Top 10 Film Industry Stories of 2004: #8: MPAA Files Suits Against Internet Movie File Traders
By David Mumpower
December 28, 2004
His name is Manny Perry. A stuntman by nature, he has become the public face of a hot button issue that keeps Hollywood execs up at night. Before each movie is shown at the local theater, Manny stands in front of the camera and explains how each and every movie downloader is a filthy thief. His empassioned plea is for moviegoers to pay for their art rather than file-trade on the Internet. As the subtle metaphor of a flaming car crashing on its roof is shown on screen, the stuntman says that anyone who steals a movie is committing a crime which robs him, Manny Perry, and others like him of compensation and potentially even their livelihood(s).
Open source debates involving the easy-to-use point and click nature of computers have been ongoing since the advent of the modem. First, it was the music industry decrying Napster and its intellectual successors. The next battlefield is already being populated as the television industry begins to see their programming stripped of advertising within hours of the broadcast then immediately made available for download on the web. But for now, the hotbed discussion begins and ends with the movie industry and their recent decision to sue their own client base.
Previously, the only media service industry which had been bold enough to sue its own customer base was satellite television. Realizing that their clients were creating piracy software that allowed for the reception of premium and pay-per-view channels sans appropriate financial compensation, DirecTV and its peers targeted a small percentage of their own monthly customers for legal charges. This decision is somewhat different from the Napster battle in that many of the people file trading on Napster proudly paid nothing to the music industry. DirecTV was suing people who were paying at least $500 a year for satellite programming.
The movie industry has now followed this fascinating legal precedent. They have boldly stated that they will target file trading services such as the most popular one, eDonkey, as well as the fastest growing entity, Bit Torrent. The MPAA has already claimed one victory in this battle. The granddaddy of Torrent sites, Suprnova.org, has recently folded due to the threats of significant legal action. This is being championed as a hallmark moment in the fight against file trading at least equal to if not surpassing Napster's shutdown.
Next up are those who regularly use such programming in order to download movies for home use. Recently promoted MPAA president Dan Glickman notes that people who wrongfully download movies may be fined anywhere between $30,000 and $150,000 per instance. The degree of punishment depends upon court interpretation of the willfulness of the act of theft.
With file trading unlikely to ever completely go away, the MPAA's behavior in how they legally attack such criminal behavior is noteworthy not just as a 2004 story but as one unlikely to be fully resolved in the foreseeable future. As such, this decision is the first shot off the bow in the upcoming open source war between moviemakers and file traders.
Print this column
