Who's Pirating Game of Thrones, and Why? 1004
TheGift73 writes "In a few hours a new episode of Game of Thrones will appear on BitTorrent, and a few days later between 3 and 4 million people will download this unofficial release. Statistics gathered by TorrentFreak reveal that more people are downloading the show compared to last year, when it came in as the second most downloaded TV-show of 2011. The number of weekly downloads worldwide is about equal to the estimated viewers on HBO in the U.S., but why? One of the prime reasons for the popularity among pirates is the international delay in airing. In Australia, for example, fans of the show have to wait a week before they can see the latest episode. So it's hardly a surprise that some people are turning to BitTorrent instead. And indeed, if we look at the top countries where Game of Thrones is downloaded, Australia comes out on top with 10.1% of all downloads (based on one episode). But delays are just part of the problem. The fact that the show is only available to those who pay for an HBO subscription doesn't help either."
I have HBO... (Score:5, Insightful)
... but I get busy doing something most Sunday nights or forget to watch it, so I usually start the download Monday morning and watch it after work.
It's not pirating if you're time shifting.
Re:I have HBO... (Score:5, Insightful)
... but I get busy doing something most Sunday nights or forget to watch it, so I usually start the download Monday morning and watch it after work.
It's not pirating if you're time shifting.
I have no interest in Game of Thrones, but I download a lot of other TV shows from a variety of sources.
-- Don't have to remember to program the DVR .mkv format with gives good quality with a fairly small file size
-- Commercials are already cut out
--
-- I can save them all to my hard drive and have hundreds of episodes available any time I want
-- Easily transfer to a thumb drive or other computer for maximum portability
Once again the entertainment industry is failing to provide people what they want and so people are taking matters into their own hands.
Re:I have HBO... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:I have HBO... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Only with certain cable/satellite companies. If, like me, you get your cable from a small, cheaper, regional supplier, then you're SOL.
Offer people what they want (Score:5, Insightful)
Stop using scarcity [wikipedia.org] with something that is an unlimited resource.
Stop forcing people to pay for packages. Stop forcing people to pay for networks. Stop using the limited countries mindset, those are artificial political boundaries.
Start making your shows available to everyone world-wide at the same second. Start asking for reasonable prices per episode, not a higher price than buying the DVD box set which you sell after a season is over.
Stop being dumbasses and start being smart. People want to see your shows, they just won't jump through your stupid, mindless 1950's hoops anymore.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Offer people what they want (Score:5, Interesting)
So basically they make a lot of money by being dicks. Some people respond to them being dicks by getting their show without paying them any money. But they're still better off for being dicks. So what's the problem? Everybody wins.
Time-Warner can whine about stealing and piracy and all that, but since they abandoned the moral high ground by being total dicks, no one should listen to them. What they really mean by all their pissing and moaning is they want the state to back up their right to be total dicks. That's a bad move; that just makes gives them more incentive to be total dicks.
Summary: Want to promote unbundling and shows seen sooner in foreign markets: pirate away. Want more bundling and longer delays for shows in foreign markets, DVD releases, etc -- respect copyright.
The Oatmeal (Score:5, Insightful)
The Oatmeal has already demonstrated the problem [theoatmeal.com] perfectly.
Re:The Oatmeal (Score:5, Insightful)
Bingo. I'd pay more for HBO Go than I do for all of Netflix, but I don't have the option unless I *also* pay for cable, and I want exactly nothing from cable except HBO. I don't want to pay $100+ for the DVDs because I doubt I'll re-watch the show.
I'd have to pay something like $60 a month (a guess--it might be higher) for one channel, which is ridiculous. $20/month for all of HBO Go? Hell yeah.
Re: (Score:3)
Define "stealing"
Legally, copyright infringment isnt stealing as its non-transitive.
If copying was stealing they wouldnt have needed seperate laws against copyright infringment would they...
Re:The Oatmeal (Score:5, Interesting)
If people download the show it tells HBO that people like their Content, but not their delivery method. Even if Time Warner isn't willing to change their delivery method, perhaps those Huge traffic numbers are telling other more responsive companies that there's a huge demand for content and they can make a bucketload of money if they can just figure out the sweet spot between on-demand viewing, price and availability.
Here in Australia, we have the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, which is Gov owned and paid for out of our taxes, something like 13c a day or something silly and small per person. They produce/license Huge amounts of content, and make the vast majority of it available online on iView, which lets me stream shows to any net-connected device (with probably some region-locking). So we collectively (as Australian citizens) pay for the content, it gets delivered to anyone with an Australian internet connection (with certain week/month availability after the airing date limits), and it's sweet as all get out. I know the BBC does something similar (which the ABC may well have copied, go them, and I wish I could buy access to the Beeb's content). It's technically possible to do all of this, NetFlix, whatever, just some managers/execs/whatever can't get with the low-cost/high-volume model.
Re:The Oatmeal (Score:5, Insightful)
Since when does morality have anything to do with it? It's simply business. Stop believing that we the people are supposed to follow some high and lofty moral compass while corporations are free to rape and pillage at will. Bullshit. When THEY treat us with dignity, respect, honestly, and consideration THEN and ONLY THEN can they demand to be treated the same.
All they care about is money. Whatever system earns them the most money is the system they will continue to use. They don't care if you can't afford cable and HBO. They don't care if you have to wait a week, a month, or a year to see their content. Cause they don't give a shit about you. They only care about THE MONEY. There is no right. There is no wrong. There is only PROFIT.
So why the FUCK should I care about them when they've made it abundantly clear they don't give a shit about me?
While you can continue to insist that it's wrong to consume content without paying for it the rest of us will continue to tell you we don't give a fuck. Just like HBO doesn't give a fuck if I want to watch their show but refuse to pay over $100 a month for it. Whatever I need to do to save the most money possible is what I'm going to do. Just like how HBO is going to do whatever earns them the most profits. So in the end both HBO and I are essentially doing the same thing -- looking out for #1 and not giving a rat's ass about the other. I learned it all from our corporate overlords. God Bless uh'Murica!!!
The Internet Sucks outside the US (Score:5, Interesting)
It is not the itnernet which sucks outside the US (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh please (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Oh please (Score:4, Funny)
Please don't...
I prefer to kill my own puppies, thanks.
Not only that but... (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
And thats after we have paid 30% more for the TV, DVD player and whatever other hardware we buy.
Several reasons (Score:5, Informative)
In my country the delay would probably be around a year plus there's a good chance that we'd have to watch a poorly dubbed German version instead of the original English thus there's really no other option except piracy.
Personally (Score:3)
A week? Try a year! (Score:5, Insightful)
Aussies have to wait a week to see a new show? Well, be glad you're not in dubbed Europe. You may rest assured that you will wait at the very least a YEAR until you get to see a show. That's because next to negotiations, you have to wait until they're done dubbing the show... and dubbing it BADLY. There are a few webpages dedicated to translation bloopers and joke explanations so you finally have a chance to even fathom just WHAT the authors wrote when (not if) you just can't figure out what the fuck's going on.
It's also "only" a year, mind you, if, and only if, a network here decides to pick up the show. In other words, it's one year from the moment they actually WANT to show it. That is not necessarily a year after it's broadcast in its country of origin.
And now think about this: You have internet access, and you use it regularly. There is a show out there that you watch religiously and it depends on suspense and NOT knowing what's going on next week. Think LOST, or worse, Bab5. Now imagine you're watching the first season of Bab5 while everyone on the 'net is discussing the outcome of the Vorlon/Shadow war.
Can you see why people download shows?
Not available in P.R. China (Score:5, Interesting)
It is not available in P.R. China through any authorized channel. Even if it were, it would be edited to nothing. The real odd thing to me is that it has recently been featured in the national student newspaper (21'st Century) in a two page spread . The article was mostly an attempt to explain the program and to help students understand the names.
What I found interesting was that there was a full two page article on a program that is not even officially available and contains a significant amount of material that would be censored even if it were available. All that being said, it is not popular with the Chinese students that I know. The plot is too complicated for the male students and it is too violent, and overtly sexual, for the female students. However, it seems to be popular with many of the westerners here; further, considering that the article was written, I expect it is popular with some Chinese, just not here.
I'm format shifting (Score:5, Funny)
I already own the paper version. I just download it so I have a copy that plays on my other devices.
HBO and iTunes and a story of not pirating (Score:4, Insightful)
My wife and I didn't pirate it, but did finally purchase the entire first season when it appeared on iTunes. This gave us good quality, and commercial free. For a hell of a lot less money than cable and HBO runs in our area. But, now here's of course why so many pirate instead.... we had to wait over a year to -PAY- HBO for the show. If we'd been in any rush to see it (Which the Networks seem to be desperate to have people rush to see their content, given how hard they try to get people to have cable to see it the day it airs) we would have had no choice except to pirate it. Now for us, we weren't in a rush we've got plenty of other entertainment so their show is welcome to sit on the back burner until they make it available. Except here's the thing, now that season 2 is on we're again waiting... which is no problem for us, but the obvious thing would be for HBO to make season 2 episodes available immediately after airing on iTunes. If they did, we'd again be paying for it already! Instead I guess we have to wait until the season 2 dvd's are available... which means that we may not purchase at all if by that time we've found something else to watch or do.
The moral of the story: If you want people to pay for it, then SELL it to them. If you drag it out and keep telling people they can't buy, then yeah they're going to either steal it, or just ignore you.
Here is the answer (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't know this show and am not interested in viewing it. However I can think of two models that will work.
MODEL I:
Copy iTunes or Mubi.
But it probably will not deliver enough viewers to fund the series by itself.
So, on to...
MODEL II:
1. Ideally create one global launch date for all languages/regions and stick to it. This will provide maximum social networking and minimal spoilers. This would require sales to other markets starting after the pilot is made but before a whole season has been created. In other words, a new global sales strategy. So talk to a global ad agency. The other option is to make one global launch date per language, but you may get pirate versions I would imagine.
2. Insert reasonable number of advertisements into market-specific versions, e.g. EN-US, EN-UK, EN-AU, etc.
3a. If you can just provide speedy downloads from your site and akamai then do it. But that is going to be awfully expensive.. unless you have an amazing contract with ISPs all over the world already.
3b. Instead, create a bittorrent for each format, with many seeders of the appropriate version within each region's territory. This way Australians can download the Australian version with Australian advertisements fastest due to having many seeds provisioned within its continental LAN. A few college kids could do this, but if you ask the ad agency to do it, they will charge you the same as or slightly less than the cost if you had hired akamai.
Video quality should be 720p or higher. The easier the delivery is made, the less important and moralistic will any other pirate versions (undoubtedly somebody will edit out ads and make an uninterrupted version. Maybe the honest version will only have ads at beginning end and same points as TV version, so people may still prefer it and give back to the creators.)
4. Create websites and social networking to advertise and link it all up. Word of mouth / magazine / twitter all linking there. Websites point to the torrents. Also sell via app stores, amazon, etc. Try to get fans to sign up. They can read blogs, teasers, special cilps on the website, post in forums, ask questions and maybe even help guide the series. Imagine if Joss Whedon was doing this.
5. Offer extra things to purchase, maybe Amazon wants to do a special product deal.
6. Offer DVD, Blu-Ray box sets and 1080p files as standalones or full season download via bittorrent or app stores. These products have no advertisements and will include special extras like making of clips, interviews with director and actors, printable pamphlets, maybe desktop wallpapers, 3d printable models, suscriptions to follow the different actors, blogs by the fashion designers or whatever. Pricing of the collections should however be the same price or cheaper than the current box sets if buying the digital version since no physical distribution is then necessary.
7. $$$
Please let me pay for good TV! (Score:4, Insightful)
I want to pay for Game of Thrones. I'm proud to pay for great TV, music, books, and news.
HBO won't let me. I'm standing here with dollars in my fist yelling "TAKE MY MONEY", but they won't do it, because they insist on the ludicrous, outdated concept of "subscription" and "scheduled programming".
Re:A week? (Score:5, Insightful)
Well you have to wait a week AND have cable television which isn't anywhere near as ubiqutous as it is elsewhere in the world...
Re:A week? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:A week? (Score:5, Informative)
Fuck that. I pirate Game of Thrones, and Fringe and buy the box sets when they come out.
Re:A week? (Score:5, Insightful)
It isn't the model the cable company wants you to follow, but I could see how it would be tempting. Presumably the extra $30/month isn't just for those two shows. The problem is the package system which forces you to buy $30/month of stuff when you really just want a small portion of what that buys.
Given this, it would be easier for somebody to justify 'piracy'. He is getting the content and the author/creator is being compensated (note that he claimed that he purchases the box sets when they come out). In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the producer of the content actually receives more compensation from a DVD box set purchase than from cable subscription payments because the cable subscription payments would be distributed across all the content which presumably isn't the case when buying specific box sets.
Re:A week? (Score:5, Insightful)
There's a difference between having an interest in a free show and feeling the need to buy $100 worth of cable to see it.
Re:A week? (Score:5, Insightful)
$100?
I live in Canada. I bought Dance with Dragons the day it came out from my local bookstore. (It helped that I was taking several cross-Canada trips for work a week after it came out.) I bought every book and I've told dozens of people about the series, probably making Martin enough to buy lunch, maybe dessert afterwards.
If I would like to upgrade my service to watch Game of Thrones, I would have to do the following:
1. Buy an HD-DVR system from my oligarchy cable / ISP / phone provider ($600)
2. Upgrade to cable. ($100 a month)
3. Upgrade to HD service ($50 a month)
4. Upgrade to some package that includes HBO ($50 a month)
And then I'd have to make certain that I was home during that time. Although I would have spent $600 on the HD PVR in step 1, they are so buggy and flakey that they tend to lose settings and recorded shows. So all told, I would have to spend close to one thousand dollars to watch Game of Thrones in the off chance that I'm home, my wife is home, the kids are in bed, the DVR doesn't pixelate out, they don't have decryption problems (happened all the time during the Olympics), AND they don't lose all my settings so I could actually watch the HBO that I've spent a grand on.
Option 2 is not watch the show. I'd really rather watch it. My wife likes the show as well.
Option 3 is wait a year for the DVD release. Riiiight.
Option 4 is direct electronic import from Sweden. Like Colt 45, it works every time.
Re:A week? (Score:5, Insightful)
Option 3 is wait a year for the DVD release.
I do this. Is this really impossible for most Slashdotters? A year is nothing, really. I've waited longer than that for a game to come down to the price I care to pay. I also don't have to spend $400 every so often for the latest graphics cards.
Re:A week? (Score:5, Insightful)
a year - by which time you've already heard the spoilers...
if you want to watch pop culture, you want to watch it at the time it is actually popular and people are discussing it
Re:A week? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm going to nominate you as a Gold Star Consumer. There's a $50 fee for entering your name for this wonderful honor, but if you win, you receive a $2-off coupon for an iPad 3 and the right to stand in line for 16 hours just for the chance to pay full price for an iPad 4, which will be so awesome it will change peoples' lives. Credit card only, please, and a $50/mo unlimited 2gig data subscription is required.
Plus, your picture goes on the Wall of Gold Star Consumers for posterity. You will be a role model for hundreds of millions.
I know it may seem like a small thing to some people that you're willing to "wait a year" to pay $159.99 for the boxed Blu-Ray set of a movie that everybody else has seen and is halfway through the next season, but it takes a certain kind of person to show your kind of willingness to serve.
But you know what? The Blu-Ray boxed set you waited so obediently for will still have DRM and an FBI warning that you will not be able to fast foward through and if you try to rip a copy to put on your iPad3 you are classified as a terrorist, because despite the fact that you have yielded to every single one of their demands, and bragged about it on Slashdot for all the world to see, making you a paragon of consumer values, the corporations behind Game of Thrones still hate you.
Life just ain't fair sometimes.
And you know what? They don't love you because they don't have to. You are the consumer equivalent of the jilted boyfriend who writes poems in floral-scented ink and saves each returned envelope in a special shoebox decorated with hearts even though your beloved is heels-up on the basement of a biker bar. Wouldn't it be great if desperation made you more attractive? Yes, that's why those corporations treat you like a love-struck trick. Because they know you'll take it.
Re:A week? (Score:5, Insightful)
Hardship has nothing to do with it. The reality is that HBO (and most other media creators) are clinging to an outdated business model, and the longer they cling to it, the more people will pirate their shows. I'm not saying it's legal, or even morally right, but it's reality. And really, since when has what's morally right ever influenced the corporations more than the all-mighty dollar? There is a certain irony in watching as all these people download Game of Thrones instead of paying for it simply because they CAN'T pay for it yet, and even if they did, they'd still have to deal with the annoying things like DRM and FBI warnings, etc. It's not one single thing that drives people to download, it's the sum total.
Eventually the business model will change, as the dinosaurs in charge retire or die off, and the next generation takes control of the process. I can't predict what that will be with any accuracy; if I could, I'd be a millionaire, I suppose. But one thing is certain; the current way they're going about it is completely useless. And folks like yourself that focus on the "right" way to do things ("right" as defined by those corps, of course) are missing the forest for the trees.
Remember..... perception of reality, IS reality.
Re:A week? (Score:4, Interesting)
Keep it up HBO!
Re:A week? (Score:5, Insightful)
1. It's a stupid warning, when I download something like that I don't get it anyway
2. The FBI doesn't have jurisdiction in the Netherlands
3. If I bought it, then I don't need any more warning that copying it is frowned upon
So the least they could do is make it skippable.
Re:A week? (Score:5, Informative)
And is it really such a horrible hardship to go to the bathroom during the FBI warning?
Is it really so unbelievable to you that people don't feel they should have to sit through that bullshit if they actually paid for the fucking product like they're supposed to? Unskippable commercials and previews, ridiculously long animated menus...I click my pirated file and the episode starts, immediately.
My pirated copies of the first season of Game of Thrones don't have any of that bullshit on them, they're in a file format and in a codec that is recognized on every device I have, and will play on literally any device I have without a bunch of stupid bullshit DRM standing in the way. They are literally a superior product in every single way.
Re:A week? (Score:5, Insightful)
Netflix will not be getting Game of Thrones or any other HBO series. In the future you will be lucky to see anything on Netflix that is not already being shown on TBS three times a night. The MPAA and studios essentially consider streaming video to be piracy lite.
Re:A week? (Score:5, Interesting)
There's a difference between waiting a year or longer for a released DVD (game in your example) to come down in price, and waiting a year (or more) for it to be released at full price, and start that year or more discounting process.
When you're waiting on, for just one example, someone who bought the game at full price to put it up for sale used, any time involved will depend on what are genuinely free market factors (such as how many other people evaluate that product as worth more than you do and snap up used copies before the average price gets down to your amount "X"). But waiting on the initial release itself seems to have little or no correlation with such market factors.
I'm a bit of a fan of Fringe. I'm waiting on the DVD sets for season 4 and eventually 5, and have bought all the others. I'm rather glad that Fringe is getting that 5th season, a thing which was far from certain. However, I have no way of knowing if my choosing to buy seasons 1, 2, and 3 at full price when they came out had any effect at all on whether Fox decided to go with the 5th season. That's literally an anti free-market situation. Good old Adam Smith's very definition of what a free market is says that parity of information for all parties is what improves market efficiency and results in the greatest good for the greatest number. Fox chose to deliberately not give out information that would help fans know if they were encouraging the show to continue if they bought the DVD sets new rather than buying used or downloading them. So, add to the physical price, and to various other prices imposed such as region encoding, that I don't know if buying at full price and before a certain date will actually encourage the creators to keep the show on the air, or have no affect at all.
Now Fox treated the fans of Fringe with considerable respect in the end - much better than in several past cases such as Babylon 5. For that matter, in the end, the situation for Fringe has involved more mutual respect for various parties than we've seen for literally hundreds of other shows with mediocre to poor ratings. But that means for the more typical show, any problems the fans have in being able to plan for DVD releases and similar are going to be much greater. That's an additional price for waiting on legitimate channels to play catchup. That says the cost of doing things by the book isn't just a year (or whatever), but a year and uncertainty penalties about whether the wait will eventually terminate, and when.
Re:A week? (Score:5, Insightful)
You can't create a hype about something and expect those hung by it to wait a year or more. It's simply against the nature of what you are trying to do with your marketing campaign.
Re:A week? (Score:5, Insightful)
If I am going to watch it in a week anyway on Free-to-Air TV and time-shift the commercials out, why is it wrong to download it a and watch it a week earlier?
We are Australian - our economy is doing just fine thanks to us exporting dirt to china, unlike America's economy which relies on exporting crap (ie. Movies, TV and reality drama) to the rest of the western world.
Sorry if I don't believe that bittorrenting supports terrorism or is un-patriotic.
Re:A week? (Score:5, Funny)
We are Australian - our economy is doing just fine thanks to us exporting dirt to china, unlike America's economy which relies on exporting crap (ie. Movies, TV and reality drama) to the rest of the western world.
Because fuckers like you won't pay for our culture. ;)
Re:A week? (Score:4, Funny)
Because fuckers like you won't pay for our culture. ;)
What's the difference between Americans and yoghurt? If you leave yoghurt alone for 200 years it will grow a culture.
Re:Yes, you can do that. (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure, it's illegal, but most people simply don't consider it wrong. No amount of propaganda will change this.
Re:Yes, you can do that. (Score:5, Insightful)
Replying to do erroneous moderation (was aiming for insightful, whacked redundant instead).
The difference between "illegal" and "right and wrong" are two very different things; the further they diverge in a given society, the more dysfunctional that society appears to the broad brush of history.
Re:Yes, you can do that. (Score:5, Informative)
legality will differ by country. In the netherlands this is perfectly legal.
Re:Yes, you can do that. (Score:4, Interesting)
Frankly, I'd rather have the on-demand stuff over the internet without all sorts of strings attached. I'll happily pay to for on-demand HBO if I can watch it from within XBMC without having to install windows. Untill that happens Sabnzbd + XBMC is simply far more convenient then any legal option.
Re:Yes, you can do that. (Score:4, Insightful)
Your option, though, is illegal.
So was consensual oral sex between married couples [wikipedia.org] in Florida, Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi, Utah, Virginia (and possibly other states) until as recently as 2003.
Please forgive us for being critical of laws coming from a nation that bills itself as "the land of the free" yet still criminalized going down on your spouse in the 21st century CE.
Re:A week? (Score:5, Informative)
I'm not saying that Cable/Satellite providers in Canada don't rip you off, but what you say just isn't true:
You don't need an HD-DVR. You just need any old cable/satellite box. Bell's site completely sucks and I wasn't able to price anything out, but with Rogers you can get basic digital cable ($34.49/month), rent a receiver box ($4.56/month) and get the TMN and MPIX package ($20.95/month which includes HBO) for a total of $60/month plus fees (which admittedly always makes me cringe, but I don't know what they actually come to).
I do believe that Cable/Satellite is over priced and only get it because other household members want it, you greatly exaggerate the situation and only make yourself look silly.
Re:A week? (Score:5, Interesting)
Let me do the math for my own little facet of the gem here.
I generally like a few shows at once. I am currently interested in Big Bang Theory, Game of Thrones, Fringe, Walking Dead and Falling Skies.
As these are shows that are aired at different season times, I will calculate the costs for a year of viewing.
To get access to both BBT and GOT, it costs me around $90 per month [foxtel.com.au]. Fringe WAS aired on Free to Air, although it was at a 10:30pm timeslot. Walking Dead was finally aired around a year and a half after the US release. Fox8 is airing Falling Skies season 2 "fast tracking" it to Australia just three days after an episode airs in the US.
So, for a mere $1080 per year, I do get access to these shows, if I watch them in their timeslots and most with commercials. Now, lets say that I don't want to time my life to these shows, I can get a Foxtel IQ and record these shows, it costs me $10 per month. That's now $1,200. Now, I do understand that for my money I get a LOT of other channels and shows. But where my frustration comes in is that I am simply not interested in them. Would I watch some of them if I had them? Sure. But that's no different to saying "Would I watch a DVD if I had it?" Yeah, probably, but would I buy it if I saw it at the store? Probably not.
I simply can't justify spending that sort of money for the few shows that I am interested in, furthermore, I am offended that the majority of the money I spend would go to subsidizing all the shit programming that is aired on all these other channels. I don't mind voting for shows with my wallet, but I feel violated knowing that a portion of my monthly fee is going to Jersey Shore, American Pickers or any other horrific mind throttling series.
Re:A week? (Score:5, Insightful)
No, that's taking the argument I made right out of context. Lets say you want to get sandwich for lunch from a shop. However, the only cafe around won't sell you a sandwich unless it is part of a "lunchtime fixed menu". However, that menu includes breakfast, dinner, a three course dessert, alcoholic bevages and a courtesy waiter who spoons it into your mouth. That Fixed Menu also costs four hundred dollars. You would go somewhere else to get lunch.
If my $1,200 per year covers 262,800 hours of programming (30 channels, by twenty four hours, by three hundred and sixty five days - and there are in fact many more channels that I would have to buy to get access to these few shows I like) and I am only really interested in watching a hundred hours, then I am paying 99.9996% of my money to shows that I think the world would be better off without. Using that math, Foxtel also thinks that my 100 hours of shows that I am actually interested in are worth $0.45 (100 hours divided by 262,800 hours multiplied by my $1,200 cost).
I really wonder how many shows would be produced if people could pay for individual series on the equivalent of Pay Per View, but at a more reasonable price.
Surprise, an inept car analogy! (Score:5, Insightful)
Thank you for the excellent example of the logical fallacy known as a False Analogy [skepdic.com].
A more fitting analogy would be wanting to order a steak, but instead only having the option of buying an all day catered dinner, during which the time slot for getting served a steak falls within a one hour window. You still have to pay for each item served, regardless of whether you ordered it, ate it, or even attended the serving. If you pay for the upgraded DVR package, you will be given 3 take-home containers. If you would be willing to enter into a contract to do this every day, then I'm sure broadcast television pricing makes perfect sense to you.
All analogies, including mine, have faults. The thing is, no analogy is needed for what OP said. He explained the position very well without using any. Your bumbling, unrelated car analogy does nothing to detract from his point.
Re:A week? (Score:4, Insightful)
Where I live, it's legal to borrow your friend's car if they think it's okay. They also have cars that you can hire on a pay-only-for-what-you-use basis. They even have ones where someone will drive it for you.
I can only imagine what it's like to live in a place where cars are sold by the manufacturer on the condition that they're not resold, hired out or lent. I feel bad for you, dude.
Re:A week? (Score:5, Insightful)
>I really wonder how many shows would be produced if people could pay for individual series on the equivalent of Pay Per View, but at a more reasonable price.
Good question. A lot of people also wonder why they always cancel the good shows [google.com].
Some observations:
1. The "good shows" are the ones that are truly interesting and different. They're not the dime-a-dozen reality shows or sitcom set in an apartment building.
2. Because of #1, they gain a passionate following.
3. But the networks play around with the shows, moving them from slot to slot. People don't know when they're on, they miss them, ratings go down.
4. They're canceled.
By contrast, if people were paying $1 directly for a show, that'd be, say $2 mil or so per episode, enough to produce most shows. Maybe $2 for a show with EFX.
Re:A week? (Score:5, Insightful)
I really wonder how many shows would be produced if people could pay for individual series on the equivalent of Pay Per View, but at a more reasonable price.
Extremely few. Most US broadcast or cable TV networks create 5-20 new programs a year. Some will be hits (maybe), most will be flops. The whole reason they can afford to produce all these shows is that they already know (roughly) how much money they're going to make from advertisers and/or cable subscriptions. Therefore, they have a budget for creating new shows and can take some risks on shows that may or may not pan out, knowing that overall the network will still make money. Every single program will still earn some revenue, even if nobody watches it, because they are guaranteed revenues from the cable/satellite TV providers.
If every single show was pay-to-watch, some shows might now generate absolutely no revenue. The hits would still be hits, but the network couldn't predict whether it was going to have any money to pay employees or produce new shows, since their revenue could fluctuate every week with the quality of each individual show and episode. Networks would be financially disincentivized to take any chances whatsoever, knowing that every show would need to be as close to a "sure thing" as possible - so get ready for reality TV, all the time.
The reason that PPV shows are produced today is precisely due to the above - the creators know from past experience that people will pay $70 for a boxing match, or $50 for a wrestling match or whatever they cost. If shows were all PPV, expect nothing but "sure things" to be produced.
Re:A week? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:A week? (Score:4, Insightful)
How about Option 5, known as the "Completely Legal and Not Full of Bullshit Rationalization" option? It goes a little something like this:
Game of Thrones, Season 1:
1. Open iTunes. or Amazon VOD service.
2. Pay $38.99 US ($43.99 on the Canadian version; 28.99 for the std def version on the Australian itunes store) for the entire Season 1 Game of Thrones in "HD".
3. Download series.
4. Watch whenever the fuck I want, as many fucking times as I want.
5. Know that I'm not breaking the law;
6. Know that I'm supporting a show I enjoy and appreciate;
7. Know that by providing a financial reward, the likelihood of other shows like this that I enjoy and appreciate will also be made in the future;
Game of Thrones Season 2:
1. Open iTunes. or Amazon VOD service.
2. Pay $28.99 for std def season pass;
3. Episodes 1-6; (Episode 8 was broadcast tonight in the US);
4. Watch whenever the fuck I want, as many fucking times as I want;
5. Know that I'm not breaking the law;
6. Know that I'm support a show I enjoy and appreciate;
7. Know that by providing a financial reward, the likelihood of other shows like this that I enjoy and appreciate will also be made in the future;
8. OPTIONALLY: skip this, wait for HD version to come out;
No HBO subscription, no cable subscription, just a computer, a credit card, and an iTunes or Amazon account. You're, at worst, 2 weeks "behind" the most recent broadcast. Not a big deal, because you've likely already read the fucking books and know what's gonna happen, so it's not like your coworkers are going to ruin some amazing magnificent surprise by telling you "Jaime fucked Cersei. Oh, and Theon was a complete dick."
Your excuses, they ring hollow.
Re:A week? (Score:5, Informative)
Regional licensing. Don't know about the parent but I live in a country that only recently (last six months) got movies in the iTunes store. TV shows? Hah! We've been begging for that for ages. Foreign TV networks won't let us watch shows via their websites ("This content is not available in your region at this time") and local TV channels clearly don't have the right licensing agreements to stream foreign shows (even more infuriating when they list all shows they air on their website but only a handful have the little "stream this show now" icon next to it).
At this point I've just given up. I don't even own a TV anymore, just a 1080p projector and my computer. I use a couple of RSS feeds from private torrent trackers to download the few shows I want to watch whenever they become available (normally within hours of airing in their country of origin). My only problem these days is that I catch myself talking about stuff that happens on the shows weeks or sometimes months before my friends (since they watch the "imported" broadcast on TV).
Re:A week? (Score:4, Insightful)
Game of Thrones, Season 1 (UK experience):
1. Open iTunes. (no Amazon VOD service over here)
2. Search for 'Game of Thrones'.
3. Filter out podcasts.
4. Discover it's not available.
5. Buy the Blu-Ray or DVD instead (which only recently came out, but OK).
6. Realise that it's technically illegal to copy them onto a mobile device.
7. Know that I'm being screwed over 'because they can', and start making justifications for an impending download.
Season 2:
1. Not available online, or in any stores.
2. Ah, it's on Sky Atlantic (their rebranded HBO channel) only one week behind the US.
3. But that channel is not available on cable, only on satellite.
4. Decide I don't want to move my phone, internet just to get one channel.
5. See step 7 above.
Hat tip to the Oatmeal.
Back to Pirate Bay for me (Score:5, Insightful)
1. Excitedly rush to iTunes to buy Game of Thrones Season 2 - I didn't know I could buy it!
2. Discover AC is a lying, prick.
3. Return to paying criminals who actually know how to provide a service
I would love to be able to vote with my wallet. I see that's not possible through legal means, at least where I live. I hereby declare my downloads to represent a lost sale caused entirely by being unable to give money for the product I want.
Re:A week? (Score:5, Insightful)
That week is critical to not seeing spoilers online, we live in an international community, forums inhabited by users all around the world, if half of them can't see the episode for a week+ that doesn't work.
Re:A week? (Score:4, Informative)
That week is critical to not seeing spoilers online, we live in an international community, forums inhabited by users all around the world, if half of them can't see the episode for a week+ that doesn't work.
Pretty sure that TV series is based on books which have been available for years already. So I don't know how one week more would make a difference.
Re:A week? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:A week? (Score:5, Funny)
Plus, although I haven't a gay bone in my body
Would you like one?
Re:A week? (Score:5, Insightful)
Game of Thrones has dialogue that's almost exactly the same as the books; most scenes are directly from the books, and just changed a bit because of the change of medium.
That was kind of true in season 1 but is very much not the case in season 2.
For instance, last week's episode had 7 major storylines; of those, 5 are pretty much created entirely for the show with little resemblance to exact scenes from the books. 1 of them (Sansa/Cersei/Hound period scenes in King's Landing) is very close to the book, and 1 of them (Theon chasing Bran and Rickon) is parallel to book scenes but rewritten because some of the major characters don't exist on the show. The show's doing a remarkable job of staying relatively true to the overarching story without really following exact scenes all that closely in season 2.
Breakdown:
Theon chasing Bran and Rickon: These scenes are altered greatly from the books because major characters are omitted. The escape is led by Meera and Jojen Reed in the books and they drive all the conversation about Bran's dreams. They don't exist at all in the TV show.
Jon Snow/Ygritte: The whole "wandering alone with Ygritte in the cold" storyline is the show's fabrication, it never happens in the books (there, Jon frees Ygritte and remains with the rangers until they're captured by Rattleshirt).
Arya/Tywin: These scenes are fabricated entirely for the show, as Arya never serves Tywin in the books. They're awesome but brand new dialog.
Sansa/Cersei: These scenes are pretty close to the book.
Daenerys in Qarth: These scenes are completely fabricated for the show; the whole dragons-getting-stolen plot doesn't exist in the book.
Rob Stark: These scenes are completely fabricated for the show; the books never show the western campaign at all and never have Rob-POV chapters. The character of Talisa seems maybe based on Jayne Westerling, but it's tough to know for sure because we never see Jeyne until after a major SPOILER event happens in the books. Catelyn is certainly not out west in the books, and her book version would never let things develop between Robb and Talisa.
Jaime Lannister: Again fabricated completely for the show, he never has any escape sequence like this in the books (he does have an escape sequence but it's nothing like this and certainly doesn't have nearly identical dialog).
Re:A week? (Score:5, Insightful)
I call BS. I devote a large part of my free to movies, tv, and internet media. Even so, I was able to go through the entire first year of Game of Thrones without watching it or getting spoilers. Most people will go out of their way to avoid giving away spoilers with a degree of fanaticism rarely seen anywhere else.
No, people torrent Game of Thrones because they can. Maybe this particular example is a little easier to justify because of the absurd notion of actually buying cable + HBO, but everything else is available to torrent as well. Even over-the-air shows, which are essentially free, are torrented because it only takes 1 person in a billion who is willing to capture it and edit out the advertising for the rest of us.
The only business model that can survive into the future is one that clearly connects money raised with future content (think kickstarter, but with mainstream professionals instead of super-niche pipe dreams). If Game of Thrones announced tomorrow they were not making another season until it was paid for, my $20 would be in their paypal account within the hour. They could charge as the market will bear, but only the stuff that people actually want could get made.
So what defines a "life" anyway? (Score:5, Insightful)
I know you're just trolling, but seriously? I can say "It's just a stupid ..." about practically anything people enjoy watching or participating in. (I'm often tempted to say it about major league sporting events, myself. It's just a bunch of adults playing a game originally designed for kids, kicking a ball around, and getting paid huge salaries for it. How stupid! Can't people get a life?!")
Others would surely tell all of us to get a life, because we're sitting around reading stories on Slashdot.
I'm not really a TV watcher myself, but I've seen a few episodes of Fringe, and thought they were pretty interesting. I started downloading more episodes as I was able to get ahold of decent copies of them. I haven't really had the time to watch more of them, but it's nice knowing I have them on my hard drive, so I can eventually get around to checking them out if and when the opportunity arises.
The point I guess I'm trying to make is -- people can't constantly be in "go, go, go" mode, trying to actively do or achieve things. We all need downtime too, and I'm not just talking about sleep. Entertainment is crucial to a fulfilled life, and it takes many different forms. Not everyone likes the same things, but that's why there are so many options around. I find that half the time, I'd rather play a video game than watch a TV show -- but others get *nothing* out of gaming. So someone following these shows (and probably discussing them with friends too) would certainly be motivated to get new episodes in a timely manner.
Re:A week? (Score:4, Funny)
Which explains what you're doing here, right?
Re:A week? (Score:5, Insightful)
The week delay wouldn't matter if everyone weren't connected via instant communication. Fans discuss shows online, so those that get it first start spilling spoilers all over the place. It's easier for many to go offline for a few hours and get the download, than it is to stay offline for a week (or months in the case of some shows). The regional delay in distribution is killing TV/Cable networks, yet they insist on holding on to the antiquated distribution methodology.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
A serious problem that cannot be sorted by the "antiquated methodology" is that the US primetime slot is far removed from the Australian and European primetime slot. A network is not to going to the air the episode when HBO do, just to get it "live". It would be on at 10:30am over here if they did.
Re: (Score:3)
Which is when the see it if they pirate it, so it appears to work for some folks. Also, they have these things called DVRs now.
Re:A week? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:A week? (Score:5, Insightful)
Ease of Use.
Arguing about it being on at a different local time live is just pedantic. You're right the 12 hours makes no difference.
If they are already paying for a cable subscription and have DVR, the path of least resistance dictates that they would just hit the record button instead of going online and messing around, and then trying to get it on their big screen.
That's what the studios just don't get. Make the path of least resistance be in their favor, even if it theoretically results in slightly less revenue (which I don't believe).
Additionally, what is beyond stupid, is having a one week delay and then claiming that paying customers who pirate the show a week early are actually causing any declines in revenue. They paid for the product, just went out and got a copy a week early.
When that logic does not apply because the customer is not paying them for anything like a cable subscription, and they are not providing a method of purchase in that demographic, it is ludicrous to complain about any piracy from that demographic and that it affects revenue that logically cannot exist.
Re:What happened to self-control? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What happened to self-control? (Score:5, Insightful)
Thus they have a very legitimate complaint.
Re:What happened to self-control? (Score:5, Insightful)
You can get books 1-4 as a set for $20 right now ($10 second hand on ebay).
Yes, and I can buy a set of dominoes for 50c from a garage sale and throw them at cats if want as well. Doesn't mean I want to.
Re:What happened to self-control? (Score:4, Insightful)
.. and why would you want to discuss the show with Americans anyway?
Good question. Why don't you post it on slashdot.org.au and find out?
Re:A week? (Score:5, Funny)
"fans of the show have to wait a week before they can see the latest episode. So it's hardly a surprise that some people are turning to BitTorrent instead"
I live in Australia as well, and it's intolerable that we have to wait for our entertainment. I mean, those lazy American's are always a few days more entertained than we are!
Some fool tried to tell me that entertainment wasn't measured by the latency between a show airing and my viewing of it - how ridiculous!?!!? What a notion?
And don't get me started on the olympics - I'm considering suing the IOC everytime the Olympics are held abroad. I, and countless others Aussies, will have to wait til the evening to get any live action, whilst the English can watch it in the morning and afternoon as it happens. Outrageous!
sincerely, Balzi
Re: (Score:3)
And don't get me started on the olympics - I'm considering suing the IOC everytime the Olympics are held abroad. I, and countless others Aussies, will have to wait til the evening to get any live action, whilst the English can watch it in the morning and afternoon as it happens. Outrageous!
sincerely, Balzi
Please do, you're welcome to the £11 Billion boondoggle of corporate sponsorship that is the Olympic games. The chances are that they will benefit you just as much as me anyway, despite my living in the UK. (I'm in the North so the best we have to hope for is the torch passing through.)
Re:A week? (Score:5, Interesting)
It's not about having to wait; social network (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not about having to wait. If the issue were just having to wait then people who now keep saying they would buy DVDs if they only cost $3 would wait the 18 months that it takes for big titles to end up in the clearance bins.
It's about the social network. In our increasingly socially connected world - one which even Microsoft is going to push further by making Windows 8 not about Windows, or the apps, but about sharing everything with your friends - if you don't watch Game of Thrones within, say, 2 weeks, you're already going to be bombarded with spoilers from people you follow on twitter, your friends on facebook, the people in your Google+ circle, etc.
The more people end up on these centralized social networks rather than their own fragmented pieces (Orkut, Hyves, whatever), the more people get exposed to that phenomenon.
You can liken this to some people who watch sports just because that's what their colleagues are likely to talk about at the watercooler, and they don't want to feel left out by not knowing a single thing about what's being referred to.
So if people on your social networks are discussing the latest episode of Game of Thrones, it's not so much the issue that you may only be able to see it (legally) a week later. It's that by the time that week is done, if you were to try talking about it it'd be like saying "The cake is a lie!" and "Bruce Willis is dead people!". Your entire discussion is old news and hardly anybody will want to engage you.
That may not matter to you, particularly. I certainly don't give a flying brick. But to many, many people - it matters.
The media companies would do well to recognize this, but they would rather negotiate large sums with foreign distributors, networks, etc. According to their accountants, any lost sales as a result are insignificant compared to the lost sales, contracts, etc. if they were to try and offer their content directly to any and all who are interested for a low price.
Re:It's not about having to wait; social network (Score:4, Funny)
"Bruce Willis is dead people!"
DUDE. fucking spoiler warning please.
Re:A week? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:A week? (Score:5, Interesting)
I can download the show before it airs here in Seattle, and often I do. I don't watch it till later that night though.
Why don't I watch on on Comcast Cable? I can, I have HBO, but the quality of Comcast HDTV is lackluster at best, and artifacty at worse. If I paid for it, I would be bummed out. The copies I download are almost always of better quality.
Here's why I think people download it:
It's a good show, but has a limited view range. Meaning, you have to have HBO to see it. So, people don't want to wait to see what everyone else is talking about. Honestly, I can't blame them, who wants spoilers? We live in an instant world now. While I can wait to see stuff, the mentallity seems to be everything now. Which is probably why people watch cams of movies.
In this day and age, making something that can be digitalize, scarce to make more money, is going to back fire on you.
Re:A week? (Score:5, Insightful)
Believe it or not, it's reality. If you don't want people to do this, try making it extremely simple to get it legitimately (at the time it airs somewhere). It may or may not be difficult to do that, but people likely don't care about your difficulties.
How about... (Score:4, Informative)
So from the sounds of it, you think waiting a week is reasonable.
How about waiting a month?
How about waiting a couple of months?
How about waiting a year?
Before pirating in Australia, it used to be a regular thing to have to wait up to a year, before you'd get the latest movies and TV. Even then, we'd only get a small fraction of what was in the US.
Re:How about... (Score:4, Informative)
Most likely this, plus the fact it's on pay TV (not big in Aus compared to the US; subscription rates have been hovering around 30% of households for the last 5 years), plus habit.
S1 aired 3 months later in Aus - a month after it had finished in the US - so anyone who wanted to see it quickly got into the habit of downloading it. S2 is 2/3rds over, and I only learned a week ago that Foxtel's showing it a week after the US.
I heard today that Go! (FTA channel) is about to start showing Fringe S4 soon. I didn't even know until I just looked that Movie Extra is currently showing Mad Men S5 about 2 weeks out of sync with the US. It seems that in Australia, after initially being driven by a historical combination of long delays, random schedule changes, deliberately incorrect start & finish times*, and minimal penetration of pay TV, downloading is now an entrenched habit.
(* I used to be amazed when I saw people in the US & UK complain about shows being 2~5 minutes off the scheduled start/finish time. In Australia, 15 ~ 30 minutes is not unusual by mid prime-time. Even if you record to watch later, to be reasonably (90%, not 100%) sure of seeing a program you have to pad each end by 30 minutes. Any wonder why Australians have started treating Bittorrent as a big, world-wide PVR?)
Re:A week? (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, it isn't just a TV show. It is one you are engaged in enough to want to see what happens. I know what I did with the one season of Doctor Who that got delayed a week because in the states BBC America didn't want to air a new episode on Memorial Day.
I had two options:
1) Stay a week perpetually behind for the rest of the season. Avoiding sites I enjoy like a lepper because of where I lived. After all, the net isn't local, it was filled with people who didn't get delayed due to a holiday. Avoid talking with other friends who enjoyed the show that weren't bound by this limitation about this mutual interest.
2) Pirate the bloody episode and watch it so I was in sync with the rest of the fandom.
You might not care about this television show, true. But television of largely digital these days. A week made more sense back in the day when things had to be shipped. A week for a book, a movie, a cd (cassette, 8-track, record, whatever)? Yes, acceptable. A week for a eBook to come out just to fit out dated norms? A week for a digital downloaded song because of where you live? Or any other such good?
The exact topic, a television show, is a bit laughable I suppose. The important thing this is a symptom, and one that helps triangulate the real disease. Sometimes a sneeze is just a lil' pepper, and sometimes a sneeze is something worse. The specific is relevant to /, and what is going on in the world. What is going on with piracy when anti-piracy measures are driving so much law creation lately.
People don't want to be pirates. They just see a stupid road block and know a way around it. Gabe of Valve called this a service problem. If this were a government act, not a corporate one, we'd be calling it a stupid regulation, a hindrance that should be stricken from the books. This is one more piece of evidence that a chunk of piracy could be fought by offering what services and goods the people want.
Re:A week? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:A week? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's about experiencing the stories in another medium. I've read the books, I've listened to them all on Audible and now I'm enjoying seeing it play out in a visual medium.
Re:A week? (Score:4, Funny)
People love their soap operas. that's all LOST was, that's all BSG was, that's all SGU was, that's all Heroes was, that's all True Blood was, that's.. that's all they are. Nothing interesting. Heavy on the over-hyped and ridiculously dramatic interpersonal relationships. "My goodness, this person said something rude to me, so I shall brood menacingly and later whine about it to some other fuck who will pat me on the back as we sob together about how terrible that rude person is like a bunch of teenage girls".
Nobody fucking acts like that in real life, and if they do, if you do find someone like that -- nobody fucking likes them. But hey, great TV, aint?
Re:Watch it when you want to (Score:4, Interesting)
Soap Op--er-a
Noun: A television or radio drama series dealing typically with daily events in the lives of the same group of characters. The plot in "Soap Operas" tend towards the melodramatic. The writing is often open-ended, with plot threads rarely being resolved. The story centers on the feelings and emotions of the various characters to the exclusion of almost all else.
Yep. To which I would add, most of the characters are an absolute waste of skin, and the only reason they're still breathing is that nobody has yet bothered to put them out of their misery.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:No win win? (Score:5, Informative)
Game of Thrones is kind of a loss leader-- it gets people to buy a subscription [slate.com]
Re:What's a television and an HBO? (Score:5, Informative)
It's an ancient technology, still used by the elderly and the feeble-minded to obtain single-media entertainment and unsourced information in a serial, time-oriented fashion. It's the precursor to the on-demand random access entertainment and information sources we have today.
Re:There really needs to be an article for this? (Score:5, Insightful)
No. The problem is that you cannot obtain this show without also paying for every other HBO show, and also paying for a cable subscription and DVR. If you need a car analogy, it's like having to buy a stocked dealership when all you want is a Toyota Prius.
Re:Gobsmacked... (Score:5, Insightful)
Want an example of an industry that "gets it"? Porn.
They "closed the loop" by buying up the popular streaming sites that were taking their content and distributing it for free. They then control the ads on those sites. So the ads on the free sites pay for the production of content which they then sell in a higher quality and more convenient form for people who are willing to pay.
This would be like the MPAA buying ThePirateBay and letting it keep running, distributing movies. Yeah, they're not getting sales from it buy they are making at least *something* from the ads, which is more than they were making before by letting the underground market operate independently. And people will still go to see movies in the cinema and buy DVDs.
But this would require them to admit that copyright is basically a dead letter. The suites are too old, their minds too fossilized in 20th century media biz paradigms to even think of such a thing. "My God, you mean ANYONE could use Mickey Mouse without paying us?! The horror!"
The porn industry is younger, more willing to innovate and take chances, more "liberal". The regular entertainment industry is conservative, and they don't like change (that's what conservative means). Unfortunately for them, the world is going to change regardless of their inability to keep up or respond to it.