AfterDawn: Tech news

US Senator concerned 'The Dark Knight' will lose money from piracy

Written by Rich Fiscus (Google+) @ 28 Jul 2008 16:01 User comments (42)

US Senator concerned 'The Dark Knight' will lose money from piracy Last week leading members of the US Senate Judiciary Committee announced plans to introduced yet another copyright bill. The latest is called the Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights Act of 2008.
The new bill borrows heavily from other recent proposed legislation, most notably the PIRATE Act which was passed in the Senate in 2004, and the US House of Representatives earlier this year. It includes controversial provisions which would increase the maximum damages available for copyright infringement and make the Department of Justice responsible for taking civil action on behalf of copyright holders.

A statement from Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee and one of the bill's sponsors, said "Many times, a criminal sanction is simply too severe for the harm done." It fails, however, to mention why the solution isn't to simply increase criminal penalties rather than giving copyright holders free legal representation.

Ironically Leahy also used the recently released blockbuster 'The Dark Knight' as an example of the products which are at risk of losing money from piracy. Perhaps someone should explain to Mr. Leahy that 'The Dark Knight' is already one of the most profitable movies of all time, and Warner Brothers seems to be doing well enough to hire their own lawyers.

Instead Senator Leahy, along with Senators Arlen Specter (Pennsylvania), Evan Bayh (Indiana), George Voinovich (Ohio), Dianne Feinsten (California), and John Cornyn (Texas) would prefer to spend taxpayers money to pursue civil penalties, in addition to any criminal prosecution that might occur.

Previous Next  

42 user comments

128.7.2008 16:23

Maybe it is the way this article is worded but I can't find a better example of how big companies are the puppeteers of the government. Why is a senator worried about a movie's profitability?

Seriously, there has got to be something more important for this committee to work on than this. I honestly don't care if they want to work on this copywriting law making but take care of the more important things first. The U.S. is in a pretty bad spot right now and senators are worried about this? Come on. /rant /anger

228.7.2008 16:24

The keep "enforcing" the law the WRONG way. Making punishment more severe only contributes to the unbalance

328.7.2008 16:38

Uummmm.......heres a clue its huge success is mirrored in alternative forms of distribution(shearing,downloading,digi stuf).

So the sky here is not falling..... NEXT!!!!

428.7.2008 16:57

Originally posted by ikari:
Maybe it is the way this article is worded but I can't find a better example of how big companies are the puppeteers of the government. Why is a senator worried about a movie's profitability?

Don't take my word for it. Here's the entire passage from Senator Leahy's statement:
Quote:
I was once a prosecutor. I am now a Senator. But I have always been a fan of movies. My cameo in the latest Batman movie, The Dark Knight, was priceless to me, but we can put real numbers on the value of that production to the economy. The Dark Knight shot for 65 days in Chicago, pouring almost $36 million into the local economy. Seventeen million dollars went to nearly 800 local vendors that were critical to the production of the movie. For example, one local lumber supplier employing 40 people played a central role in the set construction that helped transform Chicago into the mythical “Gotham City.” In order to fulfill the production needs of the film, the lumber company worked closely with 15 other Illinois-based companies. Those 15 suppliers employed an additional 350 workers.

All of that value is threatened by piracy. Just in the movie industry, piracy costs 140,000 U.S. jobs and $5.5 billion in wages each year. Piracy costs cities, towns and states an estimated $837 million in additional tax revenue each year. The movie industry alone produces $30.2 billion each year in revenue for 160,000 vendors all across the Nation, and 85 percent of those vendors employ 10 people or fewer.

The fact that he would pick the year's most successful movie to make his point about just goes to show how little he actually knows about the economics of the movie industry. Movies don't do poorly because of piracy. They do poorly because they're crap. The Dark Knight is a good movie that appeals to a broad audience so it's setting records. Other movies which are crap and/or appeal to a narrower audience don't do as well. Some of them even [gasp!] lose money. Guess Hollywood should make more good movies if they want to make more money. It's not a difficult equation.

528.7.2008 17:03

two big industries in US have the strongest lobbies: weapons and entertainment...

so expect endless wars and tougher copyright laws from their emplo... er... from your politicians...

628.7.2008 17:10

My god the movie has earned like over 350 Million in 10 days. When will corpo-rape-tions realize the obscene profits they are draining from the pockets of the very people that support them will ultimately destroy them. Piracy will continue to grow to a problem that no law can handle. In fact we are there now. DRMs are a joke and are stopping no one. Would love to know the price they will waste for putting the DRMs on "Dark Knight." Just sell the DVD for $5 and the profits will skyrocket. Either the day of it's release(my bet) or several days later it will be backupable.

The cesspool that is Congress- I won't even go there since politics is frowned upon. Edit

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 28 Jul 2008 @ 17:12

728.7.2008 17:33

Wow, a Senator concerned about The Dark Knight's profitability? Why isn't he being investigated for bribery by the MPAA? *cough*

Its been 10 days since TDK's release. In that time it has smashed almost every record in terms of money made.

Its currently at just about $314 million brought in a time period of only 10 days. It's so good I have seen it 3 times. :P

Loosing money to piracy? Heck no, partially because the movie is awesome and partially because the current pirated versions probably suck with the movie having so many dark scenes.

Peace

EDITED by Pop_Smith: Woops, I said "$314 billion" instead of "$314 million".

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 28 Jul 2008 @ 20:18

828.7.2008 17:34
lynchGOP
Inactive

The movie has ALREADY made 300 million and cost 180 million to make. That's 120 million PROFIT. Give me a GD break. Bite me with the "loss of money" crap. It hasn't lost money, it won't lose money and it's not losing any money. This is just a pre-emptive strike to implement another law or rule by using scare tactics. Kinda similar to Bush's sorry excuses and lies used to invade Iraq. Meritless!!

928.7.2008 18:04

When are the MPAA, RIAA, and people going to realize that the vast majority of people who pirate movies, music, and software most likely would never have bought it in the first place. There is also a good percentage of people who download something illegally and realize that "Hey, this is pretty good" and end up going out to buy it. They may have never bought it if they didn't get to sample it in the first place. In my eyes it is kind of a wash.

I think the decline in movie profits and music proficts has a whole lot more to do with the crap that is being released and not so much to do with piracy. But they use piracy as a scapegoat.

1028.7.2008 18:09
varnull
Inactive

Has this same "senator" ever seen the "black mamba of reaming" that the electors are gong to giver him next election..

probably not.. so long as he gets his 20 million worthless us $$ ass wiping paper for his connivance.. shit.. it even passed my spellchecker.. Open Source OS rules.. well :Pwned

edit because sernator passes whereas senator doesn't??? wtf is wit that mofos?.. looking at my edit it makes sense.. it don't object to mofo or wit but does have a problem with correct use of grammar an spelling.. ain't it the the truth. ooo.. now I'm gettin all bitchy...

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 28 Jul 2008 @ 18:14

1128.7.2008 18:16
Globe08
Inactive

I agree, personally i think the notion of piracy is retarded anyways. With movie tickets priced the way they are i could give a shat less about them potentially losing money which as we all know this flick didnt. i live in virginia and its $10.25 for a non-matinee and 8:50 for a matinee which is nuts. its 6 dollars for a large coke and 7 for a large popcorn. Everything is this world is basicaly marked up something fierce so i care less when i hear the government whining about piracy,theft and so forth. then you hear well thats why wages are low for workers is theft...wrong wages are low because companies are all about squeezing the most amount of work for the lowest amount of money.EVERRYTHING is rising in price but wages arent so they need to go elsewhere with all the complaining and scapegoat nonsense.I mean come on this is off topic but an extra topping on a pizza is like 2 bucks, thats small and trivial but its like that all over with retail so i just find it hard to buy that movie makers arent making money primarily because of piracy which by the way im too stupid to learn how to burn a flick.

1228.7.2008 18:16

Quote:
Don't take my word for it. Here's the entire passage from Senator Leahy's statement:
Verbal, I hope you didn't think I was insulting you. I actually was trying to say that you did a great job wording it.

Sorry about that. This article got me a little fired up. :-)

1328.7.2008 18:45

Quote:
Quote:
Don't take my word for it. Here's the entire passage from Senator Leahy's statement:
Verbal, I hope you didn't think I was insulting you. I actually was trying to say that you did a great job wording it.

Sorry about that. This article got me a little fired up. :-)

Not at all. I believe in questioning everything.

1428.7.2008 19:42

Movies are losing money to piracy... blah, blah, blah...

That's precisely why Vince McMahon and Mark Cuban are lining up to have their name on the producers credits. I'm sure making up to 30% return on an investment (ie. cheap film) has nothing to do with it...

1528.7.2008 19:49
llongtheD
Inactive

Lets see, were in a quagmire in Iraq, spending billions a day on a useless war. Most of the U.S. is in a recession. Schools all over the U.S. are cutting programs from lack of funding. The dollar continues to weaken, and these dumb asses are concerned about copyright legislation? If there was ever any doubt in anyones mind, that the politicians and the entire political process were not controlled by corporate america, I think you can stop wondering.

1628.7.2008 20:17

mmm let's see - the stupid old turd has his incontinence pants in a twist because " my 1 second cameo is priceless to me " what role did he play ? a fart coming out of batman's arse ?

and of course Warner giving him a 1 second cameo and then this legislation coming out trumpeted by the senile old piece of offal is just pure coincidence isn't it ?

no wonder the rest of the world laughs at america so much

1729.7.2008 0:47
susieqbbb
Inactive

So lets increase the punishment great idea but until schools place blocking tech on there servers to block transfering of files this new law is crap.

1829.7.2008 4:20
llongtheD
Inactive

@susieqbbb

I don't know where your coming from with that comment. Do you actually believe schools putting blocking tech on their servers will put a dent in piracy? Most students on a strapped budget wouldn't buy this stuff anyway, they may view and listen, but they're not the pirates. In fact, maybe if our government spent more money on education, instead of old politicians sitting around debating copyright legislation, students might have more money to spend on frivolous items.

1929.7.2008 5:28

On another related point - shouldn't he be investigated by a senate anti-corruption committee ?

I mean we've already established that he has dry orgasms humping his zimmer frame while watching his 1 second appearance in "Gotham Knight" 1,000 times over with the FF and REW buttons smoking with heat

Isn't this a clear example of abusing political influence and enacting political law to promote and protect what he himself has admitted are personal subjective interests ?

hell ! we are talking about a country where you can be sued millions for selling the wrong sized donut as a street vendor ( causing undue mental anguish ) - surely someone can get him ?

2029.7.2008 5:31

Originally posted by domie:
On another related point - shouldn't he be investigated by a senate anti-corruption committee ?

I mean we've already established that he has dry orgasms humping his zimmer frame while watching his 1 second appearance in "Gotham Knight" 1,000 times over with the FF and REW buttons smoking with heat

Isn't this a clear example of abusing political influence and enacting political law to promote and protect what he himself has admitted are personal subjective interests ?

hell ! we are talking about a country where you can be sued millions for selling the wrong sized donut as a street vendor ( causing undue mental anguish ) - surely someone can get him ?
tiz a shame comrade there is no treason in corruption anymore. =^^=

public officials need to be help to a much higher standard and to much sterner punishments...

2129.7.2008 12:35

Mr. Senator, I'm glad you are a movie buff. So am I. When I like a movie, I buy it if I can afford it.

Losing money in tax revenue? If people aren't spending money on movies, they are spending it on something else. And everything is taxed. The fabricated billions are incredible. They are essentially double-dipping for the sake of statistic numbers to make their case. Show me a list of all movies that have actually lost money (made zero profit and put Hollywood studios in debt). I want to see how large that list is.

Show me how those statistics are generated. Any High School grad could probably debunk their math. I'd love to see a college professor go at it.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 29 Jul 2008 @ 12:37

2229.7.2008 12:46

is that the bribed senator in that picture, son of a b!tch looks like he is about fall out of his rocker in 5 years. why is it that we have old dumb as$es ruining it for the younger generation.

people are getting uneasy & pissed about the economy of the US, i can barely afford gas to get to and from work. im just waiting for the sh*t to hit the fan. i feel a revolt from the public in 3-5 years.

2329.7.2008 18:24

Did the good senator forget to mention that he was in the movie???

2429.7.2008 23:58
cousinkix
Inactive

This is the same PATRICK LEAHY who flashed his personal collection of BOOTLEG Grateful Dead recordings in front of Ted Koppel's NIGHTLINE TV cameras, when Jerry Garcia died in 1995...

2530.7.2008 10:11

Originally posted by cousinkix:
This is the same PATRICK LEAHY who flashed his personal collection of BOOTLEG Grateful Dead recordings in front of Ted Koppel's NIGHTLINE TV cameras, when Jerry Garcia died in 1995...

Not quite the same thing, although certainly a good point when it comes to the music industry. The Grateful Dead allowed people to tape and distribute their shows as part of their business model. They made all their money off of merchandise and concert tickets, and given they were among the top grossing acts for a very long time it worked pretty well.

They're not bootlegs in the legal sense because the band gave their permission.

2630.7.2008 14:05

i bet that dude has a hard time just checking his email

2730.7.2008 16:26

Originally posted by jetyi83:
i bet that dude has a hard time just checking his email

Nah, he has somebody to do that for him. That's what taxes are for after all.

2831.7.2008 21:05

No F*ing wonder. That Senator is in the movie. He was in the forst 2 movies too. He gets a fat check from the royalties. It shows his prejudice and bias for the movement. He must think he could loose a few dollars?

293.8.2008 22:27
ehofehof
Inactive

Originally posted by nb69:
No F*ing wonder. That Senator is in the movie. He was in the forst 2 movies too. He gets a fat check from the royalties. It shows his prejudice and bias for the movement. He must think he could loose a few dollars?

-
Huh? Isn't that CONFLICT OF INTEREST ??
-
Legislating about something in which HE HAS A PERSONAL FINANCIAL INTEREST???
-
But be that as it may what happened to the statistical studies that so-called 'Video Piracy'(see footnote) makes absolutely no difference at all to the 'Bottom-Line' of the movie industry? Many people who otherwise wouldn't even consider purchasing the movie DO buy it after viewing a copy, and those who don't, would not have bought it anyway.
-
And AFAIR every court which has ever ruled on alleged piracy has found that the original owner of ANY media is entitled to make at least 2 backup copies. And if s/he chooses to lend them out, that is of-course his/her business, and might even generate additional purchases by the people s/he loaned it to. If it is a good product. Which I guess the Media Moguls don't want anyone to know until AFTER they have shelled out their hard-earned/quadruple-taxed cash.
-
Oh Wait! I forgot. This is the U S of A. where a rich unscrupulous individual or corporation is allowed to sue a competitor into bankruptcy with no legal basis at all, as a means of stealing the competitor's Patents... As Bill Gates originally did to Seattle Computer Products, and then a hundred more down the road.

306.8.2008 10:43

If you are in the US, STOP YOUR WHINING and do something about it! These same thugs tried to get this going a year ago and voter outrage stopped them dead in their tracks. I am sure they are waiting till after the elections to drop this bomb!

You have to write the US Senate Judiciary Committee nasty letters that look like they come from their own constituency. That requires some foot work and research. You need to use real persons’ identities. The letters should be reasonable. I always try to add that if I have to shut down the internet in my house for fear that my kids might do something wrong, their education will suffer. The reality is that it is nearly impossible to figure out if the tunes etc were pirated. Yet the parents will get stuck paying the penalties. This law is anti- American! I get real angry when I say that they favor blood suckers over my child’s education. The bill will spend billions of tax dollars to put millions of dollars into the media mafiaa’s pockets.

I like to sound a bit uneducated who heard something from a friend that scared me and made me angry. I usually mention I might bring the topic up at the PTA. That is their worst nightmare! A group of moronic uninformed angry voters! I assure you that will scare the crap out of them if done correctly. You can use the same set of letters for your senators. They will need to vote on it before it becomes law. These laws do not protect industries but do attack the public.

How is a parent to know if their kids have pirated tunes? Demand a new government group to help and educate parents how to find out if their kids have pirated tunes. Tell them they had better get that money from the from the media not tax dollars. How dare they waste precious tax dollars so that the US might profit. Who do they work for? They certainly are not working for the voters. Demand to learn who came up with this stupid idea! If that does not scare the crap out of them nothing will.

316.8.2008 12:52

No wonder he complains about Dark Knight, Leahy is in the pocket of Warner Bros. Here's the proof:

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=n00009918

Quote:
Patrick Leahy's Top 5 Contributors, 2003-2008

Technet $81,491
Walt Disney Co $43,200
Time Warner $41,100
Law Office of Peter Angelos $38,700
Viacom Inc $36,500
Politicians are bought and paid for... don't believe the B.S.

326.8.2008 13:11

Renfraus, it that supposed to be a surprize???

No politican does much especially something as patronizing as this one with out being paid off.

Yes, it is nice to see Disney in there as well. Tech Net is the lobbiest for M$ ect. Vicom is TV. I bet Law Office of Peter Angelos is a front for the media mafiaa since they are the only ones missing in that group.

337.8.2008 1:00

I can't beleive this guy, the balls to even discuss this, this senator's mind is in disneyland.

347.8.2008 1:19

US Citizen concerned 'This old Bat of a Senator' Has lost his Brain from CPS_(Corporate-Pocketbook-Syndrome)

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 07 Aug 2008 @ 1:20

357.8.2008 16:24

<rant>

Dianne Feinstein is not my senator. California will do well when we get rid of that dumb b!tch. I say we make her walk the plank!

</rant>

367.8.2008 18:07

Originally posted by maitland:
<rant>

Dianne Feinstein is not my senator. California will do well when we get rid of that dumb b!tch. I say we make her walk the plank!

</rant>


377.8.2008 20:42

All elected incumbents in the federal government need to be replaced without exceptions. A good start would be in November.

387.8.2008 20:45

Originally posted by garmoon:
All elected incumbents in the federal government need to be replaced without exceptions. A good start would be in November.
would be ebtter if gov had mroe oversight and a bribs/money/favors is treason agisnt the people theme in it...

398.8.2008 7:42

Oh Yeah Zippy! I am sure that bill would fly through both houses. No anti-graff bill is passed with out first opening a loop-hole.

There is really nothing the voters can do. The crook are waiting in line to become elected officials. It is kind of like flies on a real smelly sh1t! If a honest one does get into office no one will work with him unless he becomes tainted.

The only way to fix the problem would be a violent march on DC. I am expecting one in about a decade. Those bastards have sold us down the river for at least a half century. When we are down river there will be political unrest.

4014.10.2008 23:29

yea right ,those members of our "Divine Congress" are just lap doggies of the lobbyist,they are only doing what the payoff calls for.

4115.10.2008 6:49

ampex7, the members just want to get paid for everything they vote on.

4215.10.2008 7:47

and I thought politics was strictly a no no! LMAO unreported!

Comments have been disabled for this article.

News archive