Apple Helped FBI Identify Alleged Owner of World's Largest Torrent Site

[dysamoria]

Ukrainian-born persons residing in Poland are not subject to United States copyright laws. If the servers are hosted outside of the United States then the individual is outside of jurisdiction.

This is yet another attempt by American law enforcement to extend their jurisdiction beyond American borders.

I might agree with you. There also might be an agreement between governments for this. I think the detailed article on this story (not the AI one) mentioned a law enforcement agreement.

Which crimes against the USA would you be okay seeing the criminal extradited? People are all freaked by the word terrorism these days, so I'm tempted to make a comparison here but this KAT guy was no terrorist so the comparison is false.

Have you consulted the local government to see if they had any problem with this scenario?

That said: I do think he should be tried locally, not by the US. American imperialism is not good. Americans would throw a fit if a non-violent American citizen was extradited from the US to another country to stand trial for a law that the other country cared more about than the USA (or didn't even exist as an equivalent law in the USA, like some kind of religious law).
[doublepost=1469193715][/doublepost]

Too bad all the torrent sites could be shut down, as I believe that would make the rental of movies etc. cheaper.

Good analogy. However, I disagree with the last part. Shutting down piracy 100% will not lower prices for legit purchasers. This is an issue of corporate greed and "what the market will bear". They will charge the maximum fee they can charge and still make profits. Their claims that piracy has resulted in increased prices to legit purchasers are propaganda to justify their prices and convince consumers to hate piracy.

Check out Trent Reznor's argument against distribution company prices of his material in Australia. This is an artist telling his fans to steal it because the corporations are abusing the consumers.

https://www.google.com/search?q=trent+reznor+steal+it&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari
[doublepost=1469194078][/doublepost]

Amazing isn't it?

Not amazing at all, sadly.

What's worse is when they refuse to become more informed with better data. Commenting before reading is one thing. Commenting repeatedly while maintaining an incorrect impression of what happened is shameful. But that's how the human brain works, apparently.

http://www.alternet.org/media/most-depressing-discovery-about-brain-ever
[doublepost=1469194726][/doublepost]

Good riddance.

I am an indie filmmaker. One of the 3 main guys behind a movie called The Battery. The issue with piracy is the ratio. For every person that rents our movie for $4, at least 50 people pirate it. We can accept that piracy is a way of life, but it is hard to accept that 50 to 1 rate. When a group called YIFY created the 20th torrent of our movie, that torrent was downloaded 100,000 times in 24 hours (according to their website). In that same 24 hours, our movie sold 1 single DRM-free copy for $5. 100k downloads and we made maybe $4 (after fees) to split amongst ourselves and investors.

I've tried to keep an open mind about all of this. I listened to pirates. They said they refused to support companies like iTunes that overcharge for DRM'd movie files. So we hired lawyers, not to go after pirates, but to negotiate rights with our distributors, to regain the rights we needed to release the movie directly, with no big corporate middlemen, for $5 to own in HD, without any DRM.

And nobody cares! Piracy of our movie went up after the DRM-free release. More people click over to iTunes and pay double to get the locked version of the movie (maybe 4 a week versus 2 sold on our site).

The DRM-free version of the movie will never, ever, come close to paying back the legal expenses of the contract negotiations to make it available.

With our second movie, "Tex Montana Will Survive!" we still tried to work within a system that is broken. We essentially sold the finished movie to the people of the Internet via Kickstarter. When we hit our goal, we released via Creative Commons on YouTube, Vimeo, Prime Streaming, direct download, and torrent. We wanted to be able to feel good about our movie being shared, rather than to feel like a victim.

I uploaded torrents of that movie to many websites, including KickassTorrents. I was BANNED. Banned for uploading material that wasn't pirated.

It was one of the last arguments I've heard about torrents... That it isn't all bad... That it can be used legitimately. Sure, you can create a torrent to give your film away, but you aren't welcome to actually post those torrents on the sites that people use. The sites that make millions of dollars off the backs of people like myself. You may claim to have ideals, but you are also selling 20 million in ads a year. At the very least, your ideals are suspect.

Do you have any analysis of who the pirates are that downloaded 100,000 copies and whether they would choose to buy otherwise?

I appreciate your situation. As a musician and photographer, I'm bitter about the fact that I'll never make money on my crafts. I don't have the facilities to compete with big business nor promote myself above the noise of everyone being able to "make beats", and I know that people, by and large, don't think artists should be compensated for what people think (however incorrectly) is free stuff. I'll never be a performer unless I met compatible musicians to play instruments for me while I sing. It's just a sad and frustrating fact of living in the era I live in (similar economic change made my tech support skills useless).

I'm just trying to caution you to not think of those pirated copies as lost sales. People will give their time to try free stuff but they don't pay much to do the same. Some pirates are just collectors of data and not consumers of content. If you assume you've lost thousands of sales because of looking at those numbers, you're just going to drive yourself crazy mourning sales that might never have been.

The way you released the second film, after making the income you hoped to see minimally, was a smart technique. The downside is in requiring an existing audience, yes?

Best wishes to you and your creative endeavors.

 

[citysnaps]

Relax mate, it's sarcasm playing off the fact that torrenting impacts the content on iTunes.

See, with torrenting, people tend to download music and videos.....guess what's on iTunes....

So....in a sarcastic reply, it was in apples interest to bring down the biggest torrent site ......hence in a flash... Get it

Here is a hint. I'm quite sarcastic, so if you are going to follow me around this site, cause of one debate we had....good luck

Ah, OK, it's about sarcasm - got it.

Follow you around? Is that also sarcasm? Or narcissism? Relax, I respond to posts I take exception to. You are not special.

 

[dysamoria]

Lol. For all the talk of privacy, apple will hand over your personal details in a flash if it suits them. Not suprised.

I actually feel sorry for all the users who actually buy into the whole apple privacy BS, this is no different to google's BS do no evil hypocrisy .

Even Microsoft is more conviencing at the moment

https://techcrunch.com/2016/07/14/microsoft-wins-second-circuit-warrant/
[doublepost=1469136026][/doublepost]

you make it sound that it's a privilege to go watch a movie. If you really must know what kills it for the general joe, it's your rights management . If the entertainerment industry was not so damn driven by making money, people should not be being pushed to download shows or movies that are not show in thier country. I'd say get your house in order and actually listen to why the majority download, it's not cause it's free, it's about timely access. In a connected world , you expect a viewer to wait days or a week to watch the newest episode of game of thrones, when the net and social media go crazy after the US premier.....I've worked in the industry for 10 years, and our OS partners would screen at us why we could not send them content , and that people were getting it off pirate sites.....bloody rights mangement and network exclusivity , sorry but serves the, right that people take it in thier own hands and get the content they want

These are valid complaints about distribution. They don't justify theft. I'd be more open to the notion of making out-of-print content available, but then I've seen such things go back to print a few years after the torrents went up.

A bigger problem is that our culture doesn't respect the arts as anything but a thing to consume, for free. Why is that? Are people so dismissive of artists? Are they just too poor to put emotional and monetary value into the arts because they need to spend their money on food and daycare?

Culturally, the USA is in bad shape. Especially where intellectual content and education is concerned. There's serious greed in the content rights holders' case, but there's also serious social dysfunction in the way people value the arts. A poor society, a failing society, usually sees great losses in the arts and education. What are we going to do about it? Those of us without power and authority will do nothing, mostly, because we can't do anything. Those with power and authority generally see no problem unless they're willing to look outside their own interests. So we have to elect the right authorities.

Good luck with that. I'm constantly being told who I shouldn't vote for because it'll spoil our effort to NOT get the greater evil...
[doublepost=1469195894][/doublepost]

Do you also condone rape? Your argument works equally well for that, right down to blaming the victim.

Terrible analogy. One is a violent offense. The other is not. The victims are totally different. Unless we are taking independent artists, it's very difficult to measure the injury (and even then, it's more a discussion on psychology, sociology, and perception, rather than a tangible and provable fact).

Equivocation doesn't help the discussion and it hurts both parties being compared. I don't think any raped individual would appreciate their victimization being compared to a non-violent intellectual crime. Conversely, using the wrong analogy sets up bad logic for the content creator.
[doublepost=1469196176][/doublepost]

...and yet still not one criminal banker is in jail!

Fair complaint.

IMHO torrents help spread content and make franchises much bigger than they could be, they're akin to radio or mtv. It's free promo. They're not some magical lost revenue it's just different.

That's a decision that should be left to the owner of the property. This is an issue of consent. If I consent to treating piracy of my material as promotion, that's my right. It's not my right to decide that for someone else.

Ask content creators individually. Some will agree with you. Some will want to punch you in the nose.

 

[CarlJ]

Terrible analogy. One is a violent offense. The other is not. The victims are totally different. Unless we are taking independent artists, it's very difficult to measure the injury...

It was very much not an analogy, it was a question. The OP stated quite clearly that this is a situation in which he believes that victims of the crime deserve the crime perpetrated against them and, indeed, are the ones at fault for crime being committed. I wanted to know how far the OP takes that notion, if he held the same belief in all cases, or only ones that were more convenient to his circumstance.

 

[MH01]

Ah, OK, it's about sarcasm - got it.

Follow you around? Is that also sarcasm? Or narcissism? Relax, I respond to posts I take exception to. You are not special.

Bugger. Was hoping I was special my mum says so
[doublepost=1469199353][/doublepost]

So people are being willfully obtuse in a lame attempt at sarcasm or the typical Apple is bad garbage that permeates this site. Got it.

Owner of kickass torrents brought down with the the help of apple, one of the biggest distributers of digital content via iTunes.....hello..you think apple took a long time to hand over thier personal details... And no one is allowed to use a bit of humour, cause our residential MR self appointed police ....well tale offence to anything that is not pro apple posts.....

Well tough it's an opinion site, you can complain or voice your opinion.

This topic is interesting due to all the discussion about privacy.....

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Spoken by someone who not only hasn't clue about the constitutional legal and privacy ramifications involved, but displays an obvious anti-Apple bias, and thereby doesn't care to educate himself on the subject.

Spoken by someone that doesn't know theft from copyright violations. Go back to school and learn something before insulting others.

A long-winded way of saying and trying to justify, "I want to steal stuff and this is preventing me from doing it. I'm angry. Boo-hoo." All thieves need to die now.

I don't "steal" anything (and I've got stacks and stacks of Blurays, DVDs and Laserdiscs sitting here, but to move them onto a hard drive, I have to "copy" them. If you have so much as copied a song from a CD to iTunes or from iTunes to an iPhone or from a DVD or BluRay to your hard drive for streaming, you have broken the same copyright law you pretend you've never broken and just sentenced yourself to death by your own judgment ala the Bible for sheer hypocrisy because that makes you a "THIEF" by your own condemnation. But you don't see it that way because you don't know WTF you're talking about. Like most people in this world, you despise everyone that is different from yourself and thinks different from yourself and then justify it by self-righteous nonsense. If I want to watch a BBC show outside the UK, there's no legal way to do it either (unless they sell it on DVD/BD at some point; BBC America doesn't show 1/20 the shows the real BBC has; they show mostly STTNG these days which is not a British show at all. Torrents were the ONLY real way of seeing such shows and the limit of my interest in them anymore).

Copyright laws were NEVER designed to give carte blanche to the copyright holders. They were designed to allow someone to make money off their stories or music writing for a reasonable length of time before the material would go into the public domain for the public good (standard practice for thousands of years as society is more important than an individual). Once in the public domain, you are free to do with it as you will. NEITHER has ANYTHING to do with "THEFT". The definition of theft is taking a material object away from someone else. Copying does not "steal" anything. You make a copy in your head when you watch a movie. Did you steal it when you think about what you just watched? That's a ridiculous concept and a ridiculous notion. By your condemnation, every time Apple violated a patent, they should have been put to death as it's just another form of copying (material goods instead of intellectual ones). Everything human beings do by learning is a form of copying. No sir, you show zero comprehension of what copyright law is and what it's purpose is (to prevent others from making money off someone else's books/music/movies/media). Court cases have shown fair use rights of the public for generations. These cases are based on the interpretation/purpose of the law, which was not meant to be a wholesale exchange for the word "theft" which has a totally different legal meaning.

GREED and ignorance are the ONLY reasons people use the word "theft" around copyright violations. If I go to a library and borrow a BluRay and take it home and watch it 5 times and then my neighbor borrows it the next week and watches it 5 times and then 50 more families do the same thing, how is that any different from viewing it online from my perspective? Either way I'm seeing the movie for FREE. Oh, the library bought ONE copy so it's okay 52 families watched it, right? But watching it on a stream online is illegal even though it's the same movie either way. This shows that copyright laws are out of date and were not designed for the modern age (they were designed for paperback books).

I'm not "allowed" to re-sell my online video games from Steam or my digital purchases of songs or movies from iTunes??? Who decided that? Thieves like the corporate conglomerates who claim they own the right to everything all the time and achieve their means by lobbying/bribing the governments? But if it's on a cartridge, it's OK to sell? I can time shift TV Shows to infinity, but I can't put them on a recordable disc (hard drive is OK, but when it comes to BluRays, I'm not supposed to take them off the disc and put them onto a hard drive, as that violates DMCA. These are all examples of problems I have with modern claims about copyright laws that they were never designed for when copyright law was invented. DMCA goes even further and destroys consumer rights for "fair use" by preventing their ability to make backups of software. But who cares about consumer rights? We just need rights for the rich corporations that are buying out all the smaller companies and making huge corporate dinosaurs that own/control EVERYTHING. But that's okay. Thieves should die. People in England starving would be hanged for taking an apple out of the King's forest (huge tract of land just for the King's amusement). That was moral. Death slowly by starvation or quickly by hanging..... You don't understand the concept of morality and ethics at all.

All thieves need to die now.

You don't even know what a thief is. Your desire for them to be murdered (not even eye for an eye) tells me more about yourself than anything else. Maybe you would appreciate life more in Saudi Arabia. They tend to think like you, imposing death sentences and chopping off body parts for a myriad or crimes, not just murder.

 

[webbuzz]

Bugger. Was hoping I was special my mum says so
[doublepost=1469199353][/doublepost]

Owner of kickass torrents brought down with the the help of apple, one of the biggest distributers of digital content via iTunes.....hello..you think apple took a long time to hand over thier personal details... And no one is allowed to use a bit of humour, cause our residential MR self appointed police ....well tale offence to anything that is not pro apple posts.....

Well tough it's an opinion site, you can complain or voice your opinion.

This topic is interesting due to all the discussion about privacy.....

Can you explain the privacy issues involved?

 

[diazj3]

Some people do believe that. It's a well-spread myth that one type of victimless crime leads to the committing of more extreme and victimizing crimes. Just like it's a myth that getting high occasionally will result in being a violent offender.

Most pirates of software and music are indistinguishable from any other person in society. They don't steal from stores or assault people. They're are just like anyone else and will likely continue to be.

I know... it's the same moronic thinking that neo-conservatives and other idiots are using now... I think it came into the mainstream with NY Mayor Rudy Giuliani and his "broken windows" anti-crime theory. The same idiotic idea has been applied to anything under the sun that these morons don't understand: from cannabis to LBTG rights... Which directly leads to today's police brutality, the heroin epidemic, the crisis in the justice and prison systems, the failed war on terror, the loss of personal privacy.... and ultimately, President Trump.

Good job America!

 

[MH01]

Can you explain the privacy issues involved?

Sure. Read the article again, including the link provided and shown me where is states apple was ordered to provide the personal details.

 

[webbuzz]

Sure. Read the article again, including the link provided and shown me where is states apple was ordered to provide the personal details.

You really think Apple, Facebook, Coinbase, FDC Servers, and Godaddy just turned over customer information without a court order?

That isn't how it works.

Put the tinfoil away.

 

[MH01]

What makes you think Apple provided the user information without a court order?

Cause its not stated in the facts provided. Seems like an important fact no?
[doublepost=1469208552][/doublepost]

You really think Apple, Facebook, Coinbase, FDC Servers, and Godaddy just turned over customer information without a court order?

That isn't how it works.

Put the tinfoil away.

Stop making up facts we don't know about the case. Let's wait for them to become clear.

 

[webbuzz]

Cause its not stated in the facts provided. Seems like an important fact no?

You really think TorrentFreak knows? They don't, the case is sealed.

Not one of the companies mentioned above would release customer information without a court order. The legal implications are not worth the convenience.

Apple requires a court order when law enforcement makes a request. End of story.
[doublepost=1469209245][/doublepost]

Cause its not stated in the facts provided. Seems like an important fact no?
[doublepost=1469208552][/doublepost]



Stop making up facts we don't know about the case. Let's wait for them to become clear.

lol... Okay.

 

[MH01]

You really think TorrentFreak knows? They don't, the case is sealed.

Not one of the companies mentioned above would release customer information without a court order. The legal implications are not worth the convenience.

Apple requires a court order when law enforcement makes a request. End of story.
[doublepost=1469209245][/doublepost]
lol... Okay.

Seems you "think" you know...ill wait for the facts to be presented.

Huge respect there, love when a person finishes a debate with "end of story". Close the thread people, webbuzz said so.... Lol

Let me guess...you don't actually have a legal background, I don't , but I'm not assuming stuff...

 

[RedOrchestra]

you don't actually have a legal background

That's the thing with Apple apologists - you don't need to be a critical thinker you just put your faith in all that Apple does - they're the moral compass of corporate America - it's evangelistic.

 

[MH01]

That's the thing with Apple apologists - you don't need to be a critical thinker you just put your faith in all that Apple does - they're the moral compass of corporate America - it's evangelistic.

Surely people think for themselves ? Not even asking for critical thinking here.... i have a lot of time for people on here that share thier opinions, and use logic. I have little to no time for blind religious followers who assume everything apple does is good and for our benefit.

 

[jweinraub]

I was thinking the same thing. WTF Apple? Sad, real sad. Let the terrorist go, but not the copyright infringer...

Must admit it is very strange how willing they were wiling to give up this information...but yet this guy technically didn't infringe anything since all torrent sites do is list an index of torrents which happen to contain copyrighted material... i know it is a grey area but still these sites usually don't disappear for too long, even demonoid came back in some fashion even if nobody uses it anymore, probably thanks to KAT...but suprnova being the first to go down, this **** is always inevitable. I am surprised these things don't get hosted in more countries that are more anti-western copyright so they can give the States and/or the MPAA/RIAA/whomever the big finger as well..

 

[QquegChristian]

Do you have any analysis of who the pirates are that downloaded 100,000 copies and whether they would choose to buy otherwise?

I appreciate your situation. As a musician and photographer, I'm bitter about the fact that I'll never make money on my crafts. I don't have the facilities to compete with big business nor promote myself above the noise of everyone being able to "make beats", and I know that people, by and large, don't think artists should be compensated for what people think (however incorrectly) is free stuff. I'll never be a performer unless I met compatible musicians to play instruments for me while I sing. It's just a sad and frustrating fact of living in the era I live in (similar economic change made my tech support skills useless).

I'm just trying to caution you to not think of those pirated copies as lost sales. People will give their time to try free stuff but they don't pay much to do the same. Some pirates are just collectors of data and not consumers of content. If you assume you've lost thousands of sales because of looking at those numbers, you're just going to drive yourself crazy mourning sales that might never have been.

The way you released the second film, after making the income you hoped to see minimally, was a smart technique. The downside is in requiring an existing audience, yes?

Best wishes to you and your creative endeavors.

We absolutely know that all piracy isn't targeted, but a lot of it is and it is in such high numbers that it can't be ignored. If even 10% of our piracy was targeted, it would still account for a loss of more than 50% of our movie's income. Days like today, years after release, there will be 25 people leeching at all times. These torrents aren't new and aren't easily browsed. At this point, you have to search for this stuff directly. That's $100 a day we lose, years later. $36,500 a year. Our DRM-free copy now makes around $300 a year.

It's the least targeted when a big piracy group initially releases their torrent, for sure. They are like a distributor that people trust for quality and blindly download... Absolutely. But, again, even 10% is devastating. I suspect it is closer to 25% overall and 75% when you take release days out of the equation.

I'm glad that you brought up Reznor. I'm a huge fan of NIN. A lot of my unorthodox attempts to shake up distribution are inspired by the things he has done. He's tried everything, but he's mostly back to the status quo, as the experiments weren't that successful. His least successful was the (pay if you want) release of Saul Williams album. He was vocally disappointed in people's willingness to pay for that when given an option not to. Especially because he had convinced Williams to take that route.

We've understood very early on, that if we're to succeed, we need to treat ourselves like a band. We need to be out there for the audience to see and connect to. We'd prefer the movies spoke for themselves, but you've got to be a human and connect with every fan that you can. That is exactly why our Kickstarter worked. We don't have concerts to sustain us, so the Kickstarter was our one big show.

After fulfillment, fees, and expenses, the campaign brought in around $20,000. Not something I can recommend to other indie filmmakers, as the lowest budgets are around $100,000, and most directors don't have the history we've built up with the audience.

I've personally helped at least a dozen young filmmakers who email me. They'll ask a question and I'll call them and walk them through how to do something. Or I'll take their sound file and master it for them to meet broadcast specs that our movie initially failed to meet. That kind of stuff.

We'll do every podcast. Answer every tweet. Stand outside the theater at festivals and talk for hours.

I'd say I knew 80% of our Kickstarter backers by name. You had friends, family, and other indie filmmakers... Then about 60% were fans. But I was shocked by just how many of those fans I knew. We'd get a big pledge, I'd look and say, OHHH that's the guy who I gave script notes to. Or that's the guy who we ate poutine with in Canada.

The Kickstarter was the opposite of piracy. Fans that are very much out in the open and TOO generous. I could never do another campaign, as I could never go back to those same fans. They're too generous and we only deserve that once. But that was the point of that campaign, that the very generous would pay for everyone to see the movie forever.

Something like that is definitely a one-shot deal, and something you can only do once you've fostered a lot of genuine connections with fans.

 

[gnasher729]

Ukrainian-born persons residing in Poland are not subject to United States copyright laws. If the servers are hosted outside of the United States then the individual is outside of jurisdiction.

This is yet another attempt by American law enforcement to extend their jurisdiction beyond American borders.

if you let people in the USA make illegal downloads then you very much fall under US law.

The question is where a crime has an effect. Where the guy lives has nothing to do with where the crime happens. Where the servers are located has nothing to do with where the crime happened. Where the illegal downloads are created, that is where the crime happens.

 

[Abazigal]

I think the main reason for this seeming indifference towards the harm done by torrenting is that up till now, there hasn't been a poster boy for the victims of such a crime whom people can relate to and empathise with. Many people like to think that the people who are harmed are rich filmmakers or millionaire singers or huge hollywood companies who already make obscene amounts of profit, so they feel no guilt over stiffing them of "a few dollars". Or you see some huge movie star in a clip imploring movie-goers not to pirate films, and the impact is lost because they were already paid millions to make the film.

A poster above has just shared his experiences as a small-time, independent film-maker and how piracy is reducing him to earning barely above minimum wave, despite his best efforts. Two grown adults working full-time jobs, yet still lacking a house of their own and unable to afford a third mouth. This is the real victim of piracy, something the pirates are either unwilling to acknowledge, or simply too selfish to care.

I honestly think it is time to stop finding excuses and making flimsy rationalisations for these pirates. You want to continue pirating software, go ahead by all means. I can't do anything to stop you, but I can at least not add to the problem. Just stop trying to make yourself sound any more noble than you actually are. A crook is a crook, and if and when the law finally comes for you, you deserve every last punishment handed down to you.

 

[QquegChristian]

I think the main reason for this seeming indifference towards the harm done by torrenting is that up till now, there hasn't been a poster boy for the victims of such a crime whom people can relate to and empathise with. Many people like to think that the people who are harmed are rich filmmakers or millionaire singers or huge hollywood companies who already make obscene amounts of profit, so they feel no guilt over stiffing them of "a few dollars". Or you see some huge movie star in a clip imploring movie-goers not to pirate films, and the impact is lost because they were already paid millions to make the film.

A poster above has just shared his experiences as a small-time, independent film-maker and how piracy is reducing him to earning barely above minimum wave, despite his best efforts. Two grown adults working full-time jobs, yet still lacking a house of their own and unable to afford a third mouth. This is the real victim of piracy, something the pirates are either unwilling to acknowledge, or simply too selfish to care.

I honestly think it is time to stop finding excuses and making flimsy rationalisations for these pirates. You want to continue pirating software, go ahead by all means. I can't do anything to stop you, but I can at least not add to the problem. Just stop trying to make yourself sound any more noble than you actually are. A crook is a crook, and if and when the law finally comes for you, you deserve every last punishment handed down to you.

Thank you. And I think it is important to note that I often have this conversation with filmmakers we meet at festivals. It is hurting all of them. I'm in an entirely different bubble than Hollywood. The filmmakers I've met or become friends with, they make $50,000 to $500,000 movies.

They are considered a success if their movie barely breaks even. Most pay for the filmmakers themselves is deferred until after the movie breaks even, so they make very little. Bigger indie distributors will gladly take 50 movies breaking even to find 1 Paranormal Activity.

But what Piracy has affected the most is budgets on the indie level. Filmmakers are expected to deliver the quality of a 1 million dollar budget with only $100,000.

A great example of this is the movie Cheap Thrills. It's a great indie that was released by Drafthouse Films. $100,000 budget and it still somehow manages to cast some recognizable actors. 10 years ago, that movie would have easily had a million or more budget.

Everyone takes a pay cut to work on a movie like that. So it trickles down. You've got technical guys with degrees working for 1/4 their rate because they need the work because they're always working for 1/4 of their rate now.

We're devaluing one of the best industries America has left. One of our last great exports.

 

[Shirasaki]

Sometimes I find reading posts are more meaningful than just reading OP and reply.

Anyway, as anything related to money, there will be pirates. This is simply inevitable. But we can and should suppress it to a level which is tolerable and acceptable. Crime cannot be justified by any excuse, yet we still can listen to them and ask them why they commit that crime.

Read the post of that indie filmmaker. Never heard of it before but story is great for me to think about piracy. They are the true victim of piracy. For those gigantic companies, uh, good luck for them. Period. Don't even want to care about their profit a bit.

For Apple? Ahh... -_-|||

 

[RedOrchestra]

Good article on shaking out piracy in Canada

"Pirates in your neighbourhood: How new online copyright infringement laws are affecting Canadians one year later"

http://business.financialpost.com/f...ting-canadians-one-year-later?__lsa=8b93-6fa6

 

[pat500000]

Bad Apple. I hate snitching.

 

[pdjudd]

Bad Apple. I hate snitching.

How is it snitching? It’s Apple’s data and they have every right to use it to legally aid law enforcement. Its data that consumers know darn well they are giving up when engaging in commerce. There is no reason that anyone should think that there is any privacy on such data (and I think Apple specifically states that this isn’t as well).
Your iTunes purchase records and our public interactions with Apple are not some sort of secret that Apple is obligated to protect.

 

[barmann]

Thank you. And I think it is important to note that I often have this conversation with filmmakers we meet at festivals. It is hurting all of them. I'm in an entirely different bubble than Hollywood. The filmmakers I've met or become friends with, they make $50,000 to $500,000 movies.

They are considered a success if their movie barely breaks even. Most pay for the filmmakers themselves is deferred until after the movie breaks even, so they make very little. Bigger indie distributors will gladly take 50 movies breaking even to find 1 Paranormal Activity.

But what Piracy has affected the most is budgets on the indie level. Filmmakers are expected to deliver the quality of a 1 million dollar budget with only $100,000.

A great example of this is the movie Cheap Thrills. It's a great indie that was released by Drafthouse Films. $100,000 budget and it still somehow manages to cast some recognizable actors. 10 years ago, that movie would have easily had a million or more budget.

Everyone takes a pay cut to work on a movie like that. So it trickles down. You've got technical guys with degrees working for 1/4 their rate because they need the work because they're always working for 1/4 of their rate now.

We're devaluing one of the best industries America has left. One of our last great exports.

I've read your postings, and I think you are making good points and offer great insight into indie movie making .

However, I'm not sure piracy is the cause of your problems .
Yes it does affect indie productions, and yes, it is wrong .

But why is the US indie scene so seperate from the mainstream movie industry, with its billions of yearly revenue ?
The big studios and distributors could easily afford to finance smaller projects, and provide marketing and screenings to put those movies and their creators on the map .
In many other countries indie movies are sponsered by public funds, TV stations, distributors and such .
It doesn't make money, but is a sound investment in the future and cultural development .
In the US, this isn't quite how it works, I assume .

Back to piracy; as mentioned above, most downloaders would not consider watching indie movies, if they had to pay for them . The majority of them would not know they even existed, if they weren't on some torrent site !
Film buffs who follow the scene are less likely to steal, everyone else is most likely not to care and just watch a youtube vid instead of paying for obscure content they don't really want that bad .
People get most stuff from torrent sites just because it's there, with the exception of the most desirable and well known items .

Avatar lost money to pirates, a lot of it - and still made tons of money for the creators .
Game of Thrones is pirated like nothing else, and lost nobody a dime .
Indie movies lose a few bucks, if that, and get some comments on IMDB .

I think , what you are facing are distributors and a movie industry in general that wants a guaranteed big hit to make big money, or cheap content to make whatever money off it with as little risk or investment as possible from their side .
This is a system made for and by the big players, and they only want to share your success, not your struggle to get there .
That and an internet audience that expects free content, or content in a cheap package deal .
Youtube, iTunes, Netflix, Amazon etc., not Bittorrent .
Do you really believe people will be more drawn to indie movies , and more will pay to watch them, because the internet lets them know they exist ? It gets you recognition, the business goes to other people .

You also have the major economic issues , from the early 2000s to the 2008 crash, that cut deep into a lot of budgets, certainly for any creative projects .
Which in turn gave clients and investors a perfectly good reason to further cut budgets and keep them low forever - especially for creative content .
And why not , you just made a 1 million movie for 100k , so it can be done , right ?

I believe that piracy and online theft is a massive issue for lower tier (in terms of complexity) content creators - musicians, photographers, journalists and such, but that movie productions are too complex and expensive to be harmed by anything but the distribution and financing system they depend on .