You don't own your music and films, we do

The movie industry claims it is losing billions of dollars because of piracy. In fact they have even paid analysts to estimate what those costs are. And the report that the MPAA produced states the losses to be $6.1 billion for last year alone.

But these figures are always misleading. Are they actually saying that if it hadn't been for piracy and illegal downloads that they would have made an extra 6 billion? Because we know that's wrong. People would not find another 6 billion in their personal budgets. However, since peer-to-peer networking has revolutionised access to media, sales in DVDs and Music CDs has been steadily on the rise, and the effect of sharing is negligible. In fact the music scene in the UK is as buoyant and vibrant as I can ever remember, and attendances at live music events is unbelievably healthy. There are many more music festivals and gigs promoting multiple big acts than ever. It's a fact that unauthorised usage has led to increased purchase, something that of course is never accounted for. A record industry commissioned report even confirms these facts.

You know, maybe the music industry needs to look to itself, Have they ever considered that maybe hauling my arse down to the cinema, or buying space-consuming DVDs is not the most convenient way for me to watch movies? Instead of trying to stem the trends, why don't they embrace them? They've always been the same. When VCRs first came out, they were described as being the death of the movie industry. Again, complete nonsense. A third of all movie company's revenue is from Videos and DVDs, and this largely funds movies that would never get made if box-office takings were the only revenue stream. Because, actually, when it comes to it, people like music, and they like movies. Neither music nor film will die. People like to tell others about the stuff they like. We exchanged tapes in the shool play-ground, and we copied them for ourselves. Because the majority of people only have so much budget for this kind of thing. And if we weren't swapping tapes, there would be artists that no-one would ever know about. And certainly would not get well known enough to go on and sell millions.

So what have these powerful industries done? Has the industry analysed the supply and demand nature of their business? Have they priced their product such that people's budgets permit more choice, more purchases, more propagation of material? No, they have increased prices, and introduced protection mechanisms, measures to stop copying. CD/DVDs increasingly have copy protection, and digital content has DRM applied to it. This kind of protectionism is not providing for the consumer's needs. These days, if you own an iPod, you are not going to buy a CD that prevents you ripping it for your own use on your MP3 player. No, you'll download it illegally, because being told where and how to listen to your music restricts choice, and makes the material less attractive to the end-user.

When will they learn? In the early days of Peer-to-Peer, there was limited availability to media - now you can get absolutely anything, even TV programs that people are making digital recordings of. The industry view of all this access is that they will lose more money. But, if they know people are using the internet more and more, then they should cut the price, to reflect the fact that no distribution chains are in place. People will buy movies for £5; but don't charge them £15, then restrict where they can play them. How many £15 films are you inclined to buy? Not many. Prohibitive measures will only stunt the market, and will force people to get better organised. They will continue to swap tapes in the playground. Hackers will continue to break the DRM and protection measures. What they need to do is close the financial gap between purchase and free, then people will be inclined to buy more.

Presumably they feel they need to protect the business that they have. But it's more buoyant than it's ever been, so can only be driven by pure greed. If their measures weren't mis-guided enough, the whole legislative air that surrounds any activity that they themselves deem illegal (it's still not legal in the UK to listen to CDs that you've previously paid for on your iPod), is getting them a bad name. The software industry should take note too. When consumers act, they'd better listen. If an end-user stumbles upon a security breach, telling people about it is a good thing, not a reason to bang them up in jail. Because the end result is a win-win for all. Draconian punitary practices only inspire appetites for justice, while encouraging people to stick two fingers up at those who try to control our tastes.

Comsumer opinion is galvanising as we speak. In France this week, citizens gathered to protest the hijacking of France's DRM law by Vivendi-Universal. the march was led by "convicts" carrying signs that had slogans like "I played a DVD under Linux," "I loaned music to a friend," "I revealed a security flaw" -- shackled with chains reading "Vivendi-Universal," "Microsoft" and "Apple."

Take heed, evil empires. You're nothing without us.

Film Review: Munich

You know what to expect, right? Spielberg releases a new movie, and you’re sure you’ve got the measure of it. It’ll contain some dramatic cinematography, a quality screenplay, some dubious intentions, maybe a little sentimentality? I was surprised by this movie. This film was a very thought provoking well-paced examination of the humanity behind the most horrible acts.

The film wastes no time showing us the news reel from the events at the 1972 Olympic games in Munich, when Palestinian terrorists kidnapped and murdered Israeli athletes in the “Black September” massacre.

The Israelis plan quick retaliation, and form a crack troop of Mossad assassins to murder every one of the Munich culprits. These are led by Avner, a zealous Mossad bodyguard, played by Eric Bana.

And so the killing begins. As the team start working through the list of Palestinians, they cannot help but be affected by what they see. This is bought about several ways. For every killing, there are numerous complications, many innocent bystanders and family members get killed, and this starts to play heavy on the assassin’s minds. Inevitably, their need to establish guilt becomes paramount, and they lose some of their robotic ruthlessness.

Things start going wrong; they are betrayed by shifty informers, who are also selling information to other interested parties, and the team are reduced in number as mistakes and ambushes lead to deaths. This increases the level of paranoia, and in the end nobody trusts anyone. Although the movie is long, it needs much of this space to allow the feelings of anxiety and doubt build within the characters.

The more they cut themselves off from their lives, and isolate themselves in the horror of their acts, the more aware of their human frailties they become, and the more they miss their homes and families. Eric Bana, in particular portrays the tortured killer brilliantly; at first ruthless, he advises one of his doubting team “don’t think about it, just do it”, yet he himself ultimately insists on ensuring that the people they take out are genuinely guilty of the crime for which they are accused. His Mossad liaison is also excellently played by Geoffrey Rush, and he becomes the dark side of his conscience when his humanity breaks through.

Spielberg makes no commentary on Black September, nor the retaliation, per se. He instead spins out a beautifully shot tale (using the same Director of Photography as in Schindler’s List), showing a string of explosive action scenes, in perfectly recreated 1970’s European capitals. But more than this, he focuses on the human beings at the centre of all this activity, and shows that extremist ideals and brutal regimes are only as successful as individuals’ abilities to shut out their own frailties. 8/10


You can buy Munich here.