Copyright court cases

[Supreme2k]

I recently finished up some paralegal work on two copyright issue cases regarding warez. I am under court rule not to discuss the specifics of the cases, but we hope to certain non-disclosures repealed in order to publicize them so that valuable information can be made available.

Case 1: Settled. A person was allegedly illegally downloading music using a pay peer-to-peer service. The defense was that the service provider did not specify clearly that all content obtained through its service was not free.

Case 2: Dismissed. Sony was seeding a file on eDonkey and filed suit against a man for downloading it. It was argued that Sony has distribution rights on its own software, therefore they were seen as "giving away" the copyrighted material. The counter argument was that the man did not know that the file holder also held distribution rights (which ultimately helped the plaintiff, rather than hurt him).



I don't condone warez in the least, but I also don't condone these types of sting operations. The sad thing is that, for every one of these cases that gets dismissed, there's about 80 others that settle with a token "reimbursement" to the software manufacturer (usually under $2k). If it wasn't for my (occasional) work in this arena, I would avoid the issue completely, as both sides have sunk to using the same level of nasty on each other.

[jimmalenko]

I tend to agree that baiting is a bit below the belt, but then again undercover cops posing as ladies of the night, cops hiding their cars in dense shubbery on median strips to catch speeders with radar guns or setting up speed cameras at the bottom of steep hills are all in the same boat IMHO.

I guess it just outlines the need for clarity. Obviously it would be reasonable to expect the downloader to have some sort of idea of if something was copyrighted or not, but then again, it's the uploader who's making it available for distribution in the first place so IMHO they should be the ones getting the book thrown at them. Downloaders aren't 100% innocent by any stretch, but they can only take what is made available to them. Stop it at the source, I say

[Doramius]

I'll agree to that. It's like waiting outside a convenience store for kids to walk in and buy cigarettes. Why aren't you arresting the store owner who should know better? :duh:

[thecoalman]

I'll agree to that. It's like waiting outside a convenience store for kids to walk in and buy cigarettes. Why aren't you arresting the store owner who should know better? :duh:

Do they actually sdo that in your neck of the woods? Exact opposite here, they get a bunch of kids to make "controlled buys" then bust the clerk if they sell. It got so bad the clerks were asking Grandma for ID to buy cigarettes. :P

[adam]

Supreme2k: How is the first case a sting operation? And out of curiosity, what side were you employed by? I assume defense?

jimmalenko the difference with your examples though is that in those cases it is the city/state doing the stings and they are being done to enforce criminal statutes. Here (in the second example, I don't understand how the first case is any kind of a sting operation) we are dealing with a private entity setting people up to enforce a civil proprietary right. I think that goes too far. I also think its just downright stupid, like there aren't a billion other infringing files on Edonkey that they can monitor they have to host one of their own.

I don't have a problem with the first suit but the fact that Supreme2k puts the word "clearly" in italics tells me that the guy probably knew what he was doing and is just finding a loophole of sorts in the P2P license agreement. I'm sure it does say something about the copyrightability of the files and the fact that his actions may be infringing....its just unclear enough to formulate a defense.

[Supreme2k]

I only meant the Sony case. "These types" meaning stings in general, this one included, and that it was done on more than one occasion (and with other methods). Defense, obviously.


While I can't go into detail on the first case, it was not iTunes, but the wording of the service suggests it is a better substitute, and unlimited to boot.

...but the fact that Supreme2k puts the word "clearly" in italics tells me that the guy probably knew what he was doing and is just finding a loophole of sorts in the P2P license agreement. I'm sure it does say something about the copyrightability of the files and the fact that his actions may be infringing....its just unclear enough to formulate a defense.

That's exactly the type of "guilty until proven innocent" argument we want companies to stop using. They have the burden of proof, not the defendant.

[northcat_8]

you mean you guys "PAY" for music and software Lozzzers :P


I will say it again...

I have no sympathy for the music or software companies. It is the technology of the software companies that has made warez and pirating possible. They spend billions of dollars trying to protect software that some 14 year old kid will write a crack for inside of 4 days and distribute it for free just to show how smart he is. Even the world leader Microsoft, with their online verification, and 25 digit codes...someone cracked Windows XP...there you go Bill...hire that guy.

I remember when I use to buy Albums, you know the old LPs. They were about $10. Now they produce CDs, the CDs cost far less to produce but the cost of the CD to the consumer is higher...why is that? I read somewhere once that it cost a record company about $0.01 to produce 3 CDs....I don't know how true that is but it is one hell of a profit margin. But all the same...there weren't too many people pirating LPs now were there?

I have no problem with the sting operation, pretty lame if you ask me, kind of like killing one mesquito in the rain forrest. Is it right or wrong? Probably wrong, but who am I to judge?

[adam]

That's exactly the type of "guilty until proven innocent" argument we want companies to stop using. They have the burden of proof, not the defendant.

Well no kidding but I'm not making an argument I'm guessing as to the undisclosed facts of the case...since there no longer is a case. Even assuming my guess is right the plaintiff would still have to prove it as a matter of law.

And as I'm sure you know that burden of proof shifts to the defendant as soon as the plaintiff puts on a prima facie case and that is usually very easy to do in a copyright infringement case involving P2P downloading. Is the copyright registered? Yes. Is there evidence that he/she downloaded it? Yes. There, now the burden IS in fact on the defendant.

[MackemX]

this post text is copyrighted as it's my latest post, if you see this text then please immediately stop this page from fully loading and close the browser window

you have been warned..................




























































as you are now here by continuing to view this thread and allowing it to fully download the complete post means you have 'illegally' downloaded copyrighted material

you were warned so therefore I will see your ass in court :P

[Doramius]

I can understand Northcat's view to a point. What actually makes up the cost of these discs. Is it the retail mark-up, the initial cost to produce, the copyright, something else? This has been brought up in other areas. I buy a $6 CD from Wal-Mart, so What percentages go where. Then what do those percentages pay for. You cannot say tax, because that's added on to the initial cost. I understand there is a combination of costs, but I still cannot see where it brings the cost up to $6. I see the demand cost, but that's a greed factor. Sure there may be a small loss of cost on other less profitable items, but that cost can be made up very easily.

Let's use the Example about Microsoft. We'll go conservative with a XP Professional retail disc going for $150. How much did it cost to produce that disc? When I say disc, I'm not just talking about the production of a piece of plastic with foil in it. What was the cost of the software engineers, programmers, copyrights, production, blah blah blah.

XP sold over 7 million copies worldwide. Let's use a $10 cost figure and you get $70 Mil. made on this product alone, ALONE. XP has been out since 2001. So using this "figmented" cost the company made $14 Mil a year worldwide. Standard Business costs for a software company (IE: staffing, work areas, supplies, executives, etc.) is around $6-8 Million - remember these are already established companies. Shipping & Retail mark-up could be about $.60 (again, A REALLY conservative side), making the cost to tack on another $4 Mil. So we're roughly, at $12 Mil. leaving another $2 Mil. for whatever costs, or just profit cost for the company, or it's split $1 Mil. for more profit on the manufacture side and $1Mil. for more money given to the retailer as mark-up.

That's at just $10 per disc. They are making 16X that amount PER DISC. You tell me where the REAL CRIME is taking place. When Windows Vista Comes out. How much is Win98SE going to sell for? XP will probably take about 3-5 years, but it's prices will drop severely. People are going to want to sell their old discs. Other people are going to want to try and activate it. How much is that disc going to be worth once M$ shuts off support for it? Someone will create a HACK for it, or Maybe Microsft will create one themselves for an additional cost. Insert another disc with in the first 3 days of activation that allows you to use XP without having to go online or over the phone to activate. They'll probably charge another $50-60 for something like that, if they do.

[MackemX]

XP was cracked without the need for activation and around before it's official release wasn't it? I recall seeing a pic of a guy standing outside in front of a clock or something

I've always said that they shouldn't over charge for media as most know how cheap it is to produce. Why not just cripple the pirate market and sell CD's, DVD's, Software & Games etc at a fair price?

you say XP has sold 7 million worldwide? is that true, only 7 million or is it just an example? I would have thought it would have easily been 7 million in the UK & USA alone as there are millions of PC's in the world

I wonder how many XP's they would sell at say £10 a shot. My mate just paid £45 for an XBox game (and it's just ridiculous to pay that amount for a piece of plastic and it's one reason I don't own a PS2/XBox etc. It's all to do with supply/demand and if they only sell so many at a higher cost and get £1,000's then they don't care about those who can't afford to pay £'s for each and every disc . Same goes for these stupidly overpriced Apple products as again people are prepared to pay those prices in the first place

I think most people would buy far more CD's, DVD's, games and software if they were priced reasonably. They would probably spend more than they would anyway. I'd rather buy 20 £5 DVD's than spend £80 on 5 DVD's for example. How many times have you spent more than you should in a bargain bucket of some type? . You see this feeding frenzy attitude in many bargain forums when someone posts a CD/DVD cheaper, even if it's only something like 10% cheaper

people may well be pirates by getting the media via the internet, bootlegs or other means but it's the industry that prices most of them out of the market in the first place by being far to greedy with over inflated prices

[BJ_M]

XP cost about a billion to develop and market ---

i hope they sold more than 7 million copies

[Doramius]

7 Million is an actual number. Some of the licenses sold can encompass several computers, especially in business areas. It's not how many computers it's used on, it's how many licenses were sold. 7 Million worldwide

I agree that the costs are high. And I do believe that is a major spark to pirates. How many people do you know bought a pirated DVD because it was more expensive? I know of nobody. How many people do you know have bought a pirated music CD because they like to support the pirates, or they only buy pirated movies like they prefer brand named clothes? I haven't met anyone like that,... yet. How many people do you know have bought a pirated game or software because it's cost was at least 5% or more lower than the retail cost? My list could circle the world, I don't know how many times over.

It's not that people don't want to pay the proper fees and production costs. It's the fact that people are paying more than what an item's actual worth is, INCLUDING THE LICENSE.

Here's another RECENT case in point from my own experience. My son just stepped on my "Spies Like Us" DVD last Thursday, shattering it. I bought it for $5.50 at Wal-mart a year ago. I went to Wal-mart and got a second copy for $4.88. I didn't care. The price was reasonable. About the cost of a music CD, in many instances the cost was lower than popular music singles. COME ON! If it Really costs that much to make the physical disc. Make it available for download for a cost. I'll gladly pay $4-6 a movie title and burn them to disc myself. Or download a new operating system for free and burn it to disc. I'm guessing they'll still have a license activation key with a limit on how many computers it can run on. So worrying about how many discs it's downloaded to probably won't matter, because the license is still gonna cost you $20-25. Or you can buy the disc at a store for $35 with a key in it. The download would be useless without the key anyway.

What is the real issue?

XP cost about a billion to develop and market ---

i hope they sold more than 7 million copies

I think you're adding in costs that are a part of XP, but are actually paid by what they are related to. It's like saying part of the Billion went into Symantecs software. That was actually symantecs cost which gets paid for in the research, development, & marketing of their own product. Follow on this, the base operating system and function didn't cost $1 billion. It wasn't even written from scratch.

You start out by building a small house (DOS), you redo the interior(Win95), You make a major addition (Win98), Decorate (USB support), expand one of the new rooms (98SE), redo the interior again (WinME), furnish the basement and modernize the wiring & plumbing (Windows 2000), major remodle and add a full size 2nd floor (WinXP), Build a Guest House (Windows Vista). Altogether I could say the project had a cost of $1.5 billion. Now break it apart to the cost of each item. $112 Mil. in cost, each. Now break out the drivers as their cost goes to the actual company that made them. Misc. software to the companies that created them. So on & so forth.

1 copy to a business may cost $600 (imaginary number), but it's a license that supports 100 PCs. Plus they pay monthly fees on top of that for regular support. So there's money being made on top of the retail sale.

[MackemX]

I can't believe that only 7 million licenses have been sold worldwide, weird . I'm guessing that figure doesn't include pre-installed systems in the figures though?

as you say, another suggestion I have always thought is the ability just to buy a key at a fair price without the need for frilly extras such as the cd/instructions/fancy packaging etc

an old post of mine in 2004 from this thread

https://forum.videohelp.com/viewtopic.php?t=249532

as I said I'm not against freeware, far from it. I'm just confused by the way some are anti commercial yet behind the scenes make money from people using their 'free' software one way or another

I do respect the guys who have coded completely free programs and even more the ones who don't even ask for donations. I've also nothing against them going to work for companies or even releasing their own software

I just don't agree with the 'all software should be free' movement as it's an impossibilty that all software 'could be free'. Out of the millions employed in the software industry how many would work for free?, not many I can tell you that . That would be the same as asking everyone to go to work tomorrow and donate all their wages to Baldrick. It would be nice but it just wouldn't happen. I did notice only 7 people have donated so far in this month of goodwill

what I am in support of is 'fair pricing' for software. I wonder how many 'warez' users of MicroSoft products would pay for a legitimate key if Windows XP was say $20-$30 etc. There was an example of a new game just released and they had over 20,000 illegal people playing online within a few weeks. Imagine how many were playing offline!

why doesn't Mr Bill gates or any other chief software man offer just the activation key without official support or even without the program download (most have the program already) for a fraction of the cost?

I mean what does it cost to send an email after processing an order automatically? I bet you could easily sell at least 1,000 legitimate serials for XP PRO on Ebay for $20-$30 within a week and be ever increasing once the word spread about.

the fat cats moan about piracy but it's their overinflated prices that only promote the warez usage

p.s, lol , I must get out more!

I highlighted the 20,000 playing online and just say it was $40 a shot so that makes $8,000,000. They then claim that this is what piracy costs the industry. That's complete crap as very few would acually pay $40 for the game as very few people could afford to pay for every game they want to play so some games wouldn't be bought in the first place

I hope your son also stamped on the new copy of 'Spies Like Us' so you get the message not to buy crap movies again

[Doramius]

Sorry I was using the term a year, but it's a month. I meant 1 month. My bad.

http://www.forbes.com/business/businesstech/newswire/2004/05/03/rtr1356086.html

This is from 2004, but the sales have not tapered very much. Of course these numbers make them look more like crooks than ever.

[whitejremiah]

heck, even figure that at 50.00 per disc (appearently over 210 million copies now) and they made their money back plus quite a chunk of profit....and NO windows disc sells for 50 brand new, they generally go for twice that.....so even if the OS did in fact cost 1 billion to develop (i somehow doubt that) they still made more than 1 billion in profit....thats just from xp alone.....and that's figuring everyone bought the home version......

[Doramius]

Like I said, even at $10, Discs are overpriced.

Check this out. Before DVD movies became real popular, cartridge games were out. They cost quite a bit more to make. You're making a game and selling it at $40-$50 a pop. Pretty hefty, but the cost is explainable in manufacturing process. New disc system comes along. You price the games along the same cost as cartridges, but maybe a little more for the better games due to the demand, with a greed factor in there. So you're selling disc games for $45-$55 a pop. They cost less to make, and your profits are extremely higher. Make a new system, again, the demand is high and you raise the prices of the new games $5 more. This system also plays DVD movies. VHS movies cost $15-$20 each at the time. You make the DVDs $20-$25 each. Better quality, sound, etc, etc, etc. It seems worth it. Cost to make a DVD vs VHS cassette is extremely low. Excellent profits. Same thing with Audio Cassettes Vs CDs. Look at any of these. There is no reason why the cost of these products should be so high, other than greed from demand. People are realizing what the actual worth is of these items. Of course they are going to find the cheapest way possible to get it.

If I have to pay $2.50 for gas because there is no alternative, I'm not gonna pay $20 for a movie, when I can get it somewhere else for $4.88. Go to Borders Books and look at the older titles and find out what the costs are. Find the same title at Wal-Mart and you'll fall on your a**. My wife saw a movie she wanted at Borders a few weeks back. It was selling for $16, but the same movie was at Wal-Mart for $7.50. WTF? I know that's a retail mark-up. Still, $7.50 for a DVD? While reasonable, it's cost is still about $2 more than I think they should offer the title for. But for the case & jacket artwork, I'm willing to get it for $7.50.

Heck, My collection would be 6 times larger if all the DVD were only $9.50 , which is only half the cost I paid for most of the DVDs I own. So I would be spending MORE if the cost was lower.

[richdvd]

7 Million is an actual number. Some of the licenses sold can encompass several computers, especially in business areas. It's not how many computers it's used on, it's how many licenses were sold. 7 Million worldwide

Where are you getting this number from?
Worldwide there has to be more than 7 million.

[BJ_M]

Dell alone sold 5 million PCs last year -- i got to believe XP was on most of those ..

[splash1955]

Case 1: Settled. A person was allegedly illegally downloading music using a pay peer-to-peer service. The defense was that the service provider did not specify clearly that all content obtained through its service was not free.

Case 2: Dismissed. Sony was seeding a file on eDonkey and filed suit against a man for downloading it. It was argued that Sony has distribution rights on its own software, therefore they were seen as "giving away" the copyrighted material. The counter argument was that the man did not know that the file holder also held distribution rights (which ultimately helped the plaintiff, rather than hurt him).

Can you clarify this: "illegally downloading music using a pay peer-to-peer service." And: "Sony was seeding a file on eDonkey and filed suit against a man for downloading it. "

Are you stating the original complaint stated "downloading?"

Please do follow up and post what is public on the actual filings. Looking through Lexis I have never seen any filing of this sort, including very recently.

[Supreme2k]

That's all I'm able to divulge. I had to be pretty vague to post even that.

BTW, it will be on Lexis. At least one of them.

EDIT: Fixed typo/tense.

[adam]

splash1955 this stuff wouldn't show up on Lexis for a while, and won't at all now that its sealed unless that changes.

If you are suprised that the suits were for downloading and not uploading, don't be. Suing for downloading is all the rage now after the RIAA v. Gonzales case was upheld on appeal late last year.

[adam]

Doramius I've posted the breakdown of $ for CD sales on this site many times, and its public information. Look it up and you will see that the recording studio actually makes less than a dollar profit for each CD sold. Production cost is the cheapest part of it. Its MARKETING, distribution, royalties, and retail markup that raise the price. As far as DVDs, consider that less than 3% of movies actually break even at the box office. It basically only happens with breakout low budget flicks and absolute flukes (Old School.) The vast majority of movies never make a profit ever and those that do, do so many years later due to profits from DVD sales and tv airings. They aren't price gouging, they are earning back what they put into the film. I honestly don't understand how anyone can say DVDs are overpriced. I can buy a new release DVD for less than it costs to feed my family at McDonalds. If I'm willing to wait a month after release I can buy two or three DVDs for this price. What other form of commercial entertainment is cheaper? (value versus cost).

[northcat_8]

Adam - and see that's what I don't get. The cost of the CD and the music itself is very cheap, Marketing is what eats up the big dollars. That's money spent before money earned. It's really more like Poker, they are spending money to market some product that people may or may not like...that's gambling.

AND!! I don't need a bunch of fancy advertising and marketing to sell me a product. Chit wrapped in fancy paper is still chit.

If what you say is true, and I don't doubt that is, then I do sympathize with the artists, but seems to me that they need to find better way to skin the cat.

and on the movie deal, I'm sorry...while I do like Jim Carrey in most of his movies...no way HE is worth 40 million per film. That's their own fault for over paying actors. But I will be honest, I don't go to the movie theatre and see new movies, I wait until they come out on DVD or HBO. I'm not paying $7.00 to get in and $3.25 for junior mints to see a 90 minute film. Back in my day movies use to be 2 hours, shorter movies, higher prices = Northcat staying home.

So what you are saying is, if someone could come up with a way to market, distribute and sell movies or music at a much lower price he could monopolize the market? Like for example if Cingular decided to give unlimited anytime minutes but charge everyone a flat fee of $50 per month...pretty soon Verizon and T-Mobile would be out of business.

[MackemX]

So what you are saying is, if someone could come up with a way to market, distribute and sell movies or music at a much lower price he could monopolize the market? Like for example if Cingular decided to give unlimited anytime minutes but charge everyone a flat fee of $50 per month...pretty soon Verizon and T-Mobile would be out of business.

I think most work places have them and the guy who used to sell copy CD's/DVD's at my old work place didn't need fancy advertising/packaging to sell copy CD's/DVD's at even £5. I'd dare say these days due to the cost of media/ink, it's probably far cheaper to get copies. His 'marketing costs' were probably pennies as he just used to have simple printed lists

many people are not fussed about quality of copies as it means they can have a far bigger collection or range of CD's/DVD's. Heck, you can even buy the top/latest 40 CD albums on a DVD from ebay for a few £'s. Therefore someone could buy that DVD and burn them to 40 CD's and create covers etc all for less than £10. The quality may be affected slightly but do most people really care? Now factor in the cost of the 40 original albums at say an average of £10 a disc and it's £400!. For £400 you could get 1600 albums from DVD's on ebay rather than just 40 originals

the other factor is resale value as CD's/DVD's depreciate very fast in value also. I've got 100's of CD's/DVD's I don't play any more stored in boxes in the loft as I don't want to have a huge collection on show. I'm only keeping them as I will probably sell them on Ebay in 20 years time when it's worth getting rid of them . In fact I recall when I was burgled 15 years ago and part of my CD collection was stolen. I was only compensated £1 per CD single and £3 per album for around 100 CD's I had on display even though I had all my receipts and my policy was old for new! They just told me the value of the CD's wasn't that much (those of you with large collections may want to check your policies as you may only be covered up to a certain amount )

even worse is when you buy an album and it's only got a few decent songs on it. Obviously you get the crap movies also so buying a DVD could prove pretty costly if it's crap unless you hire them all first which just adds to cost. Yet the industry wonders why so many people buy copies? One big factor is that copies can probably be thrown away if it's crap or scratched without batting an eyelid

imagine if a guy was legally allowed to sell copy CD's/DVD's in the main town centre with enough to give some back to the artists and cover production costs. They would still work out far cheaper than anywhere else and he would take quite a lot of business from the places that sell them at low prices

why doesn't the industry beat pirates at their own game and have 'unofficial' resellers to get in on the warez market?

Heck, My collection would be 6 times larger if all the DVD were only $9.50 , which is only half the cost I paid for most of the DVDs I own. So I would be spending MORE if the cost was lower.

as I've always said, for some reason people will be willing to spend more in smaller amounts rather than a few large amounts. That's why some people buy 5 copy CD's/DVD's rather than just 1 CD/DVD

@adam, you may well buy a DVD but isn't McDonalds just another overpriced ripoff? , even more so in the UK compared to the USA!. How much does it cost to produce a Big Mac meal yet look at the price they charge for it?

[Doramius]

Again, people. It's 7 million copies a month.

Its MARKETING, distribution, royalties, and retail markup that raise the price.

If you are spending that much on marketing, you are getting f**ked in the a** with a pool cue 3 ways never heard of. I've seen those figures. I agree, the production is low cost. The research is not, distribution, & royalties shouldn't be that much. However, the retail mark-up? I've worked on the wholesale side. The mark-up is about 20-40% of the cost. I encompassed these in what I was talking about. Even then, an $80 OS comes to show a benchmark table cost of $40-$50. at 7 million copies a month You will still be making a profit on $20 retail. A major profit too. DVDs & music too. Last time I looked at a percentage, unless you're a small time shop that has little competition, you couldn't do a full mark-up retail cost on a product, or someone else would offer a lower price. But the music CD still has a cost of $8.

I've looked at DVDs, CDs, Software, & Disc Games recently and have been seeing some funny numbers on the math that don't quite follow what publicly available reports are saying.

I do know that theaters don't make squat off a movie. They are in the snack buisiness. Camelot, Tower, FYE, & other music stores may have a mark-up, but the general percentage I usually see is only 10-15% (which is below the 20-40% usual mark-up). DVDs aren't much different from the music CDs, but the mark-up usually will be in the 20-40% mark-up range on the retail side. Software & disc games are the worst. I still cannot see the reason for the extreme cost especially at 7 million copies A MONTH. Click on the website I listed above.

[northcat_8]

Yea...what's up with marketing? You hear the song on the radio, or MTV, you find the name of the song, you go to your computer fire up Kazaa and search for it.

See...no need for advertisement

this is in no way intended to be advocating warez, please do not illegally download music or software, someone somewhere says it's wrong

[Doramius]

Marketing itself is another overpriced service. Sure it makes me laugh at the superbowl, but $2 Mill. for 30sec.? Unless you're making the bucks off the product regularly, don't try it. Budweiser makes tons of money, of course it can splurge. We're not buying a license. It's an actual product where the manufacturing cost warrants the price. The software itself, not the disc doesn't have the same manufacturing costs. Plus what's the retail mark-up on a bottle or can of beer? REALLY, how much more do stores & bars charge you. I know they charge a lot more than it costs them. People drink more beer than they watch movies. People may say it can't compare, but the example can follow identically except for royalties, & copyright. That's where I see major differences.

[Supreme2k]

Without playing that specific card, I can honestly say that those production figures are extremely incorrect, on the order of "Musicians lose 999 kajillion dollars each year to downloading" wrong.

From the blockbusters to the shot-with-my-handcam indie, they all see profit (even without DVD sales). Even the so-called bombs do it. If a musician is signed and broke, his label is screwing him (probably regardless), not the downloaders.

There must be a glitch in the matrix. I posted this already, and it was 5 posts up

[MackemX]

Without playing that specific card, I can honestly say that those production figures are extremely incorrect, on the order of "Musicians lose 999 kajillion dollars each year to downloading" wrong.

From the blockbusters to the shot-with-my-handcam indie, they all see profit (even without DVD sales). Even the so-called bombs do it. If a musician is signed and broke, his label is screwing him (probably regardless), not the downloaders

this movie was just on TV tonight and I often check imdb when I see a movie I don't know

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0252223/business

I don't think it will have recouped it's £25,000,000 in DVD sales/rentals . I can't imagine how it could have cost that much in the first place though as it was crap! :P