andrew Lee
    
    Piracy is not meant to represent deep pockets even if some take advantage of it to make bank. It’s about freedom of information and it’s been proven over and over again pirates buy more. “People support the shit they enjoy.”
    
    Do you think if every single movie was legally offered for free people would stop going to the theaters? It’s pretty obvious that the average computer monitor is far superior to a theater screen the size of a house.. Wait what?
http://pulse.yahoo.com/_WM63ZFAH7HUMYUABVZNIDUHWO4 viking

That is consistent with this study done 5 years ago in Canada regarding music sales:

http://www.marketingcharts.com/interactive/study-p2p-music-downloads-increase-music-cd-sales-2287/

When will the media industry face up to the fact that all publicity is good publicity, and stop accusing their best customers of being thieves?
- Anyone
  
  not all publicity is good publicity
  if you keep reading how they sue 9 year old girls and old grandmas without computers that will not help their case
- http://nejtillpirater.wordpress.com/ Nejtillpirater
  
  Another worthless study. Have you actually read it? My experience is that the pirate friendly sites summarizing such studies don’t tell the truth, they draw their own false conclusions and in most cases because they are not familiar with either statistics or what causality is. From the actual study:
  
  “we find no direct evidence to suggest that the net effect of P2P file-sharing on CD purchasing is either positive or negative for Canada as a whole.
  
  Oh dear…
  
  “However, our analysis of the Canadian P2P file-sharing subpopulation suggests that there is a strong positive relationship between P2P file-sharing and CD purchasing.”
  
  That does not imply any causality between file-sharing and CD purchasing, it might just as well be explained by that the pirates are the ones most interested in music, resulting in at the same time more downloading and more buying. Still, pirating is not justified by this. They may have bought even more if not pirating since in that case they would have to used their money for buying CDs instead of using in on other stuff when downloading is for free.
  - Fredrika
    
    > “Still, pirating is not justified by this.”
    
    Piracy does not have to be justified, because as you yourself have openly admitted, the only thing that needs justification is the prohibitions in law.
  - Guest
    
    “That does not imply any causality between file-sharing and CD purchasing”
    
    Actually, that’s exactly what it does. I don’t think you know what the word “imply” means.
  - icec0ld
    
    In light of all the research coming out, it would be incredibly ignorant to dismiss the claims of the study.
    
    “pirates are the ones most interested in music”
    
    That sounds like:
    a. What the MAFFIA said about a previous study (lol)
    b. YOUR BEST AND MOST PROFITABLE MARKET.
    
    You may as well wear a sign that says “I hate my customers”. It’s so unbelievably idiotic to continue a vendetta againest the very people keeping the music and entertainment industries not only alive but continuously growing.
    
    Piracy breeds awareness. Awareness means more potential customers. Customers mean more money. Piracy is great for the music industry. They need to focus on the core product and not on the people, all but advertising their stuff for free on web for them.
  - http://nejtillpirater.wordpress.com/ Nejtillpirater
    
    @icecOld
    
    “Piracy is great for the music industry. They need to focus on the core product and not on the people,”
    
    They need to focus on the core product instead of fighting for their lawful rights to get paid instead of getting robbed. If nothing is done, there will be no new products to fight for, only idiots or rich people will invest time and money on something knowing that they’ll get robbed by greedy pirates.
    - Anyone
      
      noone is getting robbed
      
      except the artists, of course, because the MAFIAA keeps 90% of the earnings for themselves
    - Fredrika
      
      > “They need to focus on the core product instead of fighting for their lawful rights to get paid instead of getting robbed.”
      
      There’s no such opposite alternatives, and there’s no such right, so your entire statement is false and dishonest.
      
      They get paid when they sell. They are not failing to sell because they are robbed, they fail to sell because they try to sell useless products that holds no economical value. That’s exactly how it should work on the free market, but you do seem to have a problem with the free market, in addition to democracy, which you only hours earlier called unfortunate.
      
      > “If nothing is done, there will be no new products to fight for..”
      
      Done about what? Piracy is not a problem to the music industry. The revenues in the music industry are currently higher than ever before. There’s more money than ever before to produce music with(largely thanks to the pirates) if you wanna spend money on that.
      
      > “..only idiots or rich people will invest time and money on something knowing that they’ll get robbed by greedy pirates.”
      
      1. Nobody gets robbed.
      
      2. Since the music industry has higher revenues than ever before, there seems to be a lot of money to invest.
      
      3. You call people who do not believe in the illogical business idea of selling useless products that holds no economical value for idiots?
      
      Then what do you call people that believe in the business idea of selling useless products that holds no economical value? Super idiots? =)
    - icec0ld
      
      No one is robbed. Awareness is awareness. Any business will tell the core of any brand and product is making people aware your product or service even exists.
      
      Also, movies and music pull excellent product regardless of piracy so I’m not sure what exactly the point is, even if the act was depraving people of money.
      
      If you want a great example of a organisation actually robbing people, look no further than the MAFFIA and RIAA. Robbing blind both artists and whoever they can get their literally paid for judges to club citizens with penalties greater than any murder, rapist or pedophile. Hell putting this in perspective to get the Millions plus in so called damages I could have murdered everyone I met on the way to the music CD store and robbed it at gun point and still never receive the level of penalty we see people getting for sharing.
      
      You and your ilks reckoning will come one day when law finally catches up with societies current stand point and I will welcome the righteous justice you will one and everyone standing in the way of progress will one day receive.
  - ITakeAPotatoChipAndEatIt
    
    “Another worthless study.”
    
    yet apparently you were agreeing with part of it in another comment, lol.
    
    How much of a blatant troll can you be?
- Violated0
  
  They won’t stop using words like “thieves” and “piracy” because this is not some logical debate but propaganda terms done to slander you. Using the correct “infringer” word just does not inflame the idiots like their propaganda words do.
  
  The result is to fool idiots like VP Joe Biden who then said “But piracy is theft. Clean and simple. It’s smash and grab. It ain’t no different than smashing a window at Tiffany’s and grabbing [merchandise].” Hmmm, idiot.
  
  Two can of course play that name calling game which is why we call them “copyright cartels”, “gatekeepers” and of course our local “MAFIAA shrills”.
Karl

“A new paper suggests”

This just in! A new paper suggests that TorrentFreak should quit riding this douches dick.
Dondilly

I doubt it was just reduced word of mouth that killed revenue.
The level of word of mouth was no doubt greater. The problem for the MPAA was that it was discussing what these b’stard did to kdc and mega rather than about their movies.
joexxx

No… can’t be!
This is so non-trivial! Wow… I can’t believe it…

If people educated themselves just a little bit more, they’d know that this effect has been described a long time ago and is called co-operativity. And there is nothing controversial about that.
http://nejtillpirater.wordpress.com/ Nejtillpirater

“Comparing box office revenues before and after the Megaupload raids shows that overall box office revenues went down. The effects are small, but consistent across different sample designs when taking into account factors such as inflation, Internet penetration and the popularity of Megaupload in each country.”

It would be very interesting how they managed to isolate all other events and factors that may have affected the box office revenues at this time. Of course this is impossible and this “research” is worthless even on a theoretical level. Maybe if similar studies are performed multiple times with carefully selected samples that rules out most other possible causes, a statistically significant connection may be shown, but this is definitely not the case this time. The study was probably done because a certain result was desired by the researchers but performing it in this way is pointless.
- Anyone
  
  so far all (independent) studies have shown that piracy has either no or a positive effect
  
  when will you start seeing the facts?
  - http://nejtillpirater.wordpress.com/ Nejtillpirater
    
    Is that a fact?
    
    Well, then provide me with the link to just ONE of all those studies so I can check exactly what it has shown and exactly how independent it is. Must be very easy for you to provide me with just ONE such link so give me your best shot.
    - Anyone
      
      you are already familiar with them, if you read the articles you comment under
    - http://nejtillpirater.wordpress.com/ Nejtillpirater
      
      @Anynone
      
      “you are already familiar with them, if you read the articles you comment under”
      
      Again, give me ONE, your best shot. ONE!
    - someyahoo
      
      youre posting here obviously you can type and browse websites, maybe try reading the site your on first before wanting people to hold your hand (you CAN read, right?)
    - Anyone
      
      let’s go with the most recent one
      http://torrentfreak.com/uk-movie-pirates-spend-way-more-at-the-box-office-121122/
      
      and I admit I was wrong, you didn’t comment there
      I guess the title was frightening enough so that you didn’t dare read on, or it might have challenged your world view
    - http://nejtillpirater.wordpress.com/ Nejtillpirater
      
      @Anyone
      
      And exactly what do you claim that that study shows? Even TF seems to see its weaknesses.
      
      If you actually read the study there are some really interesting results:
      
      “When asking infringers why they download or stream/access content illegally, the most common reasons cited for doing so were because it is free (54%), convenient (48%) and quick (44%). Close to a quarter (26%) of infringers also said they do it because it means they can try before they buy.”
      
      So most (74%) infringers do it because it’s for free, not for try before buy. Strange that TF forgot to mention that…
    - Fredrika
      
      > “So most infringers do it because it’s free, not for try before buy. Strange that TF forgot to mention that…”
      
      There’s no need to mention something natural and self-evident? Every sane person wants to save money.
    - Anyone
      
      is the reason important?
      the bottom line is that “pirates” spend more money than “non-pirates”
    - http://nejtillpirater.wordpress.com/ Nejtillpirater
      
      @Anyone
      
      “the bottom line is that “pirates” spend more money than “non-pirates”"
      
      Actually, this is completely irrelevant since it says nothing regarding whether they would have bought more or less legally if not possible to download illegally.
      
      The Swedish study performed by the INDEPENDENT research company Mediavision, based on interviews with downloaders, showed that the downloaders would have bought the stuff in 25% of the cases if not possible to download it for free. That’s a considerable loss of income for the creators!
    - Fredrika
      
      > “The Swedish study performed by the INDEPENDENT research company Mediavision..”
      
      Are you purposely lying or are you just stupid? Mediavision is a profit seeking company that are 100% dependent on payments from the parties that order the studies, which makes them the complete opposite of independent. Do you seriously not understand the concept of independence?
      
      Parties that in turn use the studies as a political tool, which means they have a desire of a certain outcome of the study.
      
      > “That’s a considerable loss of income for the creators!”
      
      There’s no such thing as loss of income for entrepreneurs, There is only failure to sell, and the responsibility for that failure always falls 100% on the entrepreneur alone. Seriously, do you not understand anything how the free market works? Not even the basic fundamentals?
    - Anyone
      
      how is MediaVision independent?
      just posting it in caps doesn’t make it so
      
      all I can find about MediaVision is a now defunct company in the US or a video company in Sweden, which one do you mean?
    - Fredrika
      
      > “how is MediaVision independent?”
      
      They aren’t, they are a profit seeking consultant company, that are 100% dependent on payments from their customers.
      
      The study NoToABillionPeople refers to was so full of flaws that it couldn’t even stand up to the most basic scrutiny, which was the reason why it was never published in the first place. Nobody sane would ever refer to it’s made up numbers.
    - Guest
      
      Just one link? Come on, don’t be shy. Here. I’ll give you pages and pages of them.
      
      http://www.google dot com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=filesharers+buy+more
      
      Also: You have zero qualifications to critique these studies. And without knowing what their methodologies even are, it’s laughable to claim that their methodologies are wrong.
      
      You’re basing your shit on absolutely nothing.
    - UraPhake
      
      This link is NOT an independent study, but something to show you how even a most singularly interested party (the RIAA) made some math “mistakes” which, when corrected verifies the claims of most of the studies you seem to dislike.
      
      http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6699/125/
      
      When the faulty math is corrected, it shows that file sharers spend nearly 50 percent more on music than non-P2P users — this study was from the NPD Group, which conducts industry analysis for the Recording Industry Association of America.
      
      Now, if you can read and comprehend (along with some basic math skills thrown in for good measure) you will see that even the RIAA seems to prove the point being repeatedly put across through such studies.
      
      It certainly wasn’t their intention, but math is math and you can’t refute the true numbers when “mistakes” are corrected. But you’re welcome to try in spite of yourself. :)
    - http://nejtillpirater.wordpress.com/ Nejtillpirater
      
      @UraPhake
      
      “When the faulty math is corrected, it shows that file sharers spend nearly 50 percent more on music than non-P2P users”
      
      A result that has no relevance at all to the piracy issue since it doesn’t say anything about how much they would have spent if not being able to download illegally. It’s like saying that shoplifting is OK if shoplifters buy more in the stores than non shoplifters. It isn’t.
    - Fredrika
      
      > “A result that has no relevance at all to the piracy issue since it doesn’t say anything about how much they would have spent if not being able to download illegally.”
      
      It’s a result that has a direct relevance to the concept of copyright. But you on the other hand do oppose copyright on a conceptual level.
      
      > “It’s like saying that shoplifting is OK if shoplifters buy more in the stores than non shoplifters.”
      
      No, that’s not like saying that.
    - Anyone
      
      actually, if shoplifters spent so much more money that the shop came out ahead even after subtracting the lost merchandise it would be a good economic decision to allow the shoplifting
      
      since there is no lost merchandise with piracy that calculation is even easier with piracy
    - UraPhake
      
      “A result that has no relevance at all to the piracy issue since it doesn’t say anything about how much they would have spent if not being able to download illegally.”
      
      Pretty much what I thought you would say in response, something I was counting on.
      
      Now — let me ask you this question: If the result was of no relevance at all to the piracy issue, then why would the RIAA go to the trouble and expense of commissioning their own study via NPD? The RIAA did not think the other studies we’ve pointed out were relevant to the issue, so why bother?
      
      Just to top off the absurdity here, why the so-called “mistakes” in the original report? Could it be that they didn’t like the result (which one of the industry reps claim has been known for years, so the “mistakes” were also “irrelevant”)?
      
      I mean, if they already knew this for years, why just hammer it home with yet another study? It makes no sense at all to do (as you termed it) “another worthless study.”
    - icec0ld
      
      http://torrentfreak.com/megaupload-shutdown-hurt-box-office-revenues-121124/
      
      Here you go. 1 of those studies :)
    - http://nejtillpirater.wordpress.com/ Nejtillpirater
      
      @UraPhake
      
      “Now — let me ask you this question: If the result was of no relevance at all to the piracy issue, then why would the RIAA go to the trouble and expense of commissioning their own study via NPD? The RIAA did not think the other studies we’ve pointed out were relevant to the issue, so why bother?”
      
      Don’t know anything about that, I’m afraid. RIIA is no concern for us here in Sweden.
    - Fredrika
      
      > “RIIA is no concern for us here in Sweden.”
      
      Are you unaware of the fact that Riaa has an associate sister organisation in amongst other countries Sweden called Ifpi, that administers functions and programs on behalf of Riaa?
      
      More ignorance i guess. Big or small facts, it doesn’t matter, you just can’t seem to get them right. Not one single one.
    - Dirty_Bear
      
      “Just one link? Come on, don’t be shy. Here. I’ll give you pages and pages of them.
      
      http://www.google dot com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=filesharers+buy+more”
      
      There is one major problem with those studies and this is probably the reason why you’ll be hard pressed to find one that has been peer reviewed. The researchers obtain their results by asking people about their habits rather than studying them? As a lot of pirates are quite political and are aware of studies such as these what really stops them from lying to skew the results?
      
      Until researchers have found a way to eliminate these problem these studies really have no use other than propaganda.
    - Anyone
      
      most people are honest
      
      you can’t just assume that because you’d lie for some gain that everyone does that
- Fredrika
  
  > “The study was probably done because a certain result was desired by the researchers but performing it in this way is pointless.”
  
  You mean like the MediaVision study you often quote to prove how ignorant you are?
  - ZotSindi
    
    lol, it’s only pointless to them if it doesn’t standup to/disproves the usual MAFIAA-brand koolaid shower standards. Gotta love copyretard logic
    - in_to_the_blue
      
      or lack of logic…
  - gloom
    
    The study itself calls its own results ‘statistically insignificant.’ That’s the same as no results at all, and a waste of everyone’s time.
- IDIOCRACY
  
  I agree that the research is a worthless piece of junk and when printed a waste of nordic trees for paper. However the conclusion is still right, I have bought more (all) since I download, before I downloaded, I rented, taking real long in the store to find a good product, most of the time this never happened and I went home with a piece of shit to find out at home that the information on the cover was misleading and over exaggerated. So now I download and buy what is good. And really my nordic neighbor, I am not the only one…. stats enough.
  
  But as the Finnish say about the swedes: in Finnish: jos ruotsilaiset laskesivat he laskevat “yksi kaksi kolme paljon..”
  hehe
  - http://nejtillpirater.wordpress.com/ Nejtillpirater
    
    “when printed a waste of nordic trees for paper”
    
    Fortunately only two pages worth of printed waste of nordic trees for paper.
- Guest
  
  @Dirty_Bear
  
  lol
  
  Desperate MAFIAA troll up in here.
  
  Many people have conducted actual research to arrive at the conclusion that piracy is harmless and/or beneficial. You, however, have conducted absolutely dick to arrive at your conclusion.
  
  Studies with actual shit to back them up undertaken by professionals trump the groundless conjecture of an amateur copyright shill. Try again.
  - Dirty_Bear
    
    “Desperate MAFIAA troll up in here.”
    
    Wow, that was original.
    
    “Many people have conducted actual research to arrive at the conclusion that piracy is harmless and/or beneficial. You, however, have conducted absolutely dick to arrive at your conclusion.”
    
    Anyone can produce a study. Until it’s been peer reviewed it ain’t worth the paper it was written on.
    
    “Studies with actual shit to back them up undertaken by professionals trump the groundless conjecture of an amateur copyright shill. Try again.”
    
    Really, so please provide me with some evidence of any of these studies being successfully peer reviewed?
    
    Interesting article on the very subject.
    http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2132153
- MadAsASnake
  
  With far more integrity that hollywood uses to calculate “losses from piracy” or taxes they should pay on profits.
Pingback: Megaupload Shutdown Hurt Box Office Revenues | Zombie Torrents - Ultimate Torrents Downloads
Longcatsarelog

Blockbuster had a negitive effect because those that see it know how crappy it is already and tell there friends not to waste there cash.
RIAAtarded

This all just goes back to the ‘try before you buy’ principle which is an option in every other industry but this one. Not only can’t you try it but once you buy it if you don’t like it you can’t return it either. It doesn’t surprise me that the disappearance of megauploads has had a bottom line effect. Like it or not access to content for free does generate sales. Hear a tune on the radio might inspire you to buy and album. Movies on tv maybe you grab the bluray. If anything piracy and the early access to content helps sales on the front end. It is the best form of free advertising and something they should embrace not try to criminalize.
- SomeYahoo
  
  herp derp but but telling people what to do is more important than our sales! i mean … our sales are more important … i mean …
Pingback: Estudio indica que el cierre de Megaupload habría afectado ... - FayerWayer
waaminn

Fascinating, I am actually not surprised at all by that. Wow.
http://www.Anony-Max.tk
Sorsja

I never even heard about megaupload before the raid.

I download movies now more than ever out of principle, and when I see cars parked infront of a theatre, I put notes under the windshields, “Was it worth it? Next time use your brain http://piratebay.se!
guest

Netshitpijater

FUCK OFF and go spend the 5 dollars they paid you to spam your shit here.
gloom

Read the fucking paper, they claim the supposed effect is not stastically significant. That means they don’t *actually* find an effect that can’t be accounted for by general inaccuracy. Torrentfreak should be fucking ashamed of their bullshit propaganda.
Pingback: MegaUpload Closure Hurt Box Office Revenue « Detik Smart
Pingback: El cierre de Megaupload perjudicó a los ingresos de taquilla (ING)
BobMail

The level of idiocy in this post is beyond understanding.

Could the reductions in revenues be because Hollywood produced less blowckbuster type films over this summer, the ones that released weren’t as good, and just perhaps that small little blip in the economy has maybe made it harder for people to afford to go the movies?
Pingback: Researchers find Megaupload shutdown hurt box office revenues, despite gains for blockbusters - Daily Small Talk
downunder

as I already stated previously “flow on affect” mess with one system
affects another… such as revenue streams

stop piracy = less drive tech needed = bankrupt silicon valley (well the ones in china now :))

thats just the hardware side of things..

cut of trialling cut of free advertising of the product

look how many tv shows one can discovery online verse local tv
cos they arent bought or air-ed.. then you have more potential customers wanting to buy OR SUPPORT THEIR FAV SCIFI TO KEEP IT ON AIR as example
http://www.facebook.com/people/Ender-Wiggin/100000885624281 Ender Wiggin

those word of mouth producers, and other artists who used mega, as a place their fans could find their stuff are the ONLY ones harmed. the legitimate users. Well, and Kim and the rest who caught indictments. the rest of us got pissed, shed a tear or raised a glass then went to the next site. killing sites doesn’t slow us down. it just makes us angry, and ever more commmitted to pissing on the grave of the industry.
Pingback: Researchers find Megaupload shutdown hurt box office revenues, despite gains for blockbusters | What is Data?
0omg

we said it millions time … sharing is caring !!!
Foff

Who are the fucking morons that conduct these studies. How do you tie unrelated events together? There is no way you can say the shut down of Mega had any effect because plenty of filesharing was in effect.

What I want to know is if all pirating stopped tomorrow how much fucking money does the industry expect to make? I am sure all the money that the mafiaa spends fighting piracy does not and never will make them a fucking cent. Here is why: I don’t hardly ever go to the movies because I really don’t enjoy it. Most movies wind up being a disappointment and the cost benefit is not there. I don’t mind watching a pirated movie because if it is not that good I don’t feel I am out that much. Not only that but many movies I download it takes a long time to get into the mood to watch if I ever watch them at all. Finally if a movie really is that good and I want a big screen experience then i will go even if I can download it because of course a good copy will never available until few months after release in the theaters.

If there were no piracy I might rent an occasional movie so at least in my case all the fighting to stop piracy will not amount hardly anything. In third world countries people would just find other things to do or find ways to watch them, cheap bootleg copies will alway be plentiful in those places and enforcement will be lax to non existent.

All the tv shows and music I download i could easily live without. I will never pay for cable just to watch a few fucking shows on tv. I have no interest in buying any media on blu ray or dvd ever. Don’t care to have a bunch of plastic gathering dust. Bottom line for me is hollywood is stupid as fuck and is wasting their money of the mafiaa orgs becuase full of shit and nothing do with ever ever be worth it. I don’t why hollywood are so fucking stupid and can’t realize they are being taken for a ride. Hollywood could easily make one or two billion over night offering inexpensive downloads of first run movies. Why the fuck they think they theaters is beyond me. Why can’t they realize like drive in theaters watching a movie in theater is fast becoming obsolete. How do theaters expect to compete with 80″ screens and 7.1 surround sound systems. In a few years those systems will be common in most households.
http://twitter.com/PatternGuru714 PatternGuru714

You guys realize the article said “For blockbusters (shown
on more than 500 screens) the sign is positive (and significant, depending on the specification)” meaning they went up after MU shutdown, and that only independent, smaller movies showed revenue loss from MU shutdown. Major-screened movies all increased in revenue. I’m not big on the RIAA/MPAA or big labels, but that’s simply what it said. It still says interesting things about how P2P can help the little guy movie makers. Read the study linked in OP, it’s only 3 pages.
http://twitter.com/EvanKnz Evan Kennedy

The real question is the legality of the matter. Even as a pirate, I can see that your argument makes little sense – it’s similar to saying that if I buy more than I steal from a store, it’s very much OK. It’s not.
- http://nejtillpirater.wordpress.com/ Nejtillpirater
  
  Exactly. Promising to see that yet another reader here is aware of that simple fact.
  - Fredrika
    
    > “Exactly. Promising to see that yet another reader here is aware of that simple fact.”
    
    It’s promising to see that another ignorant person is resorting to the same failed circular reasoning as you do?
- Anyone
  
  why is that not okay?
  if you buy more to make up for what you take (since in the case of shoplifting there is an actual loss) the owner would be a fool to ban you from his store
  
  with piracy there is no loss to make up for, so the calculation is even simpler
- Fredrika
  
  > “The real question is the legality of the matter.”
  
  In what way? Simply referencing that it is currently illegal says nothing about what good or bad or how things should be. Referencing what the law currently says as an attenpt at an argument is circular reasoning, which is a logical fallacy, you should look the concept up, and stay away from it.
  
  > “Even as a pirate, I can see that your argument makes little sense – it’s similar to saying that if I buy more than I steal from a store, it’s very much OK. It’s not.”
  
  It is nothing similar. Two completely different crimes that has absolutely nothing in common, there are only differences between them. There are no similarities at all if we compare them. Look for yourself.
  
  Property rights exist for a completely different reason than copyright. Property rights are necessary for society, the copyright monopoly isn’t. Property rights are natural. Legislative monopolies are unnatural. Intrusions into property rights give a very exact result and actual harm. Intrusions into legislative monopolies gives a completely different result, and no harm.
  
  That shoplifting is a crime and causes harm says nothing about filesharing, or if it’s good or bad.
- Jatillpirater
  
  It’s not though. If you steal from a store you steal that stock from the store denying the chance to sell it to someone else. If you download music (and the study doesn’t differentiate between unauthorised downloads and downloading music that is freely given by artists, of which there is a growing amount) alongside buying from authorised sources you’re not depriving the store of the sale of that item to other buyers.
  
  It’s a shame that supporters of the middlemen like Nejtillpirater continue to peddle this myth, because they’re fighting against the rights of the artist to make money from their work.
  
  The artists, the ones who do all the creative work and thus the ones who allow the industry to exist in the first place, generally benefit from file-sharing through the increased exposure of their work to their customers/fans. This has been shown time and again to increase ticket sales for live appearances and sales of merchandise which is where artists have a reasonable margin and generally make their living. Fighting against the improved distribution channels the internet has given to artists, which in turn has removed the need for middlemen, is counter-intuitive for anyone who loves music.
  
  By removing middlemen the chances are also increased for artists to actually monetise some of their recorded music too – something that the old structure denied. It means an artist doesn’t need to sell a ridiculous number of albums to even break even repaying the advance from their ~5% share of the royalties before they even start to see any of that ~5% of the royalties in their own pocket. They can turn a profit simply by selling a few thousand copies. I know, I’ve done it. I’ve worked on production for some small indies in the past and in one example just selling a couple of hundred copies of a limited-run vinyl pressing into a tiny specialist niche market has created enough cashflow to fund three follow-up releases which between them have netted enough money to live on for the indie artist until they release their next work. It’s like actually working for a living. ;)
Pingback: To ???????? ??? Megaupload ?????? ??? ?????????? ??? ??????? | Digital Life
http://twitter.com/EvanKnz Evan Kennedy

I doubt most people got past the title…
Mc

So piracy has a positive effect on revenues for the whole world full of indie productions, but a negative effect on revenues for films pumped out by the big six MPAA affiliated studios.

What this says to me is that there is a whole world full of independent creativity trying to burst out thanks to the power of the internet, but the MPAA studios would rather keep their prime film making position cemented for as long as possible by stymieing the internet and various services on it. The balance of creative power is trying to shift back to the people away from these big hollywood studios, and they are doing everything in their power to prevent it.
- http://twitter.com/EvanKnz Evan Kennedy
  
  A related TED talk by Larry Lessig.
  
  Larry Lessig says the Law is Strangling Creativity
  http://www.ted.com/talks/larry_lessig_says_the_law_is_strangling_creativity.html
  
  I assure the readers that it’s a fairly balanced point of view. If you’re an extremist of any kind, it’s probably not for you (but watch anyway).
Pingback: To ???????? ??? Megaupload ?????? ??? ?????????? ??? ???????
Pantesmo

>This suggests blockbuster movies may be less prone to word-of-mouth promotion by movie pirates.

Not surprised. Most blockbusters are shit and lowest-common-denominator. Movie pirates are always more savvy about what is and isn’t a good film in my experience.
- http://twitter.com/PatternGuru714 PatternGuru714
  
  Then why are the top pirated movies via torrents, listed here on TF, always blockbusters?
Pingback: To ???????? ??? Megaupload ?????? ??? ?????????? ??? ???????
ScrewEwe2

The MAFIAA costs me money. If they want to compensate me for my 5 computers, 20 terrabytes of internal and external drives, burners + media, electricity, Internet service, etc., etc., I’ll start saying that piracy cost’s nothing. I’m just supporting a different part of the economy. Almost forgot to mention the $140.00 per month I spend on cable TV and movie rentals, so the MAFIAA costs me a lot of money. About the only thing that’s free is oxygen, and after 47 years of heavy smoking, I’ll be paying for that too, sooner than later. Under 2 hours to the final F1 race of 2012. Heres to wishing Sebastian Vettel a third straight drivers championship. He brings back memories of fellow Duetchlander Michael.
- Jatillpirater
  
  Shame for Alonso – he was by far the better driver this year. Much poorer car all round and he pushed it right to the last race. Still, congrats to Vettel, he doesn’t often get to show how good he can be thanks to a great team, but every now and again he pulls an amazing drive out of his hat. Last to 6th in Brazil almost equals the quality of Jensen Button’s last to 1st in Canada last year :)
Pingback: Researchers find Megaupload shutdown hurt box office revenues, despite gains for blockbusters | My Blog
Are You Really That Smart?

@Fredrika is your parent(s) using your profile to type things or are you just that smart?
Pingback: Según un estudio el cierre de Megaupload en general perjudicó a la industria del cine | GeeksRoom
Karl

I love how torrentfreak staff deleted my comment… good job guys… slurp it up
- Anyone
  
  Diqus has currently issues with comments being marked automatically as spam
  when moderators show up they fix that
  - Karl
    
    I was about the tenth person to comment on this, over 15 hours ago. It was someone who actually removed it.
Pingback: Estudio indica que el cierre de Megaupload habría afectado los ingresos de taquilla del cine « Noticias Venezuela
Pingback: Megaupload Shutdown Hurt Industries That Lobbied for its Shutdown | Infinity News Network
Bob

Ernesto, copyright bastards need to fuck off, but correlation is not causation and ridiculous claims like this makes the file sharing movement look like fucktards. Please stop.
Pingback: Weekend tech reading: Haswell to be Intel’s last swappable CPUs? | My Blog
http://www.facebook.com/QuTerry QuHarrison Terry

America loves bootleg.
Pingback: Das Bloggermärchen: Megaupload-Aus Schuld an Ebbe an den Kinokassen?
Pingback: Research shows Megaupload shutdown “had a negative effect on box office [movie] revenues” | Reviews, news, tips, and tricks -- dotTech
Pingback: Biografintäkterna minskade när Megaupload stängdes ner | Fildelning
Pingback: Ubivši Megaupload, filmska industrija ‘ubila’ je prihode manjih filmova | Netokracija
Pingback: Quickthink » Blog Archive » A Convincing Argument!
Pingback: Study indicates that the closure of Megaupload would have affected the cinema box office | Tech News Pedia
Jsmith

I have to agree with “terry” above. Look, I have no opinion on whether filesharing hurts movie revenues or not. And I have no opinion on whether the Megaupload shutdown hurt or helped the box office.

But what I do know is that I ready the “study” (all 3 pages of it) and it’s the worst excuse for a so called “study” that I’ve seen in a while. The authors don’t even describe their methodology – what mechanism do they use to “match” movies affected by the shutdown with movies not affect and how good is the matching?

It’s completely unclear with the authors did and the fact that they claim to have “findings” is ridiculous. They are trying to get around the “correlation is not causation” problem with their quasi difference in difference approach but then they do not explain this approach at all so it’s completely impossible to determine if it’s valid or not (it’s probably not).

I’m not saying they are right or wrong… just that this isn’t even close to a valid study.
Pingback: Un estudio indica que el cierre de Megaupload dañó a la industria del cine ‹ Geek Pro | Referencia de Ciencia, Cine, Tecnología y Videojuegos
Nemo

it’s amazing. If they let the ‘piracy’ going up, people are happy looking at home their film, gently sleeping with emotion. If they want to stop piracy, people wake up and go in the street sharing the occupy movement for example.
So more they do against liberty to save their money (as they thought), more revolution grow. Great ^^
Pingback: Linkwertig: Megaupload, Pu, Gründerszene, Reposito » netzwertig.com
Pingback: El cierre de Megaupload afectó negativamente a la industria del cine | MiBahia.net
Pingback: Desde que se cerro Megaupload se vieron afectados los ingresos de los cines | HD-Tecnologia
Pingback: Study suggests shutting down MegaUpload hurt box office ticket sales | My Blog
Pingback: Cierre de MagaUpload afectó negativamente las ganancias del mundo del cine | IntelDig
Pingback: El cierre de Megaupload ha perjudicado las taquillas
Pingback: Hashtable » Alerte ! HADOPI bouge encore et va réclamer plus de moyens !
Pingback: Alerte ! HADOPI bouge encore et va réclamer plus de moyens ! | Contrepoints
Pingback: Quoi de neuf sur la planète Megaupload ? | Cultures Numériques reMasterisées
Pingback: Film Studios MAKE Money on Stolen Movies
Pingback: Megaupload ???????????????????? | TechOrange? ????? |
Guest

http://battlefield4betakeys.org/

TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

Megaupload Shutdown Hurt Box Office Revenues

Related Posts

Previous Post | Next Post

NewsBits

Pirate Bay Founder Gottfrid Svartholm on Freedom of Speech

Blu-ray Anti-Piracy Tech Stops Discs and Promotes Purchases

Foxtel Breeds Pirates by Locking Up Game of Thrones

UK Student Admits Breaching Sony Copyrights With Leak of PS3 SDK

Pirates Can Be Identified Despite Sharing IP Addresses, ISP Claims

MostDiscussed

Pirate Bay Takes Over Distribution of Censored 3D Printable Gun

McAfee Patents Technology to Detect and Block Pirated Content

Pirate Bay Finds Safe Haven in Iceland, Switches to .IS Domain

Copyright Trolls Threaten to Call Neighbors of Accused Porn Pirates

Game Pirates Whine About Piracy in Game Dev Simulator

CopyQuote

PopularArticles

VPN Services That Take Your Anonymity Seriously, 2013 Edition

Top 10 Most Popular Torrent Sites of 2013

Which VPN Service Providers Really Take Anonymity Seriously?

What’s The Best VPN / Proxy for BitTorrent?

BTGuard Review: How Does it Work?

Optimize Your BitTorrent Download Speed