Music Industry Staggers While Film Industry Blooms

GLX writes "The LA Times is running an article that explores the idea that while piracy has been the (supposed) bane of the music industry, it has yet to be felt in the video industry..." "Yet to be felt" might be too strong, but DVD sales are booming, and don't seem to be much crimped by illegal copying.

In related news...

[Equuleus42]

Vivendi Universal and Sony Corp. are preparing to sue individual song swappers [smartmoney.com]... I'm curious how this will be done.

I agree...

[Andy Dodd]

Much of what I hear on the radio is crap.

I first discovered artists like Chemical Brothers, Orbital, and such from MP3s in my dorm a few years ago. Needless to say, they get little to no radio play (Except for on Solid State - Do a Google search for Liquid Todd - K-Rock lets him spin midnight-4AM Saturdays, and it's a great way to hear new and unique music.)

I'll admit, I've been mostly downloading MP3s until recently - I was a poor college student. But now that I'm working and have money, I've begun hunting down various CDs by the above artists.

Actually, the record industry shouldn't be worried about MP3s - They should be worried about half.com - That's where I'm going for most of my music.

Re:Well...

[Anonymous Coward]

I have RoadRunner and it still takes forever to download a movie. With P2P, the upstream speed is the real limiting factor.

It's in the difference of use

[r_barchetta]

I'd suspect (though I have no proof) that a significant factor here is that a good number of people do most of their music listening on their computer (at work or otherwise). This is certainly true for me. Thus the mp3 format is so popular. Small files that sound good. And they're easily accessible right at your desk.

A movie is a totally different experience. I will always choose to watch a movie on my 27" tv rather than a smaller (even 19" is too small) computer monitor. Screen size is important. And in addition to that my couch is more comfortable and my stereo speakers are better than my computer speakers. Why on earth would I watch movies on my computer? (OK, maybe while travelling but that's a different environment anyway.)

Not to mention what others have already brought up: Divx quality is noticeably lower than DVD quality, while mp3s can and do approach CD quality.

There. Those are my pre-coffee thoughts on the matter.

-r

Re:Ummmm....Price?

[Titusdot Groan]

How about comparing apples and apple sauce:

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (Full Screen Edition) DVD $15.99 [amazon.com]

Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone - Original Motion Picture Soundtrack $13.99 [amazon.com]

The full DVD with the movie, games, deleted scenes, a 360 view of Hogwarts, etc. etc. is only $2 more expensive than the soundtrack for the same movie.

Re:Interesting pricing

[SerpentMage]

You have that wrong. Movie companies only make 25% of their income from theaters. Movie companies make more money renting the movie out in terms of DVD's, etc.

Check the stats...

The movie industry now wants to get into the rental business by selling 4 Euro DVD's that only allow you to play the movie once. After that it is garbage. The home market is MUCHO BIGGER for the movie industry.

Re:In related news...

[Cpt_Kirks]

Isn't Vivendi Universal circling the bowl? They are about to join the ranks of Enron, Worldcom and Martha Stewart...

Re:Ok, so let's figure this out..

[Jucius Maximus]

"Dvd's have been around for what, about 4 years? Anyone find the back to the future dvd yet?"

Why don't you do some research and find out? The reasons wht this movie have not been released yet (and the officially annouced DVD Region 1 release date) have been available for some time now [bttf.com]. The non-appearance of this film on DVD so far is not an evil conspiracy.

FYI: There is currently a DVD BTTF available but it is a bootleg of the chinese laserdisc. The real product is coming.

Re:Lies, damn lies and Slashbots

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, there is a format where the quality is almost as good as dvd, SVCD. It a much larger format then divx, a svcd of a movie is usually 2-3 cds and if encoded correctly, the quality can be very close to that of the dvd. Unlike divx, it doesn't require large system resources to play, it'll run perfectly on a pentium 133 with 4 meg video ram. It can also include menus and extras like dvds, but from what I hear is a pain to encode.

From my experience, it has become a very popular format, when people are given the option of d/l a 2-3 cd svcd or 1 cd divx, they usually choose the svcd.

What am I getting for my $20?

[techstar25]

DVD Movie: usually over 3 hours of audio and video
The movie itself (widescreen and fullscreen)
The movie with a directors commentary
Isolated score
Trailers
Deleted scenes
Outtakes
Music videos
"The Making Of" Featurettes and Documentaries
Actor bios
Production photos and notes
DVD-Rom material for your computer

Music CD: usually 30-50 minutes of audio only
8-15 Songs
Sometimes some multimedia to view in your computer
Sometimes will not play in your computer at all

The American consumer isn't that dumb.

Re:That's great

[Sloppy]

Now they're going to start litigation against their customers.

No, the people they're going to sue aren't customers. The customers are the ones who pay money to them in exchange for CDs. The people they're considering suing are mp3z d00dz who don't pay. See the difference?

Re:I've said it before

[ceejayoz]

I have broadband, and I've bought more CDs than I ever did before Napster and its ilk. I've found some phenomenal music (Apocalyptica, for example) that I would never have found in a mass-market music store, and bought every CD they've made because I downloaded their stuff and loved it.