In 1985, I began a company that distributed films through a simple mail-order catalog. My vision was more than simply fulfilling orders; I wanted to connect the LGBT (lesbian, gay, bi and trans) community to meaningful images through film. I hoped that experiencing these films would foster a sense of pride and understanding in and for my community. Though my company distributes some studio produced films, I have been honored to work primarily with independent filmmakers -- helping them connect their films with their audience. Now, more than 25 years later, my dream has been realized. Every day I receive feedback that affirms our mission that these films have helped people and families all over the world navigate some of the most difficult questions about relationships and identity.
Though my team and I are consistently amazed with the speed at which our world has evolved, we have been disheartened to witness the rapid rise of online piracy. Not only has piracy negatively affected our bottom line, but more significantly, it has undermined the careers of many talented aspiring filmmakers.
Those who finance films generally don't view LGBT storylines as box office winners. As a result, filmmakers who want to tell these stories often turn to creative forms of financing. The process can be a long and brutal one. Filmmakers often risk their personal finances in the process. When online thieves undermine the market for their films these artists have no chance to compete. Once their film is posted illegally online, their investment can disappear in an instant. Suddenly these independent filmmakers are competing against FREE versions of their own films. Online strangers, whose only goal is to profit from theft, show no regard for the hard work, creativity, and financial sacrifices made by these filmmakers. The public generally supports security to prevent and stop theft in stores that sell DVDs. Why not support measures to stop this theft online?
As a distributor, I've been forced to devote resources to searching for and removing pirated copies of our films online (by sending DMCA notices). It is a time-consuming and expensive process. On one recent weekend, we removed over 300 links to a newly released title from a U.S. based cyber locker (each link can represent 1000s of downloads). The next day another 180 new links for the same film appeared on the same cyber locker. We found another 100 links to the film on a gay movie blog (a site which features free download links for more than 2,000 titles). This is just in the U.S., where sites are required under current law to take down links when they receive infringement notices. Multiplying that problem by a factor of 10 would not begin to cover the volume available via offshore sites, which are currently out of the reach of U.S. law.
To be clear, the Internet is essential to what I do as a business owner. I have readily embraced the changes in film distribution technology. As a company, Wolfe Video is constantly adding new and innovative online distribution avenues for our films to ensure their availability to eager audiences worldwide. Still, despite our best efforts, it's hard to compete with free. That is why I feel passionately about the need for legislation to protect this vital marketplace for companies like mine and for filmmakers who are the most vulnerable to bad actors in the space. The artists I work with and the films I have been privileged to be associated with have changed countless lives. Without a secure, fair and functioning online market, these stories of diversity will cease to be told and this "Freedom of Speech" will be compromised. American companies that are in the business of creating and distributing content shouldn't be sacrificed to protect large-scale pirate profiteers who knowingly and blatantly flout the law and common sense.
I was happy to see that Congress has recently taken up this issue. I'm not a policy expert, but I do recognize that this is a critical first step in addressing this serious and growing threat. I encourage all creative persons to become educated and involved in this fight. And, I challenge our friends in the "Tech" world to actively assist Congress in finding solutions to reduce online piracy and profiteering. Effective legislation will ensure my colleagues, our customers and my talented and creative business partners will succeed or fail based on the merits of our products and services, rather than the whims of digital thieves.
Kathy Wolfe is the founder and CEO of Wolfe Video and Wolfe Releasing. Established in 1985, it is the oldest and largest exclusive distributor of LGBT films in the world.
__________________________________________
We've seen these same arguments before during the heyday of Napster.
Back then, I took the opportunity to download - to rediscover - a lot of music from my childhood. Why?
Because it was free. I was a poor college student. If you think I would have, lest could have, ever forked out 99 cents per song, you're living in a dream world.
We see the same thing with, say, pirated broadcasts of football games. I am privy to the stories of kids who watch these games in that manner. They are poor kids whose parents can afford Internet access but not cable. And in most cases they are kids trying to stay out of trouble by becoming football players, not just fans.
With your LGBT films, many, many thousands of people may be interested enough in them to watch them for free. But force them to pay and all they do is walk away. How's that working out for your message?
All of these online piracy bills rest on the very self-same utterly false assumption: that a non-paying customer equals a lost customer. Empirically, that is just hogwash.
So the entire basis of
If I was a complete punk, I'd turn him in and he'd probably lose his job, go to jail for some time, have less of a chance of working in the future, and be in debt (extravant debt, as people like you are not realistic in how much you charge thieves when you catch them).
Without him, I would never have taken the time to return to chess, would never have gone looking for these books (still will not). When he tells me which ones are good, I'll buy them.
Fortunately, little of this sort of thing is happening here in our Dominion of Canada, but watch out for Stephen Harper`s agenda. I`m glad that my career has ended and that I am retired. These are bad times for aspiring young librarians. My career took place in better times.
It's not going to make your blog illegal.
You say, "If I really like something I will buy a copy of it." Then, in the same paragraph, you suggest that you will rip off a photographer and post a photograph to enhance your blog (even if doing so might make your blog illegal) with no mention of buying a license.
Why would you not go to the legal photo licensing places, and pay a very reasonable fee (as little as $1.00) for a license to use a photograph to illustrate your electrical engineering points?
All photographers have copyrights, too, and many of them are being seriously hurt by the attitude that anything on the internet can be appropriated. Or ask. Some will surely give you permission in exchange for proper attribution and a link.
When you talk about the "cyber lockers" that make multiple downloads available, you're talking about one site/server hosting your pirated work. Those are the "thieves" who presumably "profit"in some way from your work.
However, in my experience, the vast majority of users who download pirated media do it for one of two reasons:
1. They're stretched thin financially and just can't afford it.
2. They can't get it through legal means (i.e., DRM, DVD region code issues, overseas distribution issues, overseas streaming issues, etc.)
The majority of those people would buy your work legally if they had the resources to do so. In fact, I (and many other people I know) buy iTunes or Amazon subscriptions to our favorite TV shows as they air, but also buy the DVD sets when they come out at the close of the season just to support the show.
I understand how tough it is to make it as a creative professional in this economy. The problem is, it's tough to make it in *any* profession in this economy. It may be time to evaluate your business model and look for innovative ways to reduce costs for your customers while still fairly compensating your producers.
Think about it:
While second-hand stores such as run by goodwill.org may occasionally have the apparent rich person in them trying to buy the nice close donated by their neighbors, look closer. In most cases, these are women going through a divorce, or who are in some other sort of transition that makes shopping in the normal retail stores financially problematic for them.
Goodwill second-hand stores have very few people in them doing it "just because they can." Same with the "pirated" sites. Both serve those who lack the means to be consumers from the "normal" channels.
I am one of those people who stream movies that are taped while sitting in a movie theatre. Half the movies I watch, I've paid to see already. Needless to say, movie tickets are expensive for watching a movie ONE TIME. Plus, we pay for Uverse (tons of movie channels) and Tivo (saves movies I haven't seen or want to see again), along with paying for Blockbuster every month (unlimited rentals). Now ask yourself. Am I wrong for streaming a movie online when I already pay for so much to already watch it at home when it hits rentals? If I really like the movie, I'll buy it. And buying it doesn't ensure you won't have to upgrade it (repurchase it in DVD b/c you had it in VHS). What does buying a movie get you? A scratched disc you can't return. An outdated source of technology. You're paying to watch a show whenever and wherever you, or anyone you know, wants to watch it. Who HASN'T watched movies at their own home with friends or family? What is the difference between watching a movie that someone else paid for?
My take on all of this is the fact that actors shouldn't get paid so much. Movie companies who charge $25.00 a DVD for something that takes $2.00 to make is considered stealing. The fact that you limit what people have access to based on their finances is wrong.
Let's make a great ordeal over poor people who watch a video for free that they otherwise could not pay for, but leave unmentioned that the actors in those films make more in one hour than most of those poor people will make in an entire lifetime.
How freaking perverted can this get???
This isn't about "free" vs. "not-free" for me. It's about the format I want to watch my movies in.
Second, theft is a legal concept and I'm not offering a legal defense. I'm offering a free-market justification to show that the movie industry is losing profits and costing themselves the very jobs that they accuse pirates of costing them.
This is like going to the store and being told that what you want isn't manufactured, then walking out the door and some guy says "here" and gives you just what you were looking for for free.
Does the current proposed laws solve that problem? No, not in the least bit. I will still be able to go right to NYC's China Town area and get offered pirated movies at $5 a piece. Those are made by disk duplication. If the proposed laws were passed, can I still get pirated movies online? Yes. Blocking DNS does not solve that problem. It actually makes it harder for the good guys to track down the sites. Hiding a web site outside of DNS is even easier.
In your last paragraph you suggested the tech world work with Congress. Unfortunately it is clear that it is the least thing Congress did when writing SOPA. They want to swing the hammer of justice down without considering the consequences.
Freedom of expression and creativity is not something the movie industry owns, and can prevent others from expressing. An answer has to be found that doesn't oppress online creativity.
My thought is, since we are in a world that needs better online security from hackers, that the answer to both issues will soon come in the form of digital finger prints. We have to be able to track down who does what. But it has to be done with freedom of expression in mind.
Piracy today is about profits and you are right, technology could be used to effectively fight it. However, the only way the cyberlocker sites (ground zero for this black market business) will do anything is if laws are enacted to force their hand. Right now content theft provides them with a very lucrative income stream (thanks to Google and payment processors). Why mess with success?
Funny how folks say they are against piracy, yet aren't taking any action to work against it. Follow the money. It ain't that hard. I'm all for an "open" internet where creativity can flourish, but I also believe that such a place need not be a place where "lawlessness" can flourish as well.
But hey, keep defending that which is killing you. That's your prerogative.
As far as laws, I'm sure pirate sites in other countries are getting a good laugh at Washington trying to pass a censorship law. All they can do is blick DNS and American search engines. Doesn't fully stop anyone from getting to those sites though.
As the author of this article says, a solution MUST involve the tech industry. Washington could have easily contracted a tech company to create a method to search for and report on illegal sites. Instead they swing a heavy hammer not caring who it affects, or the impact on future development.
Why did they do that?
Because, given their salaries, it was either that or not watch movies.
Moral of the story: A pirated movie consumed DOES NOT equal a lost sale.