MPAA chairman Chris Dodd tells congress "we paid you, now you better pass SOPA"
 

Chris Dodd, a leading Democrat Senator from 1981 until last year and current MPAA chairman, has publicly announced that congress had better pass SOPA or PIPA because:

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/201...y-bought.shtml

No surprise, the US government is going after all this big money on the internet, be prepared to be raped.

Not a shock to me. Not too long ago there was video footage released of John Bohener handing out checks from the tobacco lobby to various congressmen right on the floor of the house. They have no shame.

Sick. A revolution is long overdue. Get rid of them all!

Where "not long ago" means seventeen years ago, while we were all using Windows 3.1 and the same year Marion Barry was re-elected after having been caught smoking crack with hookers. Where "handing out checks" means .. fuck it, back to this century with SOPA and PIPA ...

the government does not give one shit about piracy, or porn. they will ban porn in a second if their cohorts paid them enough.....

Good thing those lowlifes Marion Barry and John Bohener are long gone then... oh wait.


.

Only in America...

this industry is watching very carefully who's going to stand up for them when their job is at stake
\
http://melgibstein.files.wordpress.c...if?w=128&h=150

MPAA seem to be doing very well to me. Why would people lose their jobs when it's making so much money?

https://img.skitch.com/20120123-fenc...at8gnst9ji.jpg

They didn't hire Dodd, a senator for thirty years and DNC chairman, for his knowledge of music. His job is to get his old buddies to pass laws for the MPAA. If he doesn't get laws passed, he loses his job.

That'd be a crying shame.

:D

Just legalize online gambling and start taxing winnings.

In another thread you yourself posted a link against SOPA where it recognized enormous losses caused by piracy. In the UK falling DVD sales and income have hit the industry very hard.

Hollywood making big 3D movies to fend off the challenge, the independent lower budget films have been very badly effected.

I hope it pass :)

lol i guess anything that happened before 2000 doesn't count anymore..back to this century guys! :1orglaugh

I think you must be misremembering. The only figures available about piracy are the lies the MPAA admitted to making up.

The figures disagree with you. I know the MPAA have paid someone to pretend things are really bad and those awful pirate people are ruining their revenue. But it's a lie. They are doing really well.

I took a random weekend in July for box office revenue in the UK, where you claim things are awful.

2001 total - 110,503,467
2011 total - 155, 869, 730

http://www.ukfilmcouncil.org.uk/arti...ox-Office-2001

even if you go to direct sales the picture looks even rosier:

" New figures for the UK video entertainment market, released today by the British Video Association (BVA), show that video maintained its position as a leading source of enjoyment for millions of people during 2010. £2.6 billion (excluding subscription services) was spent by consumers on video entertainment, roughly the size of the 2009 market."

And they are not counting love film and netflix.

and for 2010:
"New release titles performed especially well in the first quarter of the year, with volumes up 10.3% on the same period last year, with a 31% increase in March. "
http://www.bva.org.uk/market-informa...rtainment-grow

So you are just plain wrong. according to statistics published by the industry.

What's wrong with making something people want to pay to see and marketing it well?

Been affected by what? And where are you getting your figures from. (NB: "I think" is not an acceptable source.)

There are people that think lobbyists are hired to distribute money to candidates they like?

The whole system is pay to play. At least Dodd isn't pretending its something else like everybody else does.

Third world crooks and fraudsters must look on in awe at the wanton and brazen corruption of American big business and politics. The other day Murdoch was openly expressing disgust that not all politicians could be bought, and likening politicians taking into account what ordinary people want to 'terrorism'. How dare voters think they have a say in this world.

This is the link you posted to attack SOPA
http://dyn.com/sopa-what-you-should-...yn-opposes-it/

And there you can read...

We understand why the groups like the Motion Picture Association of America and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce are supporting the bill as piracy of content costs the original producers/distributors tens of billions of dollars. They?re desperate for a solution to recoup that lost revenue.


In the government review of the UK film Industry

http://www.culture.gov.uk/images/pub...eport-2012.pdf


You can read...

Since 2004, real (inflation adjusted) film revenues in the UK have fallen. This is mainly due to the decline in DVD retail and rental revenues. Digital revenues are growing but not nearly enough as yet to compensate for falling traditional revenues.

Copyright infringement and theft is, of course, one of the major factors behind declining revenues. The creative industries, including film, make the biggest use of copyright and design by contributing over £36bn to the economy, supporting 1.5 million jobs.18

The point about the type of films that have been hit badly was a meeting in London attended by the producer of Sherlock Holmes.


Artists don't all just give audiences "what they want" , How would they know what they want, these are new films? Quite often film makers want to do exactly things that audiences find difficult and challenging. Intelligent people get into the idea hence a New York audience is very savvy .

For producers this can be a nightmare so they just want to make the same film again and again, easier to make sausages.

No, it was to explain to the fucksticks how SOPA was going to break DNS. Please link to accurate piracy figures. (clue: there are none)

So, the movie industry figures I quoted before saying how good retail was were lies?

And revenue has declined because blockbuster has died? Boo fucking hoo.

And the proof of that is where? In the figures the MPAA admitted to totally making up?

Sigh.

Come on, man, you can do better than this. Show some proof that the huge box office money and the huge retail figures your industry is posting are lies and in fact piracy is making everyone broke. Post some figures about piracy. (Clue: there are none)


Well maybe if they made films people wanted to see, as opposed to cinegraphic masturbation, they would make more money?

So everyone in new york is clever? Are people in London stupid because they don't want to sit through an indy film wankfest? I'd say they are the clever ones.

More profitable too.

What I'd really love to see from you is proof that piracy is damaging the UK indy film industry. Mainly indy films are shit that no one would want to pirate. People pirate POPULAR films. Not crap art house wank.

Show me some proof I'm wrong. Or shut the fuck up.

The internet generation is so naive. Techdirt posts that as if they've uncovered some great conspiracy. Dodd also said that in a CNN interview, it's not a secret.

Find me one piece of legislation that doesn't have lobbying or donation money attached to it and I'll give you a million dollars. Every single bill passed has lobbying money behind it.

Are Tech Dirt readers really so stupid that they think people contribute millions of dollars to political candidates just because they like them? Duh, it's to get something in return. A political contribution is an investment, it has always been that way.

You can oppose SOPA, but that article feels like it was written by a naive high school kid who is just learning about the real world for the first time.

I'm sure Tech Dirt was supporting the black out by Google and other companies. Do they realize that those companies lobby and buy politicians as well? Google buys politicians all around the world. How do you think they got into China, by being nice and offering a great product..lol.

GFY people are smart

The complacency and idea that "it's just how things are" are exactly the problem.

You posted the link about SOPA, are we supposed to believe them when they don't like SOPA but not when they say piracy is a big problem?

The figures are in the UK government report of the future of UK cinema, I supplied the link.

Figures of losses caused by illegal activity are impossible to calculate. they will always be guesses. This does not mean that distributing creative material without paying the owners and the creators is not destroying the creative industries. At the same time making some Internet companies very rich and powerful.

Audiences learn and become sophisticated if they are not treated like morons. New York and London audiences I would count as pretty astute.

Film makers that make new and challenging films maintain and build that audience. Directors like Hitchcock or Ang Lee produced new exciting different movies each time.

Independent films are now seen as films costing less that $10 million.

Porn would fall into the "lets make the same film again" sausage factory mentality, more profitable in the short term, but then why buy if its the same old tosh?

American GFYers. Where do you think all the money comes for all the TV ads, campaigning and everything else these guys "spend donations" on?

Then ask yourself if the people just give this money expecting nothing in return?

Now it's buying weight to get through an anti piracy law, people are all up in arms. Please this is how the US has run itself for decades, if not longer. How was the train paid for that candidates went around the US in the days before airplanes?

The US constitution

and

emancipation proclamation

For someone who claims to be a legal expert, you should know better.

The U.S. Constitution is not considered legislation, and the emancipation proclamation was an executive order, not legislation.

you said legislation (which includes both secondary and primary legislation) not just primary legislation.

you owe me 2 million dollars.

Once again your high school debate club techniques fall a little short.

It's a very strained argument to claim the constitution itself is considered "legislation" when talking about contemporary political activities.

Within the context of my statement it's pretty clear exactly what I meant and that excludes the constitution itself as well as executive orders. Any reasonable person can see that.

Sorry, no two million dollars for you. But you should already be rich from all your top secret marketing techniques that you boast about but nobody has ever seen in actual practice.

it the dictionary definition idiot.




you made it an absolute, and you never put limits on it.



Well i knew you were dirt bag with no integrity.

trying to justify bribery

legally political contributions are supposed to be a support of principles not a quid pro quot buying of the laws you want.


https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petition...paign=shorturl

Gideon, so I'm an "idiot" and a "dirtbag with no integrity" because you are trying to split hairs with semantics?

It's SO obvious that within the context of lobbying and politicians being bought, which was the context of this discussion, that nobody would for a second think that also refers to the founding fathers creation of the constitution or the emancipation proclamation signed by Lincoln. You are obviously trying to split hairs and play semantic games, anyone can see that.

But why are you suddenly so angry. You always debate things which composure and I can't remember you ever resorting to personal attacks. Has all this legal action against file sharing caused you to lose your otherwise unshakable temper and logical disposition? Are you angry because you can't illegally download the latest season of True Blood anymore?

In the past I have always found your mental gymnastics while arguing your opinion on GFY to be entertaining, but with these unwarranted personal attacks, I have lost respect for you.

Oh, so you are saying the actual UK film industry figures are a lie?

But I keep showing you the creative industries are flourishing. Loads of money. in the UK and the US.

Are you suggesting all those huge revenue numbers are lies? I'm not sure what point you are making? They are lying and you are right?

Are you debating that they make enough profit and should not be complaining that they can't make more. Or that the massive numbers of downloaders are actually helping them to make more?

The question should be. Would the US and UK make more money if piracy were trimmed back to where it used to be?

I have created no figures, I am showing you figures that show the effect you deny.

I have posted the link to the latest UK film review, there they say that the total film revenue in 2004 was £4,111 million pounds and it has fallen every year to 2005 to £3,118 million. I posted the link to the report.

There are many reasons why your figures are different, they may not be adjusted for inflation for example. The studios have concentrated there investment on 3D films that they seem as safe from copying. Films like Avatar generated large incomes, as I said it was a certain sort of film that suffered. So some incomes may has risen but that does not mean that piracy is destroying whole sections of the film industry.

Even the source you post to agree there large losses due to piracy. All the industries effected are complaining, newspapers, music, film and photography... why are you in denial?

So your saying you will pay someone a million dollars if they produce an example of a legislation doesn't have lobbying or donation money attached but you can only reference laws that have been lobbied for or have politicians being bought.

your trying to justify the scum bag move chris dobb to pervert the process by deliberately excluding all the legislation that was past DESPITE lobbying/ money payoffs.

The unique characteristics of both those cases is that they were laws created out of moral right.



So that the rallying cry

Vote for sopa if you want a world where politicians sell their votes to the highest bidder rather then vote for bills based on the moral rightness of the bill.

I'm just asking why you think the film industry is lying?

They posted great figures, they post about DVD sales being a huge increase.

Why are they doing that do you think?

Also, don't forget there has been this massive recession.

well given fact that auto scopic 3d has been viable option for theaters for over 10 years and we still don't have a consumer grade autoscopic 3d camera ( or the tv to play it back on)

A stituation that means all piracy damage cherry is complaining about could have been virtually eliminated by technology.

The question should be how much money would have been made if copyright holders had advanced technology (by adopting it) if they had innovated instead of hiding behind the monopoly protection.

You are quoting figures that relate to total sales in the UK which are controlled by US distributors. The increase in sales reflects the sales of a few 3D blockbusters, this money returns to the US. The income for UK domestic films and DVDs has fallen as reported by the UK film makers and believed by the government.

Piracy has the most effect on the films that are most easily copied.

Again, I have no way of saying what figures are true, but I think your position of saying that the technology that allows free identical copies to be made of music, news and videos has no effect on sales and the income of the creators, while at the same time, the Goggles of this world become gigantic corporations of uncontrolled dictatorial power and wealth by distribution of same materials, a bit surreal.

time for a REAL change?

You can fool some people sometimes,
But you can't fool all the people all the time.
So now we see the light,
We gonna stand up for our rights!

They don't even try to hide this stuff anymore, nobody gives a shit. yet ... things don't seem to be going in a good direction at this point.

I also showed you how UK box office is much better now than 10 years ago. Despite piracy having increased.

All films are equally easy to copy. Piracy seems to have little to no effect on revenue. At least according to box office figures.

I find it surreal that an industry that is posting huge amounts of revenue, despite a massive recession, is trying to claim that piracy is ruining them.

(And google doesn't distribute anything, btw).

https://img.skitch.com/20120125-xryf...b5dg9599ki.jpg

So despite the worst recession, and the evil pirates, they still make *that* much.

If there was no piracy Box Office taking would be greater. These are the taking of the box office and most of the money goes back to the US for US films. The situation in the UK is that returns on films (all monies ) have fallen year on year for the last 5 years.

3D films are difficult to copy. and few can watch outside of a cinema.

Google is at the hub of a distribution network making money directing traffic to content legal and illegal.

Google is not democratically controlled and has the powers you want to deny to a government.

These numbers can be a little misleading.

For starters I don't think that dollar amount shown is adjusted for inflation. When you adjust for that the 2003 total is the same as 10,949 in 2011 dollars. Which means in 2003 they actually had more income than in 2011. Add into that mix that in 2003 they sold 1,532m tickets in 2011 they sold 1,278m tickets. In 2003 they released 506 movies. In 2011 they released 598 movies.

This means they had to produce more product and charge more for it (average price per ticket is up almost $.60 per ticket after CPI adjustment) just to make the same amount of money. This also doesn't account for the rising cost of producing movies. If they brought in roughly the same amount of income at the box office now as they did in 2003 you could assume that their profit is down because of the increased cost in producing movies factored in with the the larger number of movies released.

Yes, there are more ways for them to make money these days. DVD sales are bigger as are pay per view says, licensing etc, but for the sake of this argument I am strictly talking about box office. Also, I'm not saying piracy is solely to blame for this. There are a lot of people who simply don't go to the movies as much because it is more expensive and because the movies come out on DVD so much quicker than they used to. However, to point strictly at the box office numbers and say that these prove that the movie industry is thriving is a little misleading.