TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

MPAA Costs Hollywood More Than US BitTorrent Piracy

During the last year Netflix managed to outgrow BitTorrent in terms of the amount of US Internet traffic it generates. A promising finding for Hollywood as it shows that there’s an overwhelming interest for the legal movie streaming service. At TorrentFreak we wondered what might happen if all US BitTorrent users made the switch to Netflix, and the results of this exploration are quite intriguing.

mpaaThe movie industry claims that piracy is costing them billions of dollars a year.

Luckily for Hollywood, many Americans choose to consume their online media through legal services such as Netflix. In fact, there are now so many that the total Internet traffic generated by Netflix has outgrown that of BitTorrent.

This made us wonder – what would happen if all movie-downloading BitTorrent users made the switch to Netflix? What if movie piracy via BitTorrent disappeared?

Before we crunch some numbers we have to say that the model we use relies on a lot of assumptions. However, we try to keep these in favor of the movie industry to maximize their potential ‘profits’. We obviously chose Netflix as a BitTorrent replacement because it comes closest to what ‘pirates’ want.

What’s the ‘value’ of BitTorrent piracy?

What we’re going to do is determine the amount of Internet traffic movie and TV related BitTorrent downloads generate in the US. Since the file-sizes of Netflix and BitTorrent downloads are about the same, we then compare this traffic to what Netflix is generating now. Assuming a linear relation between revenue and traffic we can then “guess” how much extra money would come in if all BitTorrent users switched – and paid.

Step 1: How much BitTorrent traffic is movie/tv related?

The first assumption we’re going to make is that all BitTorrent traffic is unauthorized. This is of course not the case, but we’ll leave that debate for another time.

If we then take a look at one of the more recent reports on the BitTorrent ecosystem, often cited by the MPAA, we see that 35.2% of all torrents are movie related. Another 12.7% are TV-related. For the purpose of this thought experiment we are going to forget about Hulu and other free services and add TV to the ‘pirate traffic’ mix.

The total percentage of video torrents is then 47.9%.

Since we’re comparing traffic we have to adjust for the file-size of videos compared to all other content on BitTorrent and the actual popularity of the files. This is nearly impossible to estimate precisely , but several reports show that movie and video are downloaded the most by far. So we’re going to set the total amount of infringing BitTorrent video traffic at 85%, which is probably on the high end.

Step 2: How does BitTorrent traffic compare to Netflix traffic?

The next step is to see how much of total Internet traffic 85% of all BitTorrent traffic actually is.

A recent report from the Canadian company Sandvine shows that in the US 16.5% of total Internet traffic on an average day comes from BitTorrent. Since BitTorrent traffic goes both ways (upload and download), 8.75% of this is downstream traffic. This means that a little under 7.5% (85% of 8.75) of all Internet traffic in the US is video downloads over BitTorrent.

The same Sandvine report shows that 23.3% of total Internet traffic an average day comes from Netflix. More than 95% of this traffic is downstream, so we can set Netflix downloads at approximately 22.5% of all US Internet traffic, which is three times as much as BitTorrent’s video download traffic.

Step 3: How much revenue would these pirates generate on Netflix?

Here comes the interesting part. What would it mean in terms of revenue if ALL BitTorrent traffic moved to Netflix?

If we assume that BitTorrent and Netflix users consume roughly the same amount of content (again an assumption favoring the movie studios), then this is an easy calculation. Netflix would generate a third more revenue. Based on the shareholders report of the last quarter of 2010 (where most of the torrent stats in this article are based on) this translates into $198 million additional revenue for Netflix.

Based on more recent stats contained in Netflix’s third quarter filing of this year, the increase in revenue would be $266 million for that quarter.

Step 4: How rich would Hollywood become?

It’s clear that according to our (very unrealistic) calculations Netflix would greatly benefit from the sudden disappearance of BitTorrent piracy. The next step is to see how Hollywood would be impacted. Since most licensing deals are fixed and not based on usage, one could argue that the movie studios wouldn’t benefit at all. However, that’s not much fun.

So let’s look at the licensing deals that were in place already and determine Hollywood’s added profits based on that, assuming they would be more flexible.

In the whole of 2010, Netflix paid the movie studios $181 million in licensing fees according to the shareholder reports. If we add a third to that, Hollywood would have “made” roughly $60 million extra. Salient detail, the yearly budget of the MPAA is higher than that.

In recent months the movie studios have exponentially increased Netflix’s licensing costs, but still the added profits for the movie studios will be nowhere near a billion dollars. No, getting rid of ALL BitTorrent movie and TV piracy appears to have a ‘relatively’ small effect, even if all pirating BitTorrent users signed up for a Netflix account.

What does this mean?

Nothing. It’s a simplistic attempt to put a number on BitTorrent piracy in the US.

It shows that even when you assume that 90% of all US BitTorrent traffic is dedicated to video piracy, the added revenue for Hollywood in 2010 would have been less than the amount they paid to the MPAA. That is, if all BitTorrent users switched to Netflix.

The real added revenue if BitTorrent disappeared would of course be a fraction of this, as not everyone would start paying.

We don’t want to draw too many conclusions on this simple thought experiment, but it’s something to consider, especially when ISPs are expected to dedicate millions of dollars in resources to send BitTorrent users warning letters early next year. Not to mention the negative effect of the censorship bills that have been proposed recently.

Is it really worth all that?

Related Posts

Previous Post | Next Post

  • Phil Landry

    That doesn’t surprise me…

  • http://profiles.google.com/orfetheo Orfeas Theofanis

    If they kept their money instead of paying lawyers, lawsuits etc, they would have economized more than 60m $, the rough estimate gain in the case of torrent’s disappearance…
    Good job MPAA, you’re smart! You should probably hire some economic consultants.

    • Guest

      “…instead of paying lawyers…”

      What, you thought artists ran Hollywood? Lawyers run Hollywood, and the entire US for that matter.

      • Scary Devil Monastery

        It’s sad to say that the real winners in trying to keep copyright as-is isn’t artists, isn’t hollywood, and isn’t any other major or minor studio.

        But there are, today, tens of thousands of extremely well-paid lawyers who do nothing but sort out Intellectual Property who have become completely indispensable in any company.

        The day IP legislation becomes sensible, these guys will all be out of a job. Arguably the most powerful lobby of all is the one driven by lawyers who’ve made copyright, patents and licensing their field of expertise. Moreover, unlike the lobbying by MPAA and any other vested “special interest” the influence of these lawyers is largely silent and doesn’t require an organization – each and every one of them will naturally influence the company they work for just by offering their legal counsel – which naturally is one illuminating how “important” IP considerations are.

        This is like watching a bureaucracy grow. At first the civil servants are just that – called-upon experts. Later on in the game major parts of the bureaucracy exists merely to provide a justification for the rest of it.

    • Guest

      Not factored in is the number of copies done for friends and family and copies of the download converted and sold by Pirates.

      So as a ‘guestimate’ you could multiply the losses Hollywood suffers by 10 or 50 it wouldn’t matter which.

      Hollywood would have “made” roughly $60 million extra

      “But—you see, a bank or a company can’t do that, because those creatures don’t breathe air, don’t cat side-meat. They breathe profits; they eat the interest on money. If they don’t get it, they die the way you die without air, without side-meat. It is a sad thing, but it is so. It is just so.”
      Steinbeck, “The Grapes of Wrath”

      • http://rct.me.ht/ crashsuit

        Oh, sure, everyone sells dozens of copies of everything they download. That’s why we’re all rolling around in giant piles of money.

  • StevO

    “A promising finding for Hollywood as it shows that there’s an overwhelming interest for the legal movie streaming service.” Highly….unlikely…

  • Anon

    “Is it really worth all that?”

    Of course it is.
    Law enforcement was never a zero sum game that has to be profitable or abandoned. People will always do the right thing simply because it’s right, not because it’s profitable.

    I wouldn’t expect people who pirate to save the purchase cost to themselves to understand this, but if the good, law abiding people are to have a reasonably safe and reliable network going forward, industry like the MPAA and governments around the world have little choice. Online freedom was never synonymous with lawlessness, just as it is IRL.

    • StevO

      Its funny that just because people download a movie or CD that the industry is losing money. Think about how much digital media is floating around for years now with DVDs and CDs. Can you even imagine how much of that media is watched by dozens of people who did not purchase that? Yard sales make selling your copies of them illegal? SO I would think that the industry even selling digital media has to hurt them in the long run. I cant even tell you how many movies my wife and her 5 sisters exchange over a couple of months. This I can tell you, ONE movie purchase gets viewed ATLEAST 5 times. And that wouldnt begin to cover kids movies that are watched over and over by each others kids. Its pretty unlikely that a download even gets viewed by anyone other than the person who downloads it. I think its not even comparable.

    • Anonymous

      No, it isn’t worth all that. What they’re doing is like using forensic investigation techniques to track down people who litter. They’re throwing boatloads of money at negligible “crimes” just to have an excuse to wrangle more money out of good businesses and artists.

      You should also understand that the MPAA is not law enforcement.

      • Anon

        “You should also understand that the MPAA is not law enforcement.”

        I do understand that. But you should understand that almost half of western GDP including the USA is in digital IP. Also understand that digital music was the canary in the coal mine and digital movies are being threatened next. Box office has nothing to do with this.

        HALF the merchandise the USA has to trade in the global marketplace is in digital format. And you want them to step back and simply allow multiples copies for free because “they can’t stop you?”

        oh really? lol

        Industrialized and developing nations will force monetization of digital IP including online transfer just as analog sales are monetized or whole industries and tax revenue streams will ultimately collapse. We don’t have to agree to what degree. That’s open for discussion and the industry “facts” are as suspect as the pirates “free publicity” bullshit. But if you are copying for-sale merchandise so you don’t have to buy then you aren’t paying for the products you take, the industries aren’t compensated and the governments don’t get the taxes, and that’s just a fact.

        Governments will not back off this because they can’t, they need the robust sales that drive their economies. In the long run you’ll either 1) do without 2) buy as intended or 3) risk ever increasing, incredible punishment.

        It will be as it should be. :-)

        • nonA

          It won’t. At least not your way.
          All that enforcement will accomplish is disruption of real players of internet market(like Google) bullied into submission. Average user will become tech-savvy and more anonymity-aware. p2p sharing will continue to evolve. And smaller players will emerge and easily take their share of the market. All big decaying dinosaurs will accomplish is establishing of “piracy-culture” and growth of “free internet” technologies. They encourage it with inadequate prices, poor content usability for those inadequate prices and enforcement.
          The problem is that governments are too concerned with wellbeing of corporations. Dying corporations. Even without piracy. Those governments are too eager to “help” those corporations to protect their interests. And they are interested not because of taxes but because of lobby. Legal and illegal.
          It’s time to move forward. And if big bosses don’t want to it’s their problem.
          World’s reaction to SOPA was very clear.

        • Lulz

          “Box office has nothing to do with this.”

          HAHAHAHAHAHAHA… I read that as “That they made 10x back on their investment doesn’t matter, they should have made 20x the investment!” Greedy fucks.

          “risk ever increasing, incredible punishment.

          It will be as it should be. :-)”

          Yeah… right until people start shooting these CEO’s, politicians, and lawyers and then saying, “Oh hey… I’m being charged less jail time and fines than if I downloaded a CD… Awesome!” (I’m not advocating people should, but people have done it for less, just look at all those religious wars and stuff :-P )

        • Abunchofgibberish

          Then all the good artists start giving away their content for free or selling it independently and your entire concept goes out the window. Oh wait…

        • Scary Devil Monastery

          It will be much like when the DDR fell. Governments will back away from IP for two reasons.

          1) You can’t rule a nation against the consent of it’s people. Every time “enforcement” of IP takes another step, more and more people are waking up to the fact that the “enforcement” isn’t hurting filesharers but is threatening legitimate businesses most people today take for granted.

          Once SOPA passes and people start noticing Youtube and Facebook no longer works, the pirate will become the common man.

          2) IP today has become so restrictive that real innovation becomes ever harder and requires far more legal counsel before embarking on it. Meanwhile China and India, ostensibly ignoring all such barriers, are churning out one great idea after another and putting it in the asian markets. In addition to purchasing far more of the western IP portfolios. A decade down the line when China threatens to take over the IP lead as well as it did for manufacturing, every western government will backpedal from IP fast enough to leave smoking tracks.

          Just as the US did in the first world war with the airplane patents, and just the way the UK did right before it established itself as an industrial power. IP is unsustainable in the same way a plan economy is. Realpolitik will carry the day here as it always has.

        • http://Operation-DarkSky.askaboutit.com Needlez™

          I hope you realise that even with them enforcing monetized IPs it won’t make a difference. No one person can be proved to be the IP. Second if lets say some hacker got came into this IP by it being monetized now they could have easy access to ruining someones life. That would never pass, next thing your gonna say is that they’ll be microchiping people and people will have an IP like in the movie Gamer. lol. Think of it this way alot of people do with out, and then others go rent the movie from netflix for a day take it home rip it from the movie, so they have a copy of what they bought, which isn’t for sale, and share it with friends when friends come over to visit. Now as long as it was never sold to anyone technically its not illegal. You’re allowed to back up your information from a CD or DVD if you purchased it. It doesn’t say anywhere in there that you have to still own the original, or that you have to prove that you have the original. I have hundreds of bought movies that I own and more digital copies. However I do not sell them, I watch them with friends and the girlfriend and thats all. So have they made any profit off me no, will they off my friends no, or anyone else I know that wants to watch a movie, probably not. So when it does kick in that people will be forced to by or go without, ill go without, unless I go to the cheap theathres, and then I’d only watch movies, I know will be good.

        • Anonymous

          “And you want them to step back and simply allow multiples copies for free because “they can’t stop you?” ”

          Yes, that’s exactly right. They aren’t being forced to push a boulder up a hill for all eternity just to watch it roll back down again time and time again, so why continue pushing? They’re made zero progress in combating piracy, so why try? You may think it wise to spend your money on absolutely nothing of value, but intelligence doesn’t seem to be your strong suit.

          The groups that have done the most damage to piracy aren’t the MPAA and RIAA, they are Netflix and iTunes. The companies you support have spent millions on nothing, while the companies I support have actually moved forward while simultaneously giving the pirates an outlet for all that money they’ve supposedly been saving. As you can see from this gem of common sense I’ve imparted to you, the best way to combat piracy is to provide a better option.

          As for your doom and gloom “you’ll see” bullshit, you’re just talking out of your ass (which is easier with your head already there).

        • Anonymous

          “And you want them to step back and simply allow multiples copies for free because “they can’t stop you?” ”

          Yes, that’s exactly right. They aren’t being forced to push a boulder up a hill for all eternity just to watch it roll back down again time and time again, so why continue pushing? They’re made zero progress in combating piracy, so why try? You may think it wise to spend your money on absolutely nothing of value, but intelligence doesn’t seem to be your strong suit.

          The groups that have done the most damage to piracy aren’t the MPAA and RIAA, they are Netflix and iTunes. The companies you support have spent millions on nothing, while the companies I support have actually moved forward while simultaneously giving the pirates an outlet for all that money they’ve supposedly been saving. As you can see from this gem of common sense I’ve imparted to you, the best way to combat piracy is to provide a better option.

          As for your doom and gloom “you’ll see” bullshit, you’re just talking out of your ass (which is easier with your head already there).

        • Gwiz2009

          I do understand that. But you should understand that almost half of western GDP including the USA is in digital IP.

          Whoa. Making figures up off the top of your head there?

          In 2009 the Motion picture and sound recording industry only accounted for 0.42% of the GDP in the US. That’s less than 1/2 of 1 percent. Even if you throw in broadcasting and telecommunications it’s still less than 3%.

          Figures are from this source.

        • Gwiz

          Whoops. I guess TorrentFreak doesn’t allow links.

          That source is here:
          http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0670.pdf

    • Scary Devil Monastery

      “People will always do the right thing simply because it’s right, not because it’s profitable.”

      7000 years of recorded human history begs to differ. But then again, fact never was your strong suit. What is “right” is a question of generally accepted moral. No person I have ever spoken to has a moral stance saying it’s wrong to make a copy of media. Every person I’ve ever spoken to has an objection to murder. That’s the way it goes.

      And even so, Rosa Parks was, according to accepted moral, wrong to not yield her seat on the bus to a white person – which proves conclusively that people not only do not always do what is “right” according to public opinion. It’s a very good thing they don’t always do so.

      Law enforcement in the USSR and the DDR did indeed follow the model you presume. It has been proven not to work. Any attempts at law enforcement will be abandoned or downprioritized once the cost of maintaining it proves to be a bigger drain on society’s resources than the alternative.

      Which, incidentally, is why there may be four or five traffic policemen guarding a stretch of road watching for speeders instead of the four or five hundred which would be required to catch them all.

      And when “lawlessness” means what information you may or may not pass to someone else, then “lawlessness” does indeed become synonymous with online freedom. See China for an example here.

      If you have any other irrelevant nonsense to bring to the table, feel free.

      Ah, and regarding the people who “pirate” – it’s a very strange thing then that it’s been empirically proven, time and time again, that “pirates” are far more happy to part with their cash than what you call the “law abiding people”. As soon as they can find a good deal that is, which they are not being offered.

      Were it not so then the open-source sector and creative commons would not exist. But it not only does, it thrives.

    • Scary Devil Monastery

      “People will always do the right thing simply because it’s right, not because it’s profitable.”

      7000 years of recorded human history begs to differ. But then again, fact never was your strong suit. What is “right” is a question of generally accepted moral. No person I have ever spoken to has a moral stance saying it’s wrong to make a copy of media. Every person I’ve ever spoken to has an objection to murder. That’s the way it goes.

      And even so, Rosa Parks was, according to accepted moral, wrong to not yield her seat on the bus to a white person – which proves conclusively that people not only do not always do what is “right” according to public opinion. It’s a very good thing they don’t always do so.

      Law enforcement in the USSR and the DDR did indeed follow the model you presume. It has been proven not to work. Any attempts at law enforcement will be abandoned or downprioritized once the cost of maintaining it proves to be a bigger drain on society’s resources than the alternative.

      Which, incidentally, is why there may be four or five traffic policemen guarding a stretch of road watching for speeders instead of the four or five hundred which would be required to catch them all.

      And when “lawlessness” means what information you may or may not pass to someone else, then “lawlessness” does indeed become synonymous with online freedom. See China for an example here.

      If you have any other irrelevant nonsense to bring to the table, feel free.

      Ah, and regarding the people who “pirate” – it’s a very strange thing then that it’s been empirically proven, time and time again, that “pirates” are far more happy to part with their cash than what you call the “law abiding people”. As soon as they can find a good deal that is, which they are not being offered.

      Were it not so then the open-source sector and creative commons would not exist. But it not only does, it thrives.

    • How_Funny

      “People will always do the right thing simply because it’s right, not because it’s profitable.”

      Yes you said it, that’s our philosophy here, we share because it’s right, not because it’s profitable :0)

  • Anonymous

    @readers:disqus  my classmate’s mom makes $72 every hour on the internet. She has been unemployed for 3 months but last month her paycheck was $8728 just working on the internet for a few hours. Read about it on this site http://smlk.es/Cash

  • foff

    I have been saying this for years. If you ran a company that received 60 million in revenue a year to stop piracy wouldn’t you make the same claims that the MPAA does to justify their fees? A download equals at most a book or video checked out of the library. Without downloading my budget for hard drives and internet would shrink by at least half if not more but budget for video purchase would remain at virtually zero. I watched so many things that I downloaded that I never would have even rented. There are other things in life besides video consumption. If it were not there, convenient and in my budget ie free off the internet I would spend my time in other more product pursuits.

    I was alive before the internet and like most I am addicted to parts of it but without a doubt my life would be better without it because I would spend much more time doing things with those that I love then sitting in front of this screen.

    The claims of hollywood and the Riaa are complete nonsense in fact if all their n#zi ambitions come to pass their revenues will take a big dive. Of all the new shows this year I only watch two and those will be lucky to make it to second or third season. TV has turned to shit, Movies are nothing but cgi bs with a little poor acting and horrible script writing thrown in. I can see myself stop downloading because their shit is so bad it is not even worth my time to watch for free.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_FCNK7C55CBUYFVSC5LNWKB322E Buglord

    when I watch a movie these days, it’s ONLY because most of the newer games are too boring to just play without doing something else at the same time.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002639684444 Ryan Smith

    Well done, Ernesto! I know a lot of work goes into an article like this and you’ve demonstrated the absurdity of the MPAA’s existence in a way I never could.

    My only question is, who needs to read this the most? Hollywood? Congress?

    • Mwhahaha

      Voters.

      • Scary Devil Monastery

        If SOPA passes, Voters will be reading stuff like this all the time since Facebook will be, for all intents and purposes, gone.

  • Anonymous

    no amount of downloading can warrant the cost of lobbying and the ‘incentives’ being paid to those in powerful political and law making positions within the various governments, or what is being spent on different court cases over file sharing and copyright infringement. everyone knows (except those that dont want to know) the losses the industries claim are bull shit. what this article represents is the probable increase in revenue if torrenting stopped over night. that difference is almost negligible. what so many fail to realise is that, as far as the entertainment industries are concerned, it isn’t about the money or the scale of infringements. it is about control, in particular, control of the internet. get that and they have got everything!

    • Mwhahaha

      Ooh you’re inspiring me to go all braveheart now.

      Where’s that tin of blue emulsion gone?

  • Mwhahaha

    It’s an interesting set of points you make and I’m not going to make one of the arguments you’ve taken into account in the piece, such as statistical errors etc.

    However to be devil’s advocate…

    What’s impossible to determine is how much larger piracy would be now without the MPAA’s legal warfare against the sharing community.

    How many people have stopped sharing and instead gone and brought boxsets or gritted their teeth to go to their local soul sucking multiplex. How many parents started paying attention to what their child was doing online when a possible lawsuit was the alternative?

    Probably not enough to dent the figures to be honest, least not yet. But once all these draconian 3/6 strike laws are biting down on us, we might then see the retail worth of what they’ve been spending on lawyers for years.

    The growth of netflix astonishes me, I can only assume there’s some decent ripping software out there for it.

    I assume once they’ve got total control of the internets, with all the money they make from it they will be donating lots to good causes and ventures of a philanthropic nature…

    • http://www.facebook.com/Oyashiro.Chama Jacob Ruble

      That was sarcasm right? money going to good causes? donating money doesnt do anything since they use it for the crap products at the cheapest price, find a way to make it profitable is better than donating money, so they can put back into what theyre getting. and the internet is to a point unless you kill its routes, its completely uncontrollable via the various darknets. ultimately MPAA/RIAA are fighting a losing war, that will lead to 1) collapse of the internet. One thing is why not have a server in space? there’s no government controls there.

    • Scary Devil Monastery

      “Probably not enough to dent the figures to be honest, least not yet. But once all these draconian 3/6 strike laws are biting down on us, we might then see the retail worth of what they’ve been spending on lawyers for years.”

      I doubt it. throughout history we’ve seen just how well information control works. i.e. not very.

      What happens instead is that people start treating it like open secrets. You don’t talk about it in public while you keep right on downloading at home.

      Meanwhile the support for the government and current legislation dwindles to less than nothing. And one beautiful day the politburo steps up to the balcony and finds itself booed out by the masses and the uprising begins.

      What will be dangerous here will be when washington finds itself ruling without the consent of the people once voting hits rock bottom and they find they can muster neither support nor sympathy for their policies from anyone. The reaction is always tiresomely predictable.

  • Pingback: MPAA’s Existence is Absurd | GREEN PIRATE

  • Dsa

    Very nice article
    I’m glad TF has our backs

  • Drake

    Interesting scenario but I think you’ve unintentionally made several Hollywood execs excited. The thought of being able to dip into a pool of $1Billion a year will leave them salivating and reaching for their phone to call their local dealer for an early hookup.

    The one major variable you left out is the percentage of file sharers (or pirates) who would be willing to pay Netflix $8/month for a service that is far inferior to the amount of content you can find by using BitTorrent.

    I’d estimate that if BitTorrent, Newsgroups and every other app or network that allows you to obtain files for free disappeared, only 20-30% would jump to Netflix. That reduces the $1Billion+/year figure quite a bit.

  • SpikeIH

    Actually, Hollywood and the MPAA really HATE Netflix too as they claim it de-values their (already almost worthless) content.
    They show this time and time again by raising licensing fees to Netflix, sometimes tenfold amounts. They been trying to hurt this Golden Goose for a while now.

  • http://tinyurl.com/ANoiXioNA-personal-info ANoiXioNA

    @Ernesto

    An educated ….Guesstimated…. Perspective …. of the MPAA’s wet dream realized.
    idea conception…the wording and phrasing…the overall business strategy structure…

    I really enjoyed that read…..on many “salient” levels….

  • http://tinyurl.com/ANoiXioNA-personal-info ANoiXioNA

    @Ernesto

    An educated ….Guesstimated…. Perspective …. of the MPAA’s wet dream realized.
    idea conception…the wording and phrasing…the overall business strategy structure…

    I really enjoyed that read…..on many “salient” levels….

  • MPAA

    Dear Internet,

    We the current moderators of MPAA, must — with great reluctance — clarify a point of orthography:

    “Motion Picture Association of America” should be used for the movie organization and “MPAA” for the erotic fan fiction pairing.

  • Theborisedu

    the problem here is that bittorrent doesn’t stream very well, and this is the main advantage to http vs bittorrent they are the difference between tcp and udp, for the technical people there will know what i mean…

    • http://www.facebook.com/Oyashiro.Chama Jacob Ruble

      There are examples of streaming UDP but you’re right its unusual and difficult to implement due to the inherent use of the protocol.

  • Anonymous

    lol, OK so why am I not surprised lol.
    anon-net.au.tc

  • Anonymous

    Interesting article Ernesto.

  • Paulgrinberg

    The only digital media products that still have high intrinsic value are books, educational videos (documentaries) and video-games. Everything else “pop” music and movies that Hollywood/Porn still produces and the like has finally reached the end of the massive bubble that market experienced in the CD era.

    Adam Smith the father of “capitalist” thinking said it best when he mentioned the “invisible hand of the market” and that no matter what people did these market forces will play themselves out in robust powerful ways. The market has “re-priced” Hollywood/Porn type content and deemed that it is literally $0.00 worthless.

    Napster/PirateBay etc…to the humiliation of Hollywood/RIAA types proved that the public valued their product as worthless. You see, this isn’t about money, it’s about pride. Hollywood/MPAA/RIAA industries know that they don’t have a future in the new 21st Century economy. Their only income streams come from legacy licensing fees that will dry up soon for all but the most classic titles.

    Prior to the internet the video game industry was already destroying the movie business, it was just a matter of time. Movie quality and special effects have degraded movies to such poor quality that some people have even returned to reading books, and this has fueled a huge rebound in book sales and a whole generation that prefers reading quietly on the internet or playing video games and not being bothered with Hollywood/RIAA garbage.

    Numbers:

    Google revenue average past 4 years: $22 Billion
    MPAA top movie 500 distributors combined revenues: $11 Billion.

    Conclusion:

    One large tech company makes more than their entire industry combined!

    You should ask yourself a question:

    Why is it that less than 5% of the total pirated content music is Classical music, Opera or other traditional music forms?

    Answer:

    Because the market still considers that content as having high value…it’s the market pricing mechanism at work…

    DONT STOP THE MARKET RE-PRICING, SUPPORT REAL CAPITALISM!

  • http://www.facebook.com/frankdphillips Frank Phillips

    It is more likely that most bit torrent “downloaders” already have netflix accounts.

  • Ray

    This made us wonder – what would happen if all movie-downloading BitTorrent users made the switch to Netflix? What if movie piracy via BitTorrent disappeared?

    No because netflix does not offer all titles of documentaries , and movies are mostly the newest ones.

  • Paul Holz

    Thats quite interesting. The thing is, back here in Germany there is no such thing as netflix. If you are not willing to pay about 20$/month for mid quality streaming of about 150 more or less poplular tv series, than there is nothing left. I would love to pay 20$ or maybe even more to be able to get the series and movies i want. But there is no such offer. Therefore I know a lot of people owning a sharehoster premium accout. With that, they get nearly everything from series to games for like 5$/month. I think the producers and rightsholders should learn to look outside the box in order to adept to the 21 century. Sry for my english…

  • http://torrentfreak.com/ Rob8urcakes

    What if Government banned Netflix, and the corrupt flow of cash to the MAFIAA?

    What if the government decided what you can watch? That’s not significantly different from the rip-off régime currently used by the MAFIAA – the only change would be from private to public production and distribution.

    Is that what the MAFIAA would prefer? To work for a fee from government to produce the goods? I reckon we should give it a try, don’t you?

    “I’d buy THAT for a dollar!”

  • http://torrentfreak.com/ Rob8urcakes

    What if Government banned Netflix, and the corrupt flow of cash to the MAFIAA?

    What if the government decided what you can watch? That’s not significantly different from the rip-off régime currently used by the MAFIAA – the only change would be from private to public production and distribution.

    Is that what the MAFIAA would prefer? To work for a fee from government to produce the goods? I reckon we should give it a try, don’t you?

    “I’d buy THAT for a dollar!”

  • Anonimouse

    But the MPAA do so much more for their members than just anti piracy.

    • Danny

      Yeah, I hear they are really good at ‘Fluffing’!

  • http://twitter.com/ScytheNoire ScytheNoire

    Rather than adapt to new business models and make more money (see VCR tape history and then DVD’s), they would rather fight technology and progression. It is their own fault they are failures, and yet, they are trying to destroy freedom of speech with SOPA and Protect IP when those will do nothing to save themselves from their own stubbornness. Die off already MAFIAA.

  • Pingback: MPAA Costs Hollywood More Than US BitTorrent Piracy | Remove spyware and malware, latest IT security news

  • Sanity_Vocal

    Sometimes, I think people, especially the MPAA and their like are wackos. Who’s to say that user HAVE to use Bit-torrent systems online to pass pirated media?

    Say someone has a copy, he makes a physical copy or copies of this media and hands them over to his friends at parties etc for free. He doesn’t collect money, he doesn’t recieve in kind. He is the new pirate, one who remains totally under the radar.

    At least, with Bittorrents, Hollywood at least has some idea how popular a product is. They don’t really have to pay survey companies to tell them that. They can see how many times a product has been shared online. And if they get their marketing act up to standard and have DVDs as well as VCD copies of the product into stores within a short time after the movie is shown, they can even make even bigger bucks. Who doesn’t want a high quality, and reasonably readily available copy of a movie, instead of having to wait months or even a year for the DVD release?

    And if the pricing is done right, Bittirrets can kiss itself goodbye too. And it wouldn’t have cost the studios a single penny.

  • Sanity_Vocal

    Sometimes, I think people, especially the MPAA and their like are wackos. Who’s to say that user HAVE to use Bit-torrent systems online to pass pirated media?

    Say someone has a copy, he makes a physical copy or copies of this media and hands them over to his friends at parties etc for free. He doesn’t collect money, he doesn’t recieve in kind. He is the new pirate, one who remains totally under the radar.

    At least, with Bittorrents, Hollywood at least has some idea how popular a product is. They don’t really have to pay survey companies to tell them that. They can see how many times a product has been shared online. And if they get their marketing act up to standard and have DVDs as well as VCD copies of the product into stores within a short time after the movie is shown, they can even make even bigger bucks. Who doesn’t want a high quality, and reasonably readily available copy of a movie, instead of having to wait months or even a year for the DVD release?

    And if the pricing is done right, Bittirrets can kiss itself goodbye too. And it wouldn’t have cost the studios a single penny.

  • Anonymous

    Well of course all profit is aimed to go to the middlemen like the MPAA/RIAA. What follows is a whole host of excuses and a mega-lo-manic desire for control. Instead we have figures above that say the MPAA is not financially viable.

    I am someone who has long worked in the area of what people want and I have heard every reason in the book for people choosing a unofficial piracy viewing option.

    The first would be price and NetFlix is sure to set their own price in order to maximise their profit. This highlights a need for fair competition to keep prices down (currently impossible…) but of course NetFlix in their profit goal will set a price higher than many would want to pay which makes them turn to piracy or free options. I mention free options when free services paid for by adverts is another fair choice to capture those poorer viewers.

    Hated for adverts in another reason which would lose many to piracy.

    Maximum choice is another main reason. Some people want to pirate everything possible just to maximise their input. This means any NetFlix like service should aim to provide a vast resource of movies and at one fixed monthly price as well.

    Availability is another reason that zoning with delayed rollouts badly got wrong. If what they want to see is not available almost any other method to see it is used as a valid reason and they blame their own service for not having it. Availability can also apply to format when people these days dont just want movies on their TV but on their computer, MP4 player and phone as well. So a service should aim to cater for any major connected hardware.

    You can add in various type of social rejection but their are the main reasons. I would conclude myself that the MPAA is responsible for online piracy when piracy met consumers various needs and they did not. It is indeed true to say that NetFlix is the type of answer the majority do seek.

  • Fake

    Next you’ll be claiming that the War on Drugs costs more and creates more problems than addiction treatment centers would! ;)

  • Anonymous

    linkhide.com.ar/47632

    • Anonymous

      No abuse page => adblocking.

    • Jmorse43508

      Spamfried.

      You didn’t last long against Spamfryer.

  • Sir disconn

    how about netflix and bittorrent compared to warez/cyberlockers ? :P

  • Anonymous

    I would definitely try Netflix/Hulu if it were available in the Netherlands, but nooooooo, rights are always screwing us.

    • Fjvgamer

      I’m sorry you don’t have them. I love Netflix/Hulu. I canceled my cable and just watch streaming content now. It’s 10% of the cost and in fact, better content.

      • Anonymous

        I ENVY YOU!

  • RIAAtarded

    Interesting article it definitely makes you think. Well makes us think anyway whether the corporate bodies will is rather doubtful. They still see 1 download as a lost sale but that isn’t even close to reality. How many people grab things that aren’t available in their countries? Hardly a lost sale if it isn’t on sale. How many folks start a torrent only to do a bit of reading and decide it isn’t something they want? How many folks grab something and then delete it after 10 minutes realizing that is the entertainment industry can’t be bothered to put time and effort into making it good you can’t spend the time watching it? The sad truth is most consumers of media don’t buy it. We go to theatres or rent it from the local corner store or we don’t bother at all as we don’t want to waste our money or time. On those rare occasions we find something that is worth watching more then once and I mean rare we buy it. What they are failing to take into account is piracy actually boosts sales. There is a lot of content that I wouldn’t have bought had I not see it in action first. Think of it like test driving a car you won’t buy a car without it. Now picture the entertainment industry as the car dealer. They want you to buy the car without trying it, seeing it and oh yeah if you buy it and don’t like it to bad you’re stuck with it. Sorry guys you need to change your practices and controls that is going to be how you boost sales, not that you’re losing money even with MPAA funding, lobbying and the economy in the toilet they still manage to post record profits. If only you’d put some of the movie magic and innovation into distribution then you’d have something.. sadly you’re content to recycle old ideas and utilize stuff that clearly doesn’t work.

  • Pingback: La MPAA le sale más caro a Hollywood que la propia “piratería” en BitTorrent - La Isla Buscada

  • Netflix sucks

    I had netflix and cancelled it, because most of the movies I would want to watch are dvd only. The whole point of me getting Netflix in the first place was to stream a movie.

  • http://profiles.google.com/zerianis10 Christopher Kidwell

    You shouldn’t lump TV show traffic in there, because many people who are downloading TV shows online ALREADY have a cable TV subscription that they are paying for, so these companies have already gotten paid once for their shows.

    Same thing for movies.

  • Predator

    “MPAA Costs Hollywood More Than US BitTorrent Piracy”

    MPAA is a parasite living off another parasite.

    I love this.

  • Anonymous

    Really good and thought provoking article, thanks Ernesto.

  • http://mohammadmufti.com Mo

    Really interesting article. One aspect of the thought experiment I was at odds with is that you’re fixing net additional profits from all bit-torrent users switching over based on current prices. In the face of rising licensing costs that were mentioned (and which would be exacerbated with the omission of BitTorrent from the picture), and with merger of one major source of competition for services Netflix’ services (BitTorrent), we can also imagine that they’d use the former as justification for rising costs and the later as incentive for policies leading to greater profit margins. Which suggests that, using these obviously exaggerated values, Hollywood and Netflix would actually be benefiting more than you implied were this to take place.

  • Pingback: Torrentfreak: “los torrents le cuestan menos a los estudios que la MPAA”

  • Pingback: Does the MPAA spend more fighting piracy than it would earn if pirates went legit? | Ebooks on Crack

  • http://blog.offbeatmammal.com Offbeatmammal

    I would happily pay double what I pay today for Netflix …. if, and only if I was sure that what I wanted to watch would be available to stream when I wanted it on my phone or my PC or my Xbox…. I spent an hour today searching through piles of utter “watch now” cruft to find something I wanted to watch (while adding maybe 15 new DVDs to my queue)

    None of these are things I want to own. I’d maybe watch them once and then I’m done. I have maybe a dozen movies I watch often enough to care about owning.

    If not Netflix then some other service that let’s me access the content when I want. I don’t care about DRM. I just want no adverts and all the content I want when I want it (heck I’d maybe put up with pre-roll adverts but don’t break up the content with dishwasher promos)

  • Pingback: MPAA Costs Hollywood More Than US BitTorrent Piracy | Will Ryan in Vancouver

  • Pingback: El P2P podría costar a la industria menos que la MPAA | TICbeat

  • JB

    Typical Americans… When something goes wrong, they generally start thinking about suing, in stead of retracing their steps where they went wrong and found out it’s themselves that allowed the situation to happen.

    Stella Awards anybody?

  • https://thepiratebay.org/user/manOtor/ manOtor

    If Hollywood would have invested their money in something serious like the war on drugs or terrorism, we would have a clean world-peace on our whole beautiful planet by now!

  • Derek Smith

    I pirate almost all games and software I use, movies I watch and music I listen to but can’t consider this as lost sales to any company. As I simply cannot afford to purchase and would just go without otherwise.

  • http://www.themoviedownloads.net download free movies

    I’ve been saying this for a while. The movie/recording industries believe scaring their potential customers will pay off in the end, they don’t really expect to turn a profit from these suits. The lawyers definitely do though, and they are the ones tricking these dinosaurs to keep throwing their dollars away.

  • Pingback: How Much Does File Sharing Really Cost Hollywood? « waweru.net

  • Pingback: | Kalex's Tome

  • Pingback: La MPAA le sale más caro a Hollywood que la propia “piratería” en BitTorrent - www.pajareo.com

  • Pingback: Have we raised a generation of pirates? | DailyBinaryNews.com

  • Pingback: Have we raised a generation of pirates? « Technology « DistinctiveImpression MMG

  • Pingback: warsystems » MPAA Costs Hollywood More Than US BitTorrent Piracy | TorrentFreak

  • Pingback: Despite the RIAA, File-Sharing Wins Unexpected New Allies « Gadgets for mobile

  • Pingback: Leveraging the web: how people are willing to pay for content | David Campbell

  • BTGuard - BitTorrent Anonymously

NewsBits

Even more news...

  • Pirate Bay Founder Gottfrid Svartholm on Freedom of Speech

    Freedom of speech is a highly valued commodity, but should people be allowed to say whatever...

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

    An anti-piracy system present in all official Blu-ray players since 2012 has received a fresh update...

  • Foxtel Breeds Pirates by Locking Up Game of Thrones

    One of the main reasons why people turn to piracy is the lack of legal alternatives....

  • UK Student Admits Breaching Sony Copyrights With Leak of PS3 SDK

    Last year an Internet user known as El Nomeo leaked version 3.70 of Sony’s Playstation3 SDK...

  • Pirates Can Be Identified Despite Sharing IP Addresses, ISP Claims

    Carrier-Grade Network Address Translation is a network mechanism through which many Internet subscribers can share the...

MostDiscussed

Below are TorrentFreak's most discussed articles of the past month. Join the discussion if you like.

CopyQuote

Left Quote

“The Pirate Bay has been one of the most important movements in Sweden for freedom of speech, working against corruption and censorship.

Peter Sunde Left Quote

PopularArticles

A selection of some TorrentFreak's classics dug up from our archives.