The Wolverine Movie Leak: Truth And Consequences
Apr 2, 2009 by Bruce SimmonsThink there are no consequences to downloading movies illegally? Think again.
Just in case you had’nt heard, on the eve of April Fools Day a workprint of X-Men Origins: Wolverine found its way to the internet and hundreds of thousands of downloads occurred before 20th Century Fox could stop it. Though at first one might think “So what?” – there’s more at stake than just having a flick run free on the internet prior to its official release date.
When I first saw this, I held back. It was April Fool’s day. But as the hours passed, so did the proof that this was indeed real.
I shook my head in disbelief.
How Can A Movie Get Leaked?
Does that really matter? There are so many different people that handle a DVD of a movie in post-production before it hits the theaters, it’s amazing we don’t see this more often.
With the number of folk who have access to a post-production version of a movie, when do the necessary additional security measures kick in that studios may have to take? Will those measures cost us, the fan, more in the end?
Sure we might grumble at the studios, but who is really to blame?
Have You Thought About the Little Guy?
I suppose that for some, the idea of seeing a movie before it’s actually released to the public is some sort of thrill (or something). While these folks gloat about having seen a film early (and illegally), I’m sure they don’t think about the impact their cumulative actions have on others.
The “others” are those people who put in 10 to 14 hour days over the course of a couple of years creating a movie. The “others” are also the second tier people who depend on a film to be released for their livelihoods… Movie theater owners/employees, for example.
For all these people, an advance pirate copy that makes it online dilutes the hard work they’ve put into something, and takes away from the “event” status of a big blockbuster release date. A release date that has had many countless hours of effort put towards deciding how to best present the culmination of all that hard work.
As this travesty went viral, Twitter.com was aflame with people stating that the Wolverine movie had found its way to the internet.
Some cheered at the travesty thrust upon Fox. I get where you’re coming from. Fox sure doesn’t have the best track record in how they’ve handled some franchises or other matters. But if you think this through, it’s just not Fox that gets hurt. It’s shameful to ponder the idea that we might really wish harm on a person’s livelihood.
So the buzz lit up big time.
Shortly thereafter folks were out there boasting about having grabbed some popcorn and sitting down to watch their newly stolen digital media.
Yes… I Said Stolen
If you go to the trouble of hunting down what you know is an illegal copy of the film, you knowingly stole it. And don’t tell me you didn’t know. To add insult to thievery, some of you were stupid enough to brag about it on various social networking sites. Good for you! Now at least if Fox and the FBI decide to pursue this legal issue to that level, you’ve made it very easy for them to find you. Even if you didn’t brag about it, you left a digital trail to the torrent files and subsequent activity is clear as day to the packet sniffers.
As it stands, the copy of the film that made its way online did not have the majority of its visual effects complete, had missing scenes and a temporary audio/music track. So I’m sure that made for an AWESOME viewing experience.
Some Actually Posted Reviews
To further implicate yourselves, you then thought you would be super cool and leave your reviews and opinions on what you saw on various bulletin boards and websites. Most website admins removed your misbegotten opinions, choosing instead to take the high road regarding this scenario. Good for them.
Fox stated in a press release on April 1st that the FBI and the MPAA are actively investigating this crime and that:
“The source of the initial leak and any subsequent postings will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”
Oh yes. This little stunt can lead to some jail time. I have a feeling someone may find themselves with some new best friends fairly soon.
When All Is Said And Done
It seems that it may be pretty easy to track down who did this. Maybe instead of firing him or her, the studio should garnish their wages for all eternity for profits lost.
If you think it really doesn’t hurt studios, think of this: Eli Roth didn’t release Hostel: Part II in Mexico because it was already leaked there and you could buy it for twenty-five cents. What was the point of opening there then?
You think that if you alone “stole” a movie, who would it hurt? It adds up. One of my favorite examples of adding up is an article I wrote about saving electricity. If every light switch wielding person (estimated 211 million – it’s just a ball park for this example) in the U.S. left a light bulb burning in an empty room for only 5 minutes, as a collective, that adds up to around 2,000 years of wasted energy. It all adds up and we can make a difference.
In closing, Fox said this:
“We are encouraged by the support of fansites condemning piracy and this illegal posting and pointing out that such theft undermines the enormous efforts of the filmmakers and actors and, above all, hurts fans of the film”
We at Screen Rant will never support this kind of behavior and we will not tolerate anyone posting their own review or experience in the comments.
‘Nuff said?
Source: BBC News
Around the web:
Loading ...
@TheDragon
You’re obviously an intelligent guy, but while some of what you say makes sense, you drive me nuts on other points.
You’re using the sort of double-speak politicians use:
“and the market doesn’t flow with your charge scheme”
That’s a hysterically funny way of saying “people are ripping off your program” (in the example a gave above).
You keep phrasing it different ways but it seems to me that your argument keeps coming back to the equivalent of: “If you don’t lock your door when you go on vacation, there’s nothing wrong with people emptying your house. You should have locked the door so it’s YOUR fault you were burglarized.”
Vic
P.S. Your comments keep getting caught in the moderation filter because of the email address you’re using.
@TheDragon, I guess that a store that falls victim to a lot of shoplifting should restructure their “charge scheme” so that they don’t rely on sales to make their money then…
Look, the stuff getting ripped off in the digital realm is the EXACT same stuff that was an outcry with cassette tapes. The same outcry with VHS dubbing. The same outcry with DRM. The argument hasn’t changed in 20 years. The only thing that has is the medium.
@oscar: Nope. A cookie doesn’t cut it (get it?
)
@vic
Honestly, nothing has changed throughout history with this. It’s the same battles that have been fought by the industry for YEARS whenever a new distribution medium comes out. Then they settle down when they realize it’s futile. This really is no different than it’s been over the past 20 years.
Honestly, it DOES boil down to people ripping the stuff off (as the observe it), to change the market. And Hollywood has actually slowly started to come to terms with this by including a digital copy of a film when you buy it in the store. The quality of that digital copy usually significantly better than you can find most places online, but it’s hugely restrictive and laden with DRM.
My argument is that because people pirate and download, you have to take that fact in to consideration and ask yourself why. What can you, as a company, do to make your product more valuable.
I personally don’t like going to the theater because I’m pretty socially anxious guy, and prefer to enjoy things from the comfort of my home. Same-day multiplatform releases would fix this for me entirely, and it was predicted that form of distribution would be the norm something like ten years ago, but it hasn’t happened yet.
There are certain films that I will bother with the theater for, like Watchmen, and when I do, it’s usually for an Imax release. That’s the extra value for the films that have high detail and high sound quality. That’s *my* sales point. It’s what I see valuable, so very few films are marketed to me.
The bottom line of my argument is that if people feel that they have to download your movie instead of going to see it in the theater, you have to re-evaluate what you’re providing if you want to gain THOSE people as customers. In this case, your target market still exists, it’s just getting smaller because people are seeing less value in what you’re producing. If you’re seeing plenty of profit from the ones that remain in your market, then be content with that, and don’t consider those that downloaded your film “lost profits” because they’re no longer a part of your target market. Those that live in both markets will usually pay for a film even if they’ve downloaded it, which means you can’t count their download in your estimation of lost profits either. The analytics of the situation are not as cut-and-dry as the movie companies like to treat them.
Also, @Vic: I guess it’s a good thing email addresses aren’t shared on the site.
@Ken
Nope, because there’s a tangible thing being taken, which is the result of finite resources.
We’re talking digital product. Infinite reproduction and resources without additional costs in reproduction.
@TheDragon
I edited your comment – there’s no need to be tactless, you’ve been very civil up until now.
And while the end result may be what you say, I don’t believe for a second that the majority of downloaders are doing it to “change the market,” they just want for free what they ought to be paying for and there’s no way any of your arguments will convince me otherwise.
And I laughed out loud at “seeing less value in what you’re producing”… yeah, like NO value since they download it for free. Oh, wait… there must be SOME value – they’re taking the time to download and watch it. They just don’t want to PAY for it.
Vic
@vic
I won’t argue against the fact that there are just some people that want something for nothing. That’s definitely an element anywhere, but the only reason I argue my point so fervently is because of the unnecessary cut-and-dry vilification of anyone that downloaded the leaked film. It ISN’T a black-and-white issue. There are methods to the madness. I personally had plenty of opportunities to download the leaked film, but decided that I wasn’t interested in seeing the unfinished piece. This particular film would fall under the category of “worth seeing in imax”
However, especially with regard to the film in question, it has such a large frothing fanbase, that I can almost guarantee you that a majority of the people that downloaded the workprint will be seeing it in theaters as well.
And while I won’t argue against your observation regarding the intent of people that just don’t want to pay for anything, I will say that what I’ve outlined is my reasons, and I am not alone in this opinion.
So… it’s ok for everyone to download Adobe Photoshop for free, AutoCAD programs, Office, basically, no reason to buy games, programs, or operating systems then right? Just download everything? It’s all available online. Alrighty then, saves me a lot of money. Thanks for the moral justification.
@ken
With the large applications like Photoshop, AutoCAD, and Office, this has been addressed properly by the companies. These are some VERY expensive applications, so are a higher target for digital piracy. They’ve acknowledge this, and made Student editions available for a fraction of the cost. Again, it falls back to not using the product for profit under those terms.
With games, they’re starting to come around and evolve with the market, as well.
For more details regarding the gaming situation, here’s some important reading:
http://www.penny-arcade.com/2008/9/24/
http://www.penny-arcade.com/2008/9/29/
@TheDragon
Although we disagree, I’ve enjoyed discussing this with you.
Best regards,
Vic
I cannot believe this argument is still going on. Fox, the owner of the property, said it should not be distributed. What part of this are people not getting? I suppose, again, if some genius figured out a way to distribute Vista for free before it was released, this would be OK too? I wonder how Microsoft would feel about that? This argument about lending books, DVDs and CDs that have already been purchased is ridiculous. Wolverine has not been released, therefore if someone makes a digital copy of it and give it away, they are breaking the law!
Lol people wanna keep defending themselves for downloading movies illegally.
I have a feeling, and I could be wrong, that most of the people complaining about downloading pre-released digital version of movies and music are the same ones with uTorrent running in the background filled with porn and are typing their responses while hitting the bong. Like I said I could be wrong but statistics say I’m not far off the mark. Those type of people love to point fingers and screaming “Wrong Doing!!” about what they consider to be crime, while all along committing another one. To those I say “Get your stone out of my glass house!”
Analogies on this topic are pretty much pointless, because, for every point someone makes for or against the topic someone will have a counterpoint. I wonder if this topic could be discussed at all without analogies? I also find it amusing when someone decides to start with “Bottom line…” as if they have put they foot down with the final decision and any discuss here after is moot. Please give me a break.
Now, just because you think it is wrong and SHOULD be against the law does not make it so. You can quote me dictionary definitions of the word stealing and piracy all day long, but that does not change the fact that it is NOT illegal to download movies and or music. It is however illegal to knowingly upload or “share” copyrighted material without the owner of that material’s permission.
Now to discuss how the Hollywood types would like to sue me for violating copyright infringement…I would like to sue them for every piece of crap film they have ever enticed me to watch by lying to me to get me into the theater to waste my money on it. That’s right I said lying to me. It’s called “Bait and Switch” people and I would be happy to be the first person in America to sue the Hollywood Corporate Machine either alone or with a class action suit. There is a reason why it’s illegal for a company to promise you one thing to get you into the store and then deliver something completely different. I’ll mention my Movie Lemon Law idea again as well. Why shouldn’t I be able to receive my money back for poor service or product? It happens in every other consumer market, clothes, food, electronics, services rendered (ie, car care, lawn car, house care), so why shouldn’t it be included in the music and movie industry as well?
The Hollywood Machine churns out pant load after pant load of horrible products, Uwe Bolle is the Dollar Store of directors, and continually hypes them as the best ever. “Action Packed”, “Best Suspense of the Year”, “Finest movie ever!” these terms get thrown around so much they become humorous. They are no longer producing a product that it’s consumer wants, instead they produce what they want and then complain when we don’t like it.
Consumer – “I would like chocolate cake please.”
Hollywood – “Ok, here is piece of Okra”
Consumer – “What? No, chocolate cake please”
Hollywood – “Trust us. You’ll love the okra. It’s the best ever”
Consumer – “Huh? Really? Ok fine I’ll try the okra”
Hollywood – “Great you can’t go wrong. Here you are.”
Consumer – “That sucked. Had no substance, was over salted and over cooked. Gross. I would like my money back please”
Hollywood – “Sorry, you’ve already eaten it. No money back policy”
Consumer – “But it’s not what I wanted in the first place”
Hollywood – “Oh well. You’re screwed little guy. Tell your friends to come try it!”
Sorry so long winded but I’ve obviously thought most of this through.
“Now, just because you think it is wrong and SHOULD be against the law does not make it so.”
Is it just me, or doesn’t copyright law actually exists that says it is illegal.
At least that’s the gist of the cease and desist letters I get from studios!!!
LOL,
“I wonder if this topic could be discussed at all without analogies?”
Sadly, yes. It’s called lawyers. But once they’re done, someone has to pay a s***load of money to the winning team!
@Walwus
I find your reasoning and explanation outstanding. Very well put.
PS: That’s why marketing is a billion dollar industry.
They make you want to buy and eat that Okra with associative pictures, music and words. The rest, the consumer puts together and then BAM! They’ve pulled the trigger on that purchase.
….Okra? Ick… that doesn’t sound any good at all… now Twinkies… they last forever!!!
@Bruce
I’ve seen those letters, never gotten one, but the wording is careful to leave out the fact that only sharing is illegal not downloading. It sound weird but it’s true. Pull up the old stories of the college kids and grandmothers being sued by the RIAA and you’ll see the court documents show for sharing copyrighted material not for downloading. Again, until the law is changed it’s not considered illegal. I’ll find the link to the actual law and post it for you. It’s an interesting read.
Cool.
(crap, why didn’t I think of that when writing this article?)
@Walwus
The reason that the Movie Lemon Law would not work is because is is considered an opinion as to what is good and what isn’t.
you got what you went for you just didnt like it.
consumer: Can i have a chocolate cake?
Hollywood: Sure here is your chocolate cake.
consumer: What the hell!? This is dark chocolate!
Hollywood: You came for chocolate cake and that is what you got. Would you like some milk to wash that down?
Consumer: Fine.
Hollywood: That will be $6.
Consumer: Fine!
Hollywood: Here you go.:)
Consumer: What skim!?
@zibe
WEll no it wouldn’t work based on the dialog that you used but I wasn’t using my bit of consumer vs hollywood banter for that purpose. I was using it to explain how HOllywood doesn’t give us what we want, instead they give us what they want.
Lemon Law would be very useful if there was paper work to fill out to have your 10 bucks returned. That would cut down on the people just looking to get their money back.
Restraunts do it all the time, eat your food, didn’t like it here’s yoru money back.
@Walwus
So you’ll eat the entire meal and THEN complain you didn’t like it? I start eating, and if I don’t like it I call over the waiter and ask him to take it back. Shouldn’t take eating the entire thing to decide you don’t like it.
I’m pretty sure that if you watch a movie and you get about 15 minutes in and it sucks so bad you think you deserve your money back, you can walk out right then and get your money back from the manager.
Vic
Lol it will never end. Even though its illegal people will find a way to make it legal in their minds.
Okay lets be honest here some of the resolutions that we have all come to are great ideas, but the chances of any of them happening any time soon would take too dramatic a change on either side of the arguement. people are not going to stop downloading while it is still so easy, but the movie industry is not going to change it whole business model for the sake of what is considered a criminal act so how about we start trying to find a happy medium. cant we all just get along
When a film has been produced on a multi-million dollar budget, there is little excuse for poor craftmanship of the final product.
Don’t theater owners screen what movies they play?
If theaters, together, stop accepting crap from the studios, the studios will be forced to step up their game.
I think that if quality was again the norm in cinema, piracy would be a far smaller issue.
@Vic
Remember what I said earlier about analogies adn peopel have point/ counterpoint with them. You’re response proves my theory. Not saying you are correct or incorrect, actually agree with you about going the entire way through before realizing you hate the film, I’m just saying my point about analogies is correct.
@Oscar
I’m a little tired of you just moaning illegal this and illegal that. Post me a link to the copyright law where is states that the downloading of copyrighted material is in violation of the law. Again saying that it’s so does not make you right, just uninformed.
What you are discussing is ethical vs lawful. Do not get the two confused. Where you may find it to be unethical to download a movie there is nothing illegal about it.
Personally, I don’t download films and/or music. I do however make back up copies of the discs I buy and keep the originals in a clean container. Easier to replace them that way.
@ Walwus
“I have a feeling, and I could be wrong, that most of the people complaining about downloading pre-released digital version of movies and music are the same ones with uTorrent running in the background filled with porn and are typing their responses while hitting the bong. Like I said I could be wrong but statistics say I’m not far off the mark. Those type of people love to point fingers and screaming “Wrong Doing!!” about what they consider to be crime, while all along committing another one. To those I say “Get your stone out of my glass house!”
WTF!!
You are wrong and you assume way too much..No u-whatever running here. I got three kids and have a real life so no time for that..whatever it is…No time for getting ossified with a bong either..You certainly know how to generalize and stereotype. Where are these statistics you write about so cavalierly? I guess all I got from your post was conditioned cynacism and very little acumen. You postulate and preach about what others are doing when you would take that which does not belong to you..Call it whatever you want. I’ll teach my kids that it is wrong and I’ll be careful not to call it thievery. Can’t call a thief a thief in this time of political correctness.
There is no reciprosity in downloading. I will call it illegal because with any luck in due time it will be. It’s already in an incipient stage I guess with all this discussion appearing online on this subject. A lot people here have become inured with the internet and how to use to gain something for their benefit without compensation to those they pilfer. I hope my kids will stay away from people with a belief system such as yours. And for someone who speaks of useless analogies you quickly bring up the Glass House analogy and then proceed to fire stones throughout the rest of your post. Something about a pot & a kettle their dude?
Maybe you did think it through just not as well as you think you did..
By-the-way..when you go to a theater you pay your money you take your chances, something got your a$$ in that seat to buy that ticket in the first place and I’m sure most theaters would give you your money back if you left after 15-30 minutes of the show were already done. I’ve gotten mine back when I walked out on a couple of films. You just can’t see it all and then complain that you didn’t like it. You used the service and then want to renege.
Now excuse me I need to go find out about U-Torrent..
@Walwus
People use analogies, and have used them since the beginning of speech because it helps to clarify and communicate a point. There’s nothing wrong with using analogies.
And even if you are technically legally correct in regards to downloading, what chaps my hide is that no one finds this at least unethical. At least you see that part of it.
Vic
@ GK, about your argument that in time downloading this material will be illegal. I have a feeling that this will not happen. The movie industry is fighting this not only because yes, it may hurt their profits slightly. But they’re fighting it because they feel that they don’t need to adapt to the changing technology. As someone mentioned previously, these kind of debates have gone on with every new form of technology and probably will continue until the end of time.
@Greenknight
Ha man calm down. I should have slipped the word “probably” in there. Of course it was a vast reaching over generalization with what I thought was an obvious satirical opening comment, but it appears to not have been obvious enough.. Also, please re-read my comment about the glass house. The saying goes “People in glass house should not throw stones.” I said get your stone out of my glass house, in other words I’m already in a glass house so I have my own stones to worry about, and you (general you not you specifically) can keep your stones.
No to respond to what I think is you point. So because you want it to be illegal then you are going to call it illegal and hope that one day it is? Seriously? Good grief man. I oppose abortion (don’t worry Bruce I’m not starting that topic here) and think it should be illegal but I’m not going to call it illegal until it actually becomes against the law.
And seriously Green, did you really feel as if my comment about porn and pot was directed squarely at you? Calm down a bit and let someone make a comment without you dropping a WTF!!!! on them? I actually chuckled thoughout most of your post. Not because you were saying funny things or that your opinion isn’t justified, (you’re entitled to it I just happen to disagree) but I laughed because I could picture you sitting there typing that post with a vein throbbing in your forehead furiously typing away, mumbling and grumbling, and possibly uttering the occasional 4-letter word under your breathe. By the way, kudos on using the most 10cent words in one post since this discussion started: ossified, cavalierly, cynicism, acumen, postulate, reciprocity, incipient, inured, pilfer. Looks like someone found the link to thesaurus.com
(Calm down dude it’s a joke)
@TheDragon
Don’t bother. They don’t get it.
What people simply can’t understand is that this is a licensing issue related to distribution, not an issue of deprivation. The only losses anybody is crying about are implied, not actual. Nobody was deprived of anything. Your example of lending a book to somebody is perfect. For the people who think lending a book to a friend is OK- It doesn’t matter if YOU paid for the book, if you lend it to a friend YOU are STEALING from the publisher!!! If your friend wanted to read the book he should have bought it. He wasn’t licensed to read it because he never paid for it. He stole the book because you lent it to him. Same thing with a DVD. YOU might have licensed it, but your friend didn’t. He never bought it. This is why if you show a DVD in a public place you are in trouble. You letting people see the DVD who aren’t legally licensed to do so.
The fact is that copyright was legislated to protect individual authors, not corporations. The real tragedy of capitalism was when governments decided to grant corporations the same rights and protections as an individual. Copyright is supposed to protect people, not businesses.
Dragon, you get it. Nobody else seems to.