Oscar movie pirates battle the MPAA once again in 2009

With the nominations of the Oscars named just a few days ago I wondered how many of the movies nominated have actually been seen by people at home rather then the cinema in the form of piracy. Of course no website gives out that kind of information but there is a blog post that was featured on slashfilm that gave some shocking figures.


Displayed above is a small section of a list of films (see full list here over the last 7 years that have been nominated in some form or another for an Oscar. In the years Andy Baio has been researching this information he has found some quite shocking statistics regarding the piracy of the nominees.

This year the battle for the 2009 Oscars is quite close but for anyone that doesn't go to the cinema the films are unfortunately easy to find on the internet, as part of Andy's research he found out that 23 out of the 26 films have been leaked and this is a long time before the nominations were even decided upon and strangely Academy Judges only get 20 of them to review.

The time between the judges receiving the DVD and the film actually getting leaked to the internet takes about 6 days and sometimes quicker if you count the camcorder copies that are released. It's been recently documented that cinema's are trying to stop the piracy of films via the camcorder. For example a VUE cinema in Pilsworth, UK is now asking customers to sign in and let their bags be checked before they go to see a film. This policy isn't in place just on weekdays either but at the weekends which is the busiest times for some cinemas. Odeon staff regularly use night vision binoculars looking for the pirates in action on opening nights of big budget films.

So what could the MPAA do about the films being leaked on the internet? Well actually not a lot, they could put a shield on the CD's like there are on PC games but that would be cracked very quickly and the piracy would continue or maybe they could let the judges watch the films in group screenings so they aren't sent out and pirated. Whatever does happen 2009 won't be the last year films are pirated if previous years are to go by.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Introducing Kosmix search, watch out Google and Wikipedia

Next Story

DTV likely delayed till June 12

25 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

i think piracy would definitely not be as bad if it was cheap to buy music and movies

going to the cinema in Australia is like $14, if you want popcorn and a drink with that you're looking at $30
i certainly cant afford to do that every time i want to watch a movie, downloading pirated movies may also be a convenience to many as they don't have to leave the house, i guess apples catching on with their itunes store

but when its available free people are just going to download.

Is this article serious?

artnada said,
Meanwhile in the real World, box office takings were at an ALL TIME HIGH since records began in the UK!!!

Piracy is not as bad as the MPAA make out.

http://www.gazette-news.co.uk/uk_national_...ish_box_office/

And not only that.

The main thing that astounds me is the incredible obviousness of the situation and the MPAA's apparant obliviousness.

There is a product that is being dangled infront of peoples' faces, and not even being offered for sale. And they wonder why people will then download pirate copies.

Complete madness. They need to get with the program, and start offering the movies they are shouting about to people all the time for sale, so people can buy them. Best part is, instead of actually working on a solution, they just whine. There are very obvious opportunities to sell people movies - the demand is clearly there - but instead they are content to do nothing, and just complain that since they don't want to change or do anything about it, that the world is so unfair.

Astonishing stupidity. The article itself is a joke as well, to be so one-sided and blinkered.

While there's nothing quite like going to the movies, some pirated movies have surprisingly good quality. My advice- Just wait until the movie comes out on DVD, and download it in good quality. If you really must see the movie when its released, go and watch it in a theater. Plus with high-end headphones, a comfy chair, and Apple Front Row, the experience is quite authentic.

Why would you pay £30 to take your family out when you can stay at home and do it for free?

Why do people buy music then from Itunes when they can get it for free? Why do people buy software when they can get it for free? Some people do it because they feel it's wrong to download something that they didn't pay for, but some also do it to support the people that released something worth purchasing.

The people that are downloading movies are downloading for the sake of downloading. Movies cost to much money to go out and see especially when you have a family. Like I said there isn't any movie I can't just wait to get from Netflix.

^ However you try and jazz it up with "they will probably pay to go if it's good because they are probably just movie geeks". .. they won't.

People pirate movies because they can't or don't want to pay to see them. I have grown up surrounded by people that do this, it was around long before the internet as an "industry" and the quality, actually, isn't always all that bad. £5 for a VHS or DVD used to be the usual price, about half to a third of what you'd pay for the DVD in a shop, a quarter of the price of taking your family to the cinema. With the internet, it's now typically free. Why would you pay £30 to take your family out when you can stay at home and do it for free?

Whether we should cry over it for the sake of the movie industry, I don't know. They don't seem to be struggling for money from what I can see. Perhaps if DVDs and Cinema tickets were cheaper more people would be willing to go. Personally, I love seeing a good film at the cinema, but I haven't got several children to buy tickets and popcorn for.

Yup, i love this bull****. Damien sounds like an MPAA member.

As far as im concerned this is an example of movie geeks downloading films early and then telling their friends what to watch; and probably going themselves to the cinema to watch it again!. Watching a copy from an Academy screener with a big blur in one corner to hide the watermark is not the same as going to the cinema.

All it does do is help you not waste £10 on going to see something crap. Because of internet leaks i know that "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" is the most over rated film for years and has saved me ending up in a cinema with a sore ass for um... NEARLY 3 HOURS.

a better plan would be to intergrate movie service into your ISP, at NO additional charge , maybe some differences in options and the number of movies you watch depending on your connection choice....

plus anyway cinema is expensive, and these days most people cant be bothered to go OUT, rather sit and watch on our 60" HD tv's that we all brought during xmas!

Tough situation here because what really can be done to combat the pirates?
Release the movie early on limited amounts of copies to 'trusted sources' - still gets leaked early
Release the movie to the 'trusted sources' as an online only viewing? - still would get copied and leaked
Release the movie in a locked portable dvd player type of thing? - not too practical

They could change the format of the awards, perhaps, where everyone isnt scrambling to get their movie out at years end. But like I said, its a tough situation, I sure as hell dont have a good solution

not to mention the number of screeners DELIBERATELY leaked by the movie studios... how come the quickest leaks happen during oscar season

lololol

The screeners themselves come out prior to Oscar season and go to legit members of the academy for consideration. There are more screeners at this time of year for that reason, hence more of them to leak.

Are they really threatened by someone's dark ass cam recording? Who would watch that ****? The good releases aren't usually released until damn near the DVD comes out. I for one wait for the movies to come out on DVD because I refuse to pay for what they want at the cinemas. I started boycotting movies at the theaters a long time ago.

I think both camcorder pirates and the people who download the movies pirated with camcorders are incredibly dumb. Forget about the law issue. Movies, in general, are done with a lot of care, from the moment they are filmed to the post-production. All that care of quality is lost when some retard goes to a theater with a $200 camcorder and shoots it. Picture and sound quality are 5hit. What's the point? You have to be really stupid to do something like that, and also to waste time downloading it. What about your time? Isn't the time and electricity you waste downloading it about the same or even more than the rental fee for the DVD or BD?

I don't even go to the theater anymore, what's the point of paying $9 for a movie, and being screwed big time by the theater if I want to eat some popcorn? I wait a couple of months until it's released on Blu-Ray and watch it in the comfort of my bed, eating whatever the hell I want, and if it's pop-corn and a soda, it will be far cheaper than the theater prices. But best of all, I watch the movie with excellent picture and sound quality, that I paid about $1 to Netflix.

i disagree overall.

sure the CAM releases (which suck as audio and picture quality are generally bad) are bad but TELESYNC (this i consider to be the minimum for watching a movie that's filmed from a camera) is about as good as you will get from a theater besides a TELECINE (pretty much scanned from the film reel itself, but these seem more uncommon vs TELESYNC) and from there you got DVDSCR or R5 (which are typically DVD quality as far as the picture is concerned) then of course you got the DVDRiP stuff which is obviously the best.

but about your question of... "Isn't the time and electricity you waste downloading it about the same or even more than the rental fee for the DVD or BD?"

the electricity part your joking about right? (i sure hope so cause that's pretty obvious on the answer there) ... hell, even TIME wise it's not a issue since when your at home you dont have to go anywhere since you just download it and if you got a fast internet line and know where to get stuff you can get a film pretty quick to (within a couple hours) and not only that since your staying at home u save gas and time going up to the video rental store etc etc... i think you get the picture ;)

i can understand your point though about lowered image quality and sound from a CAMera but like i say, i consider TELESYNC version's of a film (if done properly) to be 'watchable' for sure... although it's pretty obvious there not great in the image quality/sound dept but there not horrible unlike a CAM version of a film which typically is.

typically speaking though unless i wanna see a film real bad i usually wait until a DVDSCR or R5 release is out , those you pretty much got DVD quality image there and the sound is typically good to since after all a DVDSCR is a DVD... but sometimes you can see lower audio quality on R5's but typically speaking it's easily good enough.

but yeah, i pretty much agree with you about 'going to theaters' though as i also rarely go to theaters anymore myself but when i do i typically dont buy anything else besides the movie ticket cause there prices are outrageous on stuff like popcorn etc etc.

It's comfy at home and the git with the bag of sweets is me so I can only blame myself for missing something. also the amount of crap that is on but as far as the adverts are concerned is unmissable, saves me a hell a lot of money. Australia is a good example, if I had payed to see it I would have felt cheated. On the rare occasion a film is good, I buy.

You pay and get cheated sometimes. That's the game.

You pay to play the game. You don't pay only when you win.

If you go to a sporting event and you team loses do you go to the ticket gate on your way out and ask for your money back?

shakey_snake said,
You pay and get cheated sometimes. That's the game.

You pay to play the game. You don't pay only when you win.

If you go to a sporting event and you team loses do you go to the ticket gate on your way out and ask for your money back?

maybe, but the fact of the matter is if someone can 'get' that sorta stuff pretty easily (which you can if you know where to look) and for FREE with little to no chance of getting in trouble, then people will do it... it's just the way it is.

as for the example (sporting event) you gave i think that was a bad idea.. i think using the Lottery as a example would have been better ... but other than that you got a legitimate point.

p.s. for me personally... i rarely go to theaters in general so if i 'get' a film it's not really going to effect a film's profits one way or the other... although a 'video rental store' might suffer a little from me personally. lol

Very interesting read there, I wasn't aware that Odeon used night vision. I thought most cinemas used cameras in the ceiling to check for pirates and other naughty activities :P

What about bring the prices down to the Ticket and DVD.

Man I love movies, I really do, but I can not afford the quantity of movies that I watch monthly, its just to much.

Course whenever I can, I went to the Theater, the experience is good, no so good As should be, the country where I live the cinemas sucks big time.
The Movie Quality is awful.
The sound is worst
The behave of the public is something scary, people talking by phone, screaming and you dont even imagine.
What else?
You can be watching a movie and .......... the movie stop with a projector problem, even worst we have to wait for the guy with in first place should not let this happens.

Thats of course maybe just a problem of my country.

I've not experienced what you've described - but, I have noticed a couple of my friends from another country seem to talk very loud anytime they feel like in the movie, as if they were sat on their sofa at home.

Cineworld in the UK offer 11.99/mo to watch as many movies at the cinema as you like. So if your a movie addict, its fantastic value.

Okay piracy is one thing but with these Oscar movies, in general:
a - they are limited releases (not a lot of theaters)
b- released to those theaters late dec to make deadline
c - sometimes months later (if worth it) they get a wide release

They hype them up as the films of the year but are only accessible to art house type areas and people until after the Oscars. People want to see the movies! If they ran them all now at a theater they would get the money that they more then likely deserve.

This year is a little bit different then most years, as a lot of the movies are widely released, but the same thing does happen every year, it's not a surprise.