Movie Piracy Costs Australian Economy $1.3 Billion According To AFACT

AFACT, the Galactic Empire of corporations fighting to protect the rights of poor copyright owners against piracy across the known universe, has claimed that the Australian economy is suffering to the tune of $1.3 billion a year because people download movies on the internets. Fortunately, they put that money right back in by paying lawyers to sue companies like iiNet...

The study was conducted by IPSOS and Oxford Economics on behalf of AFACT, and found that movie piracy over a 12 month period killed the equivalent of 6,100 full time jobs thanks to 92 million pirated movies being viewed or obtained.

The study interviewed 3,500 adults in July and August last year, questioning their piracy habits. Some 45% admitted to having watched some pirated material, although AFACT naturally assumes this number to be higher. The study also doesn't include every pirated screening to equate to a lost sale - they asked people in the survey whether or not they had actually gone on to see the movie after watching a pirated version and the 32% that said yes weren't included as lost revenue.

I'm always sceptical about statistics, especially when statistics are commissioned to prove or disprove an argument for a company with a vested interest. But even if these numbers are true, will they persuade any pirates out there to change their ways? Is hurting the economy enough incentive to push people to iTunes for movie rentals? I doubt it...

[AFACT (PDF)]


Comments

    Alt:
    Movie Piracy drives efficiencies for the Australian Economy of $1.3 Billion According To AFACT

    The problem with these "studies" and "statistics" is that it compares directly with costs as if all of those movies pirated would have been watched. I wonder how many watchers would of been interested in the watching the film if there wasn't a pirate copy available.

      Couldn't have said it better!

    I can't remember what movie it is now, but I bought a BluRay movie, and it has TRAILERS on it. WHAT THE HELL. This is the problem; if I download a movie, I can get straight to it, but if I buy it, I have to sit through trailers, ads, menus, and then more ads telling me not to pirate movies.

    I DIDN'T, I BOUGHT THE GODDAMN THING SO GET OFF MY BACK

      Exactly right, I cannot for the life of me understand why I should be punished for purchasing a movie by having to sit through that awful piracy is stealing trailer they run before every movie. And yet if I had pirated the movie I wouldn't be punished. There must be some really stupid arrogant and stupid people deciding to do this to their customers.

      Yep. It makes me so sick to buy a movie, only to have to sit through 10 minutes of crap before I get to the film, culminating in a big message telling me not to pirate. I bought it, I should be allowed to bypass those stupid bloody messages.

    The report uses the standard practices that wildly inflate the cost to the economy by including as many indirect costs they think they can jam into it. Like adding in how much a person who theoretically might not have a job would have paid for clothes or food. This is sort of padding is pretty disingenuous really as we are expect to believe that there are 6,100 people out there that are unemployed and DO NOT EAT or wear clothes because they weren't employed by an offshoot of AFACTs members.

    I notice their methodology does not discount the damage by the amount of money AFACT is spending on lawyers and people to write reports, and then including the indirect costs associated with these people no longer eating, wearing cloths or putting their children through private schools. If there were no piracy then this spending would not occur, and therefore this damage to the economy should be accounted for in their model.

    The more AFACT try to inflate the 'damage' the more peoplenwill just see them as

    Access to a better alternative than iTunes might help

    That's just plain crap.

    Many movie pirates love movies. This love for movies is fueled by many things, including the movies that they have downloaded. Often these "viewings" are not instead of paid viewings at the cinema, rentals or subscription TV, but in addition too them.

    I know many people who download TV and Movies and often the main reason is lack of accessibility to legal options. These are not people who have stopped going to cinemas because they pirate movies.

    Did the music industry suffer because of Napster or because of it's inability to adapt? People are sitting in front of their TVs/computers/screens more than every before, the industry needs to work out how to put content on those screens, faster and more easily (and monetize it)

    Personally, if studios and alike cant find a way to tap into what is clearly one of the best distribution networks available (torrents etc) as a means to make money, then it's their own fault!! Keep up with times already and stop winging that people no longer want to pay $25 for a movie ticket!

      You are right dude. I remember when movie tickets were under $10. Now it costs me roughly $20 a ticket. You think people are going to go to the movies when the ticket prices have doubled? And the food is the biggest rip off too!

      I go to woollies and grab some food while a movie downloads...

      As someone previously mentioned, you fork out a bundle of cash to get the legit blu-ray/dvd and then you HAVE to sit through 10 mins of anti piracy ads til you can actually take control and start the movie. You dont get any of that garbage on a downloaded copy.

        "get the legit blu-ray/dvd and then you HAVE to sit through 10 mins of anti piracy ads til you can actually take control and start the movie. You dont get any of that garbage on a downloaded copy."

        Yes I don't know how the movie companies don't see the delicious irony there.

    The report uses the standard practices that wildly inflate the cost to the economy by including as many indirect costs they think they can jam into it. Like adding in how much a person who theoretically might not have a job would have paid for clothes or food. This is sort of padding is pretty disingenuous really as we are expect to believe that there are 6,100 people out there that are unemployed and DO NOT EAT or wear clothes because they weren’t employed by an offshoot of AFACTs members.

    I notice their methodology does not discount the damage by the amount of money AFACT is spending on lawyers and people to write reports, and then including the indirect costs associated with these people no longer eating, wearing cloths or putting their children through private schools. If there were no piracy then this spending would not occur, and therefore this damage to the economy should be accounted for in their model.

    Piracy does reduce the ability of intellectual property holders to generate income and also to produce more and hopefully better content. And those rights holders should have the ability to protect their property.

    However by producing a report like this and trying to make it look like the sky is falling AFACT runs the risk of being seen as just a bunch of money grubbing studio executives desperately defending an old and increasingly outdated distribution model rather than a coalition of concerned content producers trying to defend their legitimate property rights.

    These numbers always crack me up... seriously, 92 million movies downloaded. Ok.... how the hell do you get $1.3 billion?

    Why not take the low-ball road, average movie rental for new-releases being $6, well that drops that figure to $552 million, or 2590 full time jobs, etc, etc.

    *Yawn* I'd like to see how much AFACT is burning to track all this "research".

    And instead that $1.3b goes to ISP's instead of movie companies :)

    Seriously though, only a small portion of the crap I download i would actually pay to go and see, and in most cases those things I do pay to go and see.

    For the TV series available on Channel BT, downloading and storing for your own use is really no different to recording them when they are on and storing them, except that you get the US version the day after it is shown, and not when the local channels want to show them (if at all).

    AFACT should be using the money they get from studios to develop new ways to distribute content (paid or otherwise) - then we will all be happy.

    They would like us to pay $20 (each) to see a movie, of which probably 30-40% goes to Hoyts/Village/Greater Union (ie the Cinema owner), probably the same again goes to a local distributor, some to the studio, and a small amount to the cast. Cut out all the margins and enforced old school distribution channels, and I for one would be happy to pay $5 to see a movie. But the whole industry has priced themselves out of the market.

    Welp. I've pirated. Hell, still do and I certainly sympathise with some of the people out there and I still make the effort to buy Blu-Rays. Because while it's sweet just torrenting a DVD rip and enjoying it on your laptop, Blu-Ray's still the gold standard for quality and I really dig special features.

    That said, if they released Netflix Streaming subscriptions in Australia? I'd jump on that shit in a second, $30 a month to assuage all the guilt is a small price to pay. So instead of whining that it's gutting the industry, they should just work harder to get this stuff running.

    I would get ipTV in an instant (and stop my downloading), but my internet connection isn't good enough to stream ipTV.

    Apple's TV show prices are ridiculous when compared to the ipTV options out there, so I chose not to use it.

    If the NBN were to be rolled out sooner (and in my area), I would then subscribe to ipTV and watch my TV shows legally on the internet. Maybe AFACT should be supporting the NBN rollout and ipTV more.

    The companies behind AFACT need to come to terms with the world as it now is (specifically, the technology within it.)

    Stop running business models created in a time where viewers only options to see a film was a cinema or a VHS hard copy, when the production of an album required the manufacturing costs for a legitimate purpose and when a TV show aired, the only chance to see it was during the actual airing time.

    You are old. You are outdated. And your unwillingness (or inability) to adapt bears nothing but selfishness, for which we offer you no sympathy.

    My last trip to the Cinema with my three nephews to see a movie (with snacks and drinks) cost me over $120 for an adult and 3 kids.

    I spent 5 weeks in Canada earlier this year and a trip to the cinema to see a new release movie cost me $10, Malaysia was even cheaper.

    In Canada when you buy a DVD, you get three mediums in 1. I paid $29.95 for a DVD and it came with the Blu-ray copy, Standard DVD copy AND the digital copy.

    Sorry, but to a certain degree they only have themselves to blame by making the Cinema-going experience so costly over here.

    When the Cinema chains & Movie company's are raping you through your wallet to see a movie or buy a DVD its no wonder people are downloading movies. They get no sympathy from me whatsoever

      I disagree that DVD/Blu-Ray is over-priced... more often than not these days new releases of popular films are around $25 (I'm looking at you, Inception, Avatar). In the case of Inception, you did get the DVD/Digi-copy/Blu-Ray.

      But yes, cinema-going is getting more and more expensive, but if it were any cheaper, would people be any more likely to go? No, they probably wouldn't - people are inherently lazy, and will always be cautious with money. It isn't that it's getting more expensive, it's that if you spend time going to the cinema, seeing a film and being disappointed by the sub-standard plot etc, you become more and more cautious as to where your time/money is going. This, combined with the general ease of pirating, means you're less likely to go.
      Hell, I was for a while renting a lot of blu-rays, but now, because I have to DRIVE to the rental store since it's a fair way away, (or spend even more time walking/biking), again all in order to watch a substandard plotted film, I would rather download. And more often than not, what I download is never watched because I was never that thrilled in seeing it anyway.
      So, film studios really need to attack this on three fronts.
      1) reduce the number of films made and reduce salaries of actors.
      2) Combat lazyness by offering a) more incentives to GO to the cinema, or buy/rent the film B) some other way
      3) If (2) fails, then make it legal to BE lazy and get the film via the tubes, FOR A REASONABLE PRICE.
      I wonder what would happen if they asked for a 'donation' as to what you thought the movie was worth AFTER you had watched it via the tubes.

      I do not know what movie theatre you go to, (It cost me about $120 to see Harry Potter at the Imax and that was like 5 people!) but the one I go to costs $8 (on mondays) and $12 every other day, not unreasonable at all.

      I am a small time pirate and nothing beats watching a movie at a movie theatre; where the surround sound and visuals kick ass!

    Wot twaddle. If they produced movies worth watching they wouldn't need excuses. I sincerely doubt these rubbery figures. $1.3 billion at $30 per movie means they are saying Australians are pirating 43 million movies per year. How on earth did they sell ANY?????

    Tip: Australians pirate more than the rest of the world for these reasons.

    1. Movies come out months, or even up to a year earlier in the USA, why should we wait?

    2. TV shows either don't come here, or come here so late it's ridiculous. Why should we wait?

    3. Movie and TV series pricing here is laughable, seriously, why do we pay so much more than other regions in the world? Distribution surely can't take that much of the cake, they just know "Australians will pay that much". Well if we'll pay that much, why are we pirating?

    I do buy movies, because sitting at home with surround sound, 60" tv, a few mates and a case of beer is great. I download movies to ensure that I don't waste my money on the 90% of movies that are complete crap. To equate my dozen or so downloaded movies from the last year with the equivalent lost revenue from me not going to the movies or buying the blue-ray is crap. If I couldn't preview those movies first and not guarantee an enjoyable evening for me, my family, or my friends, I wouldn't be buying blue-rays, and I probably wouldn't have the home entertainment set up that I do.

    2010 was the biggest year ever for te industry in Australia 1.1bn dollars the industry is worth.
    How can piracy cost the industry more than it's total turn over which is a record high?
    BULLSHIT AFACT misleading douche bags!

    $1.3 billion may be the reduced amount of revenue that goes to the movie companies, but money is far from being 'lost'. Like 'oh crap I pirated that movie and now the $20 I was going to use to buy the dvd has suddenly disappeared from the economy.' People just spend their money on other things as all good increases in efficiency allow. It not like the digital age is new anymore and its about time these companies suck it up and adapt to it.

    Now is that AFACT..... or is it a baseless figure pulled out of the air well known as "a lie".

    Or.....you could look at it in a different way. If i'm not paying US movie studios money for their products, i'm probably spending more on money on goods and services in Australia which does directly contribute to our economy. Falls down a bit when its a Australian movie, don't know when I last DL'd a Australian movie

    Piracy: Keeping currency in Australia.

    We need to start sticking it to them in more direct ways. They'll never see the light unless we stick metal prods in their eyes to keep them open and shove a foglight in there.

    I don't think Ipsos involving themselves in this type of crap is going to help them win tenders in future.

    They always complain about lost money, Avatar was the most pirated movie of all time, But on the other side it was the HIGHEST Grossing Movie of all time!!!

    AFACT? More like AFICTION!

      Haha WIN!

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now