Distributors vs pirates - who owes whom?

    Some time ago, I noticed that the usual sluggish rhetoric of the media regarding the “bad guys - movie pirates” clearly goes to a new, tougher level. The experience of 37 years living in Russia hints that harsh, ineffective and, most likely, idiotic repressions of the state will soon follow. A recent meeting of GDP with representatives of the most important of the arts only confirms this. Although the GDP gently tried to hint to them that do not subsidize and tighten the screws, but if the film is crap, the viewer will not pay. However, kinopapiki heard in this speech only the phrase “tighten the screws”. As a result, K.G. Shakhnazarov proposed to ban the free circulation of audio and video products in general, and N. Mikhalkov liberally proposed only to introduce a tax on the turnover of audio and video products, naturally in his favor. The main argument of these respected people:cattle of the audience, which does not allow them to live like Lucas and Spielberg to develop domestic cinema. Given these trends, I decided to check some of their points with the scores in hand.

    The main argument of the distributors is that the proliferated torrent trackers and DVD stalls deprive them of a larger and better share of the profit. However, in accordance with the law on consumer protection, the seller is obliged to sell the goods (provide the service) that is fully consistent with the model or description. Thus, if “The Best Movie” is sold to me, and I find that shit has been sold to me , then the seller must replace me with the defective product or reimburse the cost of unproven services. Based on this, I built the assessment methodology - who, after all, owes to whom.
    The technique is simple:
    1. We take a list of the 9 highest-grossing films of the last weekend. From there we take the total amount of fees in Russia and the number of spectators who watched the movie in the cinema.
    2. We take the audience rating of the film
    3. We analyze the number of movie downloads on torrents.ru and extrapolate this value to all trackers in Russia, multiplying it by 2 (other offers are also accepted).
    4. We estimate the volume of "pirated" distribution of the film through other channels
    5. We calculate the shortfall received by the distributors due to the pirated distribution of the film by the formula: Fees / Spectators * (Downloads + Other_Pirats)
    6. We calculate the amount to be reimbursed by the distributor for shit steamed instead of a movie. There are two ways to calculate:
      1. A simple way - according to the formula Fees * (10-Rating) / 10
      2. Advanced method: we proceed from the fact that, due to the spread of opinions, the true range of rating values ​​is not from 0 to 10, but somewhat different. We rate the highest rating rating (corresponding to a fully satisfied viewer) as the lowest rating of the Top250 films (8.1), and the lowest rating rating as the rating of the worst film of 2008 (2.9). Further, the amount to be reimbursed is estimated using the formula Fees * (8.1 - Rating) / (8.1 - 2.9).
    7. We calculate the balance and write a claim for damages.

    Some of the results are tabulated:


    conclusions

    1. At the very least, for showing three of the nine films, distributors remained owed dough to viewers.
    2. Two of these three films are a miscarriage of the domestic film industry
    3. The overall balance of rental is not in favor of distributors, that is, despite pirated activity, they remained owed to spectators from 8 to 36 million rubles.
    4. The methodology did not take into account the costs of the distributor for compensation for moral damage from viewing boiled crap.
    5. If the gentlemen of the cinema magnates need money to develop domestic cinema, then let them go to the bank. I (the viewer) are not a bank, and I do not lend.

    Also popular now: