In the last 24 hours, my indifference to SOPA and PIPA was essentially overridden by the torrent (pun intended) of anti-SOPA content streaming (also pun intended) through each and every communication medium.
Even the the sanctity of my email inbox was violated when one of my two email-subscribed blogs delivered a passionate plea for a free and open Internet. I’d done my best to ignore the issue.
What finally provided me with the necessary motivation to dig into the issue, however, was a tweet by Hollywood DP, Rodney Charters.
This was the first semblance of a pro-SOPA comment from anyone I respected. It was enough to get me to attempt reading the bill (utter failure) and eventually do the minimal amount of research required to draw a hasty and ill-informed conclusion.
And here it is.
The end of SOPA means the end of Hollywood.
1. SOPA appears to be dead (at least for now) and its demise illustrates that the people of the USA will not accept government regulation of Internet thievery if it could, in any way, effect their personal access online information. I think ultimately we just don’t trust our government or the public parties to justly administer Internet sanctions.
2.Digital media is expected to be cheap or free. Internet users aren’t willing to pay very much, if anything at all, for TV and movies online. The result is often piracy which, as Charters and others point out, is killing Hollywood.
3. Hollywood as we know it is in a downward spiral. The “cinema” experience isn’t selling. People won’t pay cinema prices for digital copies. The content is available for free if you don’t have moral qualms about pirating. This is all very bad news for this obscenely expensive art form. The cost of making quality TV and movies has gone up while profit margins have plummeted. SOPA and other bills like it are the industry’s last-ditch effort to save their hemorrhaging bottom line.
Everyone has an opinion on SOPA, and all of them seem to be either based on what the bill intended to accomplish or what it could have allowed. Who knows what actually would have happened, but I doubt it would have been what either side predicted.
To me, the SOPA saga is a just epitaph for an industry unwilling or unable to make the changes necessary to stay viable. Ten years from now, will anyone be able to produce a film with the imagination of Inception or the epic scale of The Lord of the Rings? Or will Hollywood just become an unrecognizable celebrity factory where reality TV stars replace actors?
I know that SOPA and PIPA had a slim-to-none chance of bringing back real profitability to the old Hollywood model, but I’m sad to see the closing credits of our most collaborative and incomprehensibly extravagant art form.
Adam Shields says
I think you are absolutely wrong. Neither SOPA nor piracy is killing hollywood. Hollywood’s inability to stay current with people’s desires on how they consume content is killing hollywood.
I have no problem paying for content. Most people I know are completely willing to pay for content. Yes I know people that actively pirate. But they weren’t going to pay for content regardless. Independent study after independent study has agreed that in general when content distributors go after pirates it hurts the legal user, not the pirate. (And lets be honest, it is the distributors, not the creators that are going after pirates.)
SOPA was about protecting a business model, not an art form.
Brian Notess says
I don’t disagree with you. I even said Hollywood was an “industry unwilling or unable to make the changes necessary to stay viable.” I merely meant to point out that the violent backlash against SOPA is another sign of the demise of Hollywood as we know it.
Matt James says
I quote from the GAO investigation into piracy:
” Three commonly cited estimates of U.S. industry losses due to counterfeiting have been sourced to U.S. agencies, but cannot be substantiated or traced back to an underlying data source or methodology.
First, a number of industry, media, and government publications have cited an FBI estimate that U.S. businesses lose $200-$250 billion to counterfeiting on an annual basis. This estimate was contained in a 2002 FBI press release, but FBI officials told us that it has no record of source data or methodology for generating the estimate and that it cannot be corroborated.
Second, a 2002 CBP press release contained an estimate that U.S. businesses and industries lose $200 billion a year in revenue and 750,000 jobs due to counterfeits of merchandise. However, a CBP official stated that these figures are of uncertain origin, have been discredited, and are no longer used by CBP. A March 2009 CBP internal memo was circulated to inform staff not to use the figures. However, another entity within DHS continues to use them.
Third, the Motor and Equipment Manufacturers Association reported an estimate that the U.S. automotive parts industry has lost $3 billion in sales due to counterfeit goods and attributed the figure to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). The OECD has also referenced this estimate in its report on counterfeiting and piracy, citing the association report that is sourced to the FTC. However, when we contacted FTC officials to substantiate the estimate, they were unable to locate any record or source of this estimate within its reports or archives, and officials could not recall the agency ever developing or using this estimate. These estimates attributed to FBI, CBP, and FTC continue to be referenced by various industry and government sources as evidence of the significance of the counterfeiting and piracy problem to the U.S. economy.”
Source: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d10423.pdf
—-
The article contained here:
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/01/even-without-dns-provisions-sopa-and-pipa-remain-fatally-flawed.ars
also does an excellent job of explaining what is wrong with SOPA and PIPA. A defense against piracy does need to be crafted – but Hollywood, the MPAA and their paid legislators are not the ones to craft it. They are the same people who likened the release of the VCR to Jack the Ripper – seriously.
Brian Notess says
I definitely don’t doubt that SOPA and PIPA would have been completely impotent at stopping piracy. It’s just sad to see a beloved industry failing to make progress towards a sustainable business model.
Paul Clifford says
I disagree with number 2. This is the same problem that the record industry had. They wanted to sell their media only on round plastic discs. Eventually, they agreed to let iTunes sell digital copies, but that was years after people had started to trade music for free. People wanted to pay for digital music, but there was no way to do so. It was easier to just steal it.
Let me give you an example. My 10 year old wants to see “Back to the Future.” We have netflix on our Wii, but it isn’t there (on streaming). Hulu? Nope. Youtube? Yes, for $2.99 for SD rental. Redbox? Nope. Amazon? $2.99 rental. Blockbuster? Yep, but that’s several miles away and I don’t even know if I have a membership anymore. Bit torrent? Yep, for free. Not hard to find either. I didn’t download it, but it was easier, faster, and cheaper to go the piracy route than to pay for it on Netflix.
Hollywood doesn’t get that a $2.99 rental (which my Wii doesn’t support) isn’t competing with Netflix or Hulu (where they’d get something), but with bit torrent where they get nothing.
As a content creator, I view piracy like shoplifting in a store. I should do what I can to prevent it, but not at the expense of my paying customers. Hollywood treats all of us like pirates, even those who wouldn’t know how to be (ever seen the anti-piracy ads on the front of a bought or rented DVD?).
We still need Hollywood for blockbusters, but for smaller pictures and documentaries, it’s just not worth it.
Paul
Brian Notess says
I think you’re right, but I’ve already seen a cash-strapped Hollywood struggling to produce great original content. The end of SOPA just proves they won’t be able to sustain their old product model in a digital age. I’m predicting continued depreciation of the quality of Hollywood content over the next few years.
I do think something new (and hopefully better) than the big-studio system will emerge.
Stuart says
I have no idea if it is relevant and care even less about SOPA or PIPA as we have our own fight with the far worse ACTA.
Anyway – would Hollywood’s demise as you keep stating have anything to do with the exhorbitant pay they give to the names?
Dustin W. Stout says
+1!
Andy says
Brian,
Good thoughts as always. While I was strongly in opposition of SOPA/PIPA, I share your thoughts that the likelihood of it having the worse-case-scenario effect that many predicted was probably never very high. But, for a variety of reasons, I believe it is a good thing it was not passed.
Your thought on Hollywood are interesting. If I’m looking in my crystal ball, I think we’ll see Hollywood go the way of the Publishing industry. Will there still be movies like LOTR and Inception? Yes. Just as there will always be ultra creative, visual, interactive books that leverage technology and creativity. But my hunch is that similar to the publishing industry, they will be fewer and farhter between?
Reality TV stars taking over Hollywood? No way. (I know you’re kind of being tongue in cheek.) There will never be a shortage of creatives writing, producing, and acting on-screen. Has Amazon destroyed the availability of good writers? Nope. The power to create (a book) has been taken away from the gatekeepers. Now, anyone can publish.
What is the effect on quality? Godin wrote recently (i’m paraphrasing) that it will be up to the consumer to weed through the junk to find the value. But I believe value will always rise to the top. Social networks make finding good content even easier.
I believe Hollywood will eventually benefit from a change similar to the publishing industry. More junk? Surely. But it just means we’ll have to look to find the value. And let’s be honest, it’s not like Hollywood doesn’t roll out a ton of junk as it is.
K, that was a ramble. Apologies. But it’s somethign I’ve been thinking of. Thanks for the post!
Brian Notess says
Yeah, I already spend enough time filtering through the crappy content to find good stuff. I’m pulling for Hollywood to make the necessary changes to survive. I love big budget action movies!
silentfool says
I’m reminded of this diagram I saw a while back: http://i.imgur.com/GxzeV.jpg
Brian Notess says
Yep, that is a big problem.
Peter S says
I’d argue that the tweet in the first place was naive or at least missing a word. The future of the motion picture business’ profit model depends on something like SOPA/PIPA. It’s far past time for them to change their thinking. Delaying new releases to rental companies until 30 or more days have passed strangely enough doesn’t get people to buy more discs. People just wait that additional time period to watch it. Yes, piracy is a bad thing, but the motion picture distributors don’t get the new truths as pointed out by another comment. Legal downloads of movies are hard to find, inconvenient, and made harder to find and use by the distributors. Add in unnecessary DRM for movies you actually buy (not rent), inconvenient restrictions and all of the *AA lobbying for the DCMA which makes us using media we buy the way we want illegal, and it just keeps getting worse.
I think as the actual need to give the customers what they really want gets strong, Hollywood will adapt. They’ll have to or die. If they can’t or won’t change, I’d say they deserve to go away and be replaced by something that can meet the desires of the consumer. I don’t think we’re doomed to one reality “star” after another, but someone will figure out how to make money with the “new” technology, meeting the desires of the consumers and producing quality entertainment.
As for not trusting our government to get it right – that just about goes without saying. 🙂 Besides, I think the statements by former senator Dodd were pretty funny – “it’s an abuse of power to get people to think the way these internet companies want” as he speaks on behalf of the MPAA.
There are a couple of sites out there that digest the bill reasonably well into human-readable language. I agree that it wouldn’t likely rise to the level most of us are afraid of, but it opens the door to so much potential for abuse that it’s just a horrible proposal that needs to be rethought before coming back in any form.
Brian Notess says
I pretty much agree with you, completely. I thought Rodney’s perspective (or rather, the directors guild’s perspective) was interesting as big studios pay his bills.
It makes me sad to think of Hollywood dying out. I’m hoping they take the SOPA backlash as concrete proof their current direction won’t be successful.
George says
my one issue with this article is the smallest most insignificant statement “The “cinema” experience isn’t selling.”
The experience isn’t selling because it costs WAY TO MUCH, last time i went to the theater It was $40 just for the tickets for myself and my wife, then you tack on $6 for a large popcorn and $4.50 for a large drink, so $50 bucks for an hour and a half to two hours of entertainment? In two trips to the theater I can almost buy year round passes to Busch gardens… three trips and i have my passes plus lunch and drinks for the day.. and can go back all year…
Its not Piracy that’s killing Hollywood its Hollywood pricing themselves out of the market that’s killing Hollywood…
Why goto the theater when i can wait a couple of months buy the blu-ray and watch it in my comfy couch on my 60″ tv with surround sound for roughly 25 bucks… over and over and over if i so choose…
Brian Notess says
So you’re saying I’m correct when I say, “the ‘cinema’ experience isn’t selling.” 😉 I totally agree with you. It’s a pretty crappy product that costs way too much.
Ryan Mc says
George,
I’m in total agreement with you. Frankly, movies don’t cost 20, 50, or 100 million to produce. If everyone was taking in a salary that was reasonable, for the sake of the art, then we’d possibly see prices plunge, access open, and the artform continue on AS IS.
I wonder even what the moral and spiritual implications could be. I thought about this, when we become greedy and covetous, do we not stand against God himself, and our fellow man? If money can be the source of all kinds of evil, is it possible that lower salaries for actors/actresses could decrease the rampant divorce rate of celebrities? Less money to play and less trouble to be in. Decrease the pressure they are under? Decrease their drug use? We see in other countries healthier actors and actresses where their incomes are reasonable.
It could be one of the healthiest things for our country to not have these celebs sitting so high above society, and more in the mainline. Didn’t we see the same things happen when Wallstreet Execs. were pocketing too much cash. I think of Proverbs 30:7-9
7 Two things I ask of you;
deny them not to me before I die:
8 Remove far from me falsehood and lying;
give me neither poverty nor riches;
feed me with the food that is needful for me,
9 lest I be full and deny you
and say, “Who is the LORD?”
or lest I be poor and steal
and profane the name of my God.
Individuals with excessive incomes can often lead to their own demise. (not always/necessarily)
I’m not a socialist, and I swing to the right, but when we all get a little closer to the middle, perhaps then we can see a bit more what life was all about.
Just a thought.
George says
Agree Completely
George says
sorry for the double post just wanted to say thanks to the Church IT folks! This is the ONLY blog i actively monitor and comment on, b/c the quality content and quality of people and discussion..
Brian Notess says
Interesting. I can see where you are coming from. Part of my can’t wrap my brain around how Hollywood makes financial sense, much less the moral implications of living that way.
Good thoughts.