3 ms·

I'm not saying that HBO is rich so it's OK to pirate their stuff, I believe the entertainment industry as a whole, from Big Five studios down to indie filmmaker

I'm not saying that HBO is rich so it's OK to pirate their stuff, I believe the entertainment industry as a whole, from Big Five studios down to indie filmmakers, is no longer viable -- at least in its current form. Previously, duplicating a creative work was labour- or resource-intensive, so comparatively few entities could attempt it, and the effort required to police them was small compared to the economic and cultural gain. Now, duplicating a creative work can be done at the twitch of a fingertip, by anybody, anywhere, anytime. As a civilisation we could spend the time and effort to police such things, but I'm not sure it would be worthwhile. As you point out, it's already hard to monetize a low-budget film and it's not getting any easier. But that's not because people are freeloaders or because they refuse to allocate their resources responsibly (although both may be true). Ultimately, the real problem is that the world changed, and things that had been difficult became easy. We can't put the genie of general-purpose computing back in the bottle, and I think it would be irresponsible to lock it down in its current state. The only reasonable alternative is to move forward: this will mean a great economic upheaval for artists, just like the invention of the printing press and recorded music and television were, but I don't think that's a deal-killer. Humans have been creating art, with or without economic recompense, for thousands of years, they're not going to stop now.

reboog711 12y ago
> I believe the entertainment industry as a whole...is no longer viable" How do you rationalize the movie industries increasing year to year profits with the idea that the entertainment industry is no longer viable? https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140328/11442826721/piracy-continues-killing-movie-business-to-new-record-highs.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140328/11442826721/pirac... Although I don't have numbers, it is my impression that many more musicians / songwriters are making a full time living at their music than in the past. In today's world it is a lot easier to 'go at it alone'.
- thristian 12y ago
  > How do you rationalize the movie industries increasing year to year profits...? OK, so "no longer viable" is perhaps a bit of hyperbole. Perhaps a better word would be "doomed", which is to say that the economic axioms it was built on are no longer as firmly true as once they were, so the industry cannot continue in its current form indefinitely. It may continue for a little while from sheer momentum, and until the future becomes more evenly distributed, and it may eventually reinvent itself (and I hope it does) in a way that is sustainable under these new conditions, but something's got to change. > Although I don't have numbers, it is my impression that many more musicians / songwriters are making a full time living at their music than in the past. My impression is that a lot of these musicians and songwriters are finding fans over the Internet, playing small venues and touring small areas, with maybe the help of a manager or two. When most people think of a phrase like 'rock star', they probably imagine someone who finds fans by paying for lots of radio play, who fills stadiums and tours the world with the help of a giant record label who might have hundreds or thousands of artists signed to it. When I say 'the entertainment industry is doomed', I'm heavy on the 'industry' - the giant record labels, the world tours and saturating advertising are doomed because digital reproduction puts a cap on how much money can be extracted from a particular recording. These musicians and songwriters you talk about have already figured out how to earn a living in the post-Internet era, and I hope they can serve as an example to artists in other media who currently believe that the existing industry must be propped up indefinitely so they can earn a living.
- anigbrowl 12y ago
  It's far, far easier to record a song or even an album than it is to make a movie. The former is something you can literally do alone in your bedroom with a fairly modest outlay on equipment, if you're willing to work on the craft of sound engineering or team up with someone skilled in that area if your main skill is as a musician/songwriter. Of course it's not the same as going to a studio with outstanding acoustics and great session musicians etc. etc., but it's very feasible nonetheless. Making a movie is simply not something you can do on your own - it's orders of magnitusde more complex and expensive, in both time and dollar terms. Also, you can't make money on live performances or merchandising swag in the same fashion that musicians do; it's not impossible to build other streams of revenue besides ticket/rental channels, but it's a lot more difficult and the ancillary revenue potential varies enormously with the subject matter.
anigbrowl 12y ago
Duplication is only one half of the economic picture. You don't need to explain to me how the costs of duplication have fallen to zero, but I would like you to address the fact that the fixed costs of creating something people want to duplicate are very far from zero. Humans have been creating art, with or without economic recompense, for thousands of years, they're not going to stop now. And for the longest time art was the preserve of the wealthiest segment of society that used it as means of keeping the population in line. The idea that people who work in the arts should not be allowed to use technology to monetize the product of their labor is a bunch of self-serving bullshit. Nobody is entitled to have an artwork they produce become successful, but if it does become successful (in terms of people wanting to watch/listen/read) then they're entitled to something in return for the utility their product has provided to the consumer.

reboog711 12y ago

> I believe the entertainment industry as a whole...is no longer viable" How do you rationalize the movie industries increasing year to year profits with the idea that the entertainment industry is no longer viable? https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140328/11442826721/piracy-continues-killing-movie-business-to-new-record-highs.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140328/11442826721/pirac... Although I don't have numbers, it is my impression that many more musicians / songwriters are making a full time living at their music than in the past. In today's world it is a lot easier to 'go at it alone'.

thristian 12y ago
> How do you rationalize the movie industries increasing year to year profits...? OK, so "no longer viable" is perhaps a bit of hyperbole. Perhaps a better word would be "doomed", which is to say that the economic axioms it was built on are no longer as firmly true as once they were, so the industry cannot continue in its current form indefinitely. It may continue for a little while from sheer momentum, and until the future becomes more evenly distributed, and it may eventually reinvent itself (and I hope it does) in a way that is sustainable under these new conditions, but something's got to change. > Although I don't have numbers, it is my impression that many more musicians / songwriters are making a full time living at their music than in the past. My impression is that a lot of these musicians and songwriters are finding fans over the Internet, playing small venues and touring small areas, with maybe the help of a manager or two. When most people think of a phrase like 'rock star', they probably imagine someone who finds fans by paying for lots of radio play, who fills stadiums and tours the world with the help of a giant record label who might have hundreds or thousands of artists signed to it. When I say 'the entertainment industry is doomed', I'm heavy on the 'industry' - the giant record labels, the world tours and saturating advertising are doomed because digital reproduction puts a cap on how much money can be extracted from a particular recording. These musicians and songwriters you talk about have already figured out how to earn a living in the post-Internet era, and I hope they can serve as an example to artists in other media who currently believe that the existing industry must be propped up indefinitely so they can earn a living.
anigbrowl 12y ago
It's far, far easier to record a song or even an album than it is to make a movie. The former is something you can literally do alone in your bedroom with a fairly modest outlay on equipment, if you're willing to work on the craft of sound engineering or team up with someone skilled in that area if your main skill is as a musician/songwriter. Of course it's not the same as going to a studio with outstanding acoustics and great session musicians etc. etc., but it's very feasible nonetheless. Making a movie is simply not something you can do on your own - it's orders of magnitusde more complex and expensive, in both time and dollar terms. Also, you can't make money on live performances or merchandising swag in the same fashion that musicians do; it's not impossible to build other streams of revenue besides ticket/rental channels, but it's a lot more difficult and the ancillary revenue potential varies enormously with the subject matter.

anigbrowl 12y ago

Duplication is only one half of the economic picture. You don't need to explain to me how the costs of duplication have fallen to zero, but I would like you to address the fact that the fixed costs of creating something people want to duplicate are very far from zero. Humans have been creating art, with or without economic recompense, for thousands of years, they're not going to stop now. And for the longest time art was the preserve of the wealthiest segment of society that used it as means of keeping the population in line. The idea that people who work in the arts should not be allowed to use technology to monetize the product of their labor is a bunch of self-serving bullshit. Nobody is entitled to have an artwork they produce become successful, but if it does become successful (in terms of people wanting to watch/listen/read) then they're entitled to something in return for the utility their product has provided to the consumer.