Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Movies Media

BitTorrent Blamed for Matrix2 Downloads 847

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the nice-while-it-lasted dept.
MartyJG writes "The BBC are running a story on how Matrix Reloaded is available via P2P. This time BitTorrent is taking the heat for the distribution - even though there's no company behind it to drag over the coals. The story speculates about the source of the copy, suggesting it's from a film or digital source rather than a cinema-screen-leech." Despite this piracy, the flick has made over $365M already. Including my tickets. Twice.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

BitTorrent Blamed for Matrix2 Downloads

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @09:49AM (#6047178)
    Great work guys. I'm downloading Matrix: Reloaded right now with BitTorrent and the whole thing is about to get Slashdotted. Thanks.
    • You'd actually want more people trying to download it at the same time... because that provides many more upload sites at the same time.

      Bittorrent is a really clever technology... I was able to download RedHat 9.0 in minutes rather than hours when it was made available.
      • by cdrudge (68377) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:09AM (#6047406) Homepage
        To a point, yes. However, if a tracker gets overloaded, everyone suffers.
      • by allgood2 (226994) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:33AM (#6047671)
        True, but the websites that host to the bit torrent files are very vunerable to slashdot effect. The last article on Slashdot crumled some of the more popular sites. Three of my five favorite sites were down for 2-5 days. That said, once people grab the files and actually start downloading, when there is a more than 60 people streaming the file, downloads rock.
    • by klmth (451037) <mkoivi3@unix.saunalahti.fi> on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @09:59AM (#6047298) Homepage Journal
      I know this is a joke, but I'll bite.
      Due to the swarming nature of BitTorrent, additional users downloading a file will not slow your downloads down. Quite the contrary - everyone will experience speedier downloads.
      • by akadruid (606405) * <slashdot@thedruid.co . u k> on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:11AM (#6047442) Homepage
        This has been proved by the Slashdot effect in the past.
        For example, the latest Doom 3 video [slashdot.org], although just 31mb, was almost impossible to get hold of by regular download, yet I found that BitTorrent maxed out my connection, giving me 60k/sec all through.
        The days of smoking servers are over, Slashdot is powering the age of fast downloads.
        Well, with a bit of imagination anyway.
        • by klmth (451037) <mkoivi3@unix.saunalahti.fi> on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:18AM (#6047514) Homepage Journal
          There has been quite some interest around designing a p2p hypertext transfer protocol. P2P has been proven to work very well with large files, where latency isn't much of an issue. When you download two gigs, you don't care if it takes thirty seconds for the download to begin.

          A decentralized p2p web-server network would be an interesting project, and certainly the bittorrent protocol could be a base for serving large files, but for serving small files direct connections are better. Perhaps a giant web-server pool that would simultaneously request webpages from the entire network and initiate a transfer with the first server to respond would work. However, there has so far been no development work towards this.

          The Circle is an interesting project which aims to create a p2p network for .debs
  • Link? (Score:3, Funny)

    by override11 (516715) <cpeterson@gts.gaineycorp.com> on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @09:50AM (#6047183) Homepage
    Someone plz post the bit-torrent link? :)
    • Re:Link? (Score:5, Funny)

      by zangdesign (462534) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:51AM (#6047847) Journal
      Great. So now you're reducing /. to a warez board.
    • Worldwide releases (Score:4, Interesting)

      by RenHoek (101570) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @11:56AM (#6048521) Homepage
      Say what you want about P2P programs and movie leeching. One of the most notable effects for me was that we don't have to wait half a year anymore in the rest of the world before we get to see a good movie!

      The best example is Star Wars I. When this movie was released there were actually people in Europe that FLEW OVER TO THE USA to watch that movie. Can you believe the insanity?

      That was also the movie that really rocked the internet for being on the internet _before_ it was released officially.

      I downloaded SW1 two days after the USA release and watched it in the public computer room at my university where I drew a huge crowd. Including 2 guys who _had_ tickets already to fly over. (I thought SW1 sucked though. I'm happy I didn't spend money on tickets)

      I'm pretty happy P2P movie leeching happened so that I was able to see LOTR in the theater right away. I did buy tickets for that one, and enjoyed it a lot.

      I haven't downloaded the new Matrix film nor did I get it on the net. I'm pretty sure the internet version is of low quality so that doesn't tempt me too much. I don't have the need to go to the theater because I think it's probably going to be pretty mediocre if you don't count the fighting scene, so I'll just wait for a DVD release at the movie rental.
  • Let's see (Score:4, Funny)

    by octalgirl (580949) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @09:50AM (#6047184) Journal
    Let's see the MP** go after this one....
    • Re:Let's see (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Bonker (243350) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:23AM (#6047573)
      Who modded the parent redundant?

      One of the most important features of Bittorrent is that it is almost completely decentralized. Rather than even p2p sharing, it's just swarm downloading. This decentralization is ultimately what will protect it from the incredible litigation powers of the MPAA and RIAA.

      Also of note is its noted ability to be used for non-infringing purposes, such as the download of the aforementioned Redhat 9 ISOs. I'm certain that Redhat is *gleeful* that the ISOs are available over Bittorent rather than everyone trying to pull them off of their server and their mirrors. This non-infringing use will be a saving grace when legal-types start examining bittorrent for lawsuit fodder.
      • by Splork (13498) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @01:26PM (#6049395) Homepage
        Get a clue! bittorrent is not a privacy protecting lawless-idiot hiding p2p client. it is meant for big LEGAL downloads.

        In order for bittorrent to work someone has to run a tracker. that is the centralization point. it is the single server on the net making the download possible by coordinating the peers for that download.

        Legal entities take note: if you're going to sue someone first, sue the tracker operator(s)! Once that is said and done its EASY to simply ask any tracker for a list of peers serving the content to the world. Those are your next obvious targets.

        bittorrent as an application is no different than running a simple web server hosting the content from a legal standpoint. it just saves on hosting bandwidth problems by using the downloading peers as a coordinated distributed cache during times of high load.
  • Matrix???? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cansecofan22 (62618) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @09:50AM (#6047186) Homepage
    Maybe the copies are another form of control... Give us a grainy low res version to excite us and then grab the $8 admission to the movie.... The matrix has us!
  • Wow! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Verteiron (224042) * on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @09:51AM (#6047205) Homepage
    The Matrix Reloaded is available through BitTorrent? Wow, thanks BBC, I never would have known that without that story! Now I just gotta find that .torrent file...
    • Re:Wow! (Score:4, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:08AM (#6047403)
      http://10mbit.com/suprnova/the.matrix.reloaded.div x.ts.daduck_sn.torrent
      (730 MB, DivX)

      http://10mbit.com/suprnova/The.Matrix.Reloaded.S VC D.TS-Centropy.torrent
      (2.6 gb, Bin/Cue) - Great quality...a little dark in places, but essentially like watching it in the theater.
    • Re:Wow! (Score:4, Interesting)

      by sjgman9 (456705) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @11:15AM (#6048119)
      In 1999, I saw the Matrix 3 times in theaters - $25
      I already saw the movie in theaters once. $10.
      I will see it with my dad. $20
      I bought the first Matrix DVD. $20
      I bought the Matrix Revisited DVD $20
      I will buy the Animatrix DVD -- unknown cost.
      I will buy Reloaded on DVD - $20
      I will see Revolutions, twice in theaters, $20
      I will buy Revolutions on DVD - $20

      Lets see. I spent (or will spend) at least $155 dollars on a high quality movie trilogy. I really like the movie. I might even buy the videogame.

      The Matrix Reloaded has made $355 million dollars. In two weeks. It could easily make upwards of $1 Billion. The first one might have made that much when everything globally is added up.
      Production costs for all 3 movies, I am guessing are at least $350 million dollars (Matrix - 50, Reloaded, 150, Revolutions, 150).

      The movie studio is turning a profit from a well-made movie with a huge following. They are decrying the very themes the movie espouses (hacking -- I mean cracking :), deviant behavior, pirate broadcasting, fighting power). Ironic. For all the money turned over to them, they are not happy. For all the profit they are making on an excellent work, they are not happy.

      If you want to completely eliminate movie piracy, do not make movies. Somewhere, someone will use a DVcam and film a movie. Somewhere, someone will bribe a pimply-faced projection operator to transfer a film print onto a computer.
      Somewhere, someone will use DeCSS to watch a DVD they BOUGHT to remove territorial restrictions. Maybe someone with less ethics will make it widely available to downloaders everwhere else.

      Billions of dollars. Many hours involved in a fictional story by millions of people. That money could have easily have gone elsewhere, whether the movie was "pirated" or not. You made a good movie. Be happy. We are paying to see it. Laugh to the bank. Gleefully. Keep making good movies and you will have our business. Just accept the fact that some people will redistribute copies of movies. If it gets people to be bigger fans of movies, then its just a cost of business.

      Microsoft doesnt care too much about piracy. Why? People get hooked on their software like drug addicts. When they get in a corporate environment, its what they know. Their companies want to be properly licensed, so they pay for software.

      Look at Macromedia. People download and crack trials of their software. They learn how to use it. When they get into corporate environments, they have users who will put it to good use and put it on a corporate expense account.

      Piracy will always happen. Get over it and spend money on making GOOD movies, not inane shit. Your industry has the luxury of making people pay for movies before seeing them. True, somone can download a crappy cam version, but to see it in full cinematic glory on a digital projection screen is well worth the money being charged. Be happy. For your own sake and bottom line.
      After all, the Matrix is not ISHTAR
  • by TopShelf (92521) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @09:51AM (#6047208) Homepage Journal
    Without a company to go after, it's only a matter of time before the MPAA goes after a few users a la the RIAA over the last couple months. Considering that studios put oodles more money into a major movie release than a music CD, they have plenty more to "lose" from P2P trading...
    • So if they go after ONE person, they also have to go after the other 700 million people downloading as well because not one person is more accountable than any other. It's entirely balanced distribution, and finding the original contributor is all but impossible after it has been released to more that one machine. I dont think they could drag anyone to court and honestly answer why the other 699,999,999 people aren't there as well, it would be discrimination.
      • by ReelOddeeo (115880) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:21AM (#6047556)
        So if they go after ONE person, they also have to go after the other 700 million people downloading as well

        Try telling that to the officer when you get a speeding ticket. "Well, I was going as fast as everyone else."

        I think you misunderstand. Hope you don't learn the hard way.

        They discover that your ip is offering this unauthorized copy of a copyrighted work. They investiate. Track you down. Some days later, you get served with legal process. (Or arrested?)

        You are guilty of a crime. It doesn't matter that everyone else is also doing it. It doesn't matter if they don't even go after all the other people.

        All they need to do is make a few very public examples. For this reason, I'm sure they'll sue you for $300 milliion, and then settle for $15,000. Just as the RIAA recently did with four students. This had the effect of completely stopping piracy of copyright works owned by RIAA member companies.
    • by ihatewinXP (638000) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:09AM (#6047412)
      -- the source of the copy, suggesting it's from a film or digital source rather than a cinema-screen-leech--

      Howabout going after themselves? I remeber a few days before Episode II came out I had a copy...and it was terrible. Sure I watched it and was wowed but when the movie came out I still went and saw it. Now if YOUR OWN COMPANY leaks a pristine digital copy it seems to me that the problem is your own company and not a file format (.torrent). And as many people pointed out, Ive seen matrix twice now and I garuntee you anyone searching out reloaded on bit torrent is A. a huge fan and B. will or has already shelled out to see it.

      If they start to sue individual users since there is no company ill boycot the 3rd movie. Just like ill never buy a CD again (i support my artists by buying a tshirt at concerts, that is where they make money) the only thing you can do these days is vot with your dollar.

      You guys (and gals) talk so much shit about the MPAA but who pays their salaries? You do. Everytime you see the matrix / LOTR your paying their lawyers to hunt people down. Never forget that.
    • .NET act (Score:3, Interesting)

      by JeffSh (71237)
      the original poster reminds me of an interesting point.

      IANAL, but if a user is not sending the entire file, is she/he actually committing a crime by the net act?

      The .NET act defines copyright infringement by sending like $1000 in stuff over a 6 month period. since a section of a movie is valueless, doesn't that make .torrent a gray area?

      intriguing, at the very least.
    • by aborchers (471342) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @11:38AM (#6048320) Homepage Journal
      I know this isn't a very popular point of view 'round here, but going after the people "sharing" the works is actually what the copyright industry *should* be doing under their existing legal protections. What they are doing instead is trying to buy/manipulate the law to the point where they've turned our potentially liberating technology into an esophagus from the corporate content industry to the consumer. I for one, would prefer they prosecute offendors under their existing protections rather than turn our PCs and other computing devices into next-generation cable TVs...

  • by Trespass (225077) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @09:51AM (#6047209) Homepage
    Their lawyer was quoted as saying 'This one is the exact same thing as the last one. Same gimmicks, same fast-food mysticism. I believe we have a strong case for plagarism'.
  • by FosterKanig (645454) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @09:52AM (#6047213)
    I guess next you will tell me that people use Kazaa for porn.
  • by neildiamond (610251) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @09:52AM (#6047215)
    Most of these early bootlegs are filmed on a VHS camcorder with people's heads in the picture. If I was planning on seeing Matrix in the theatre, I wouldn't download a garbage version. If I wasn't planning on seeing it in theatres, I might consider it, but I'd probably still wait for the DVD. How does this hurt them?
    • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @09:54AM (#6047240)
      Ahem.... Perhaps you missed this detail from the BBC article:


      Although it is not unusual for pirate copies of blockbuster films to appear on the internet soon after release, they are often of poor quality, filmed on a hidden videcamera by a cinemagoer.

      The picture is often jerky, with poor sound, punctuated by ambient noise in the cinema.

      But the copy available using BitTorrent appears to be have made from a film print, and is in widescreen format with surround sound.
    • by AlgUSF (238240) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:00AM (#6047313) Homepage
      I'll probably rent it on DVD when it comes out, because my girlfriend doesn't want to see it. I guess she doesn't understand the responsibilities of dating a geek?
    • no kidding, I got to see XMen 2 in this way (was called TCO subbed version) & decided I would stay away from any copies of Matrix. Downloading bootlegs might make sense if the highlight of the movie is the story. For movies where special effects is the king, it makes no sense to watch a crappy video version with wolverine sounding like he has got a cold.
    • by cdrudge (68377) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:15AM (#6047485) Homepage
      After seeing the moving on opening day, I went straight home to see if I could find it on BT. Started downloading it and completed it after a day or two. Started to watch the first 3 minutes and promptly deleted both VCDs. The movie was grainy like it was filmed on a 8mm video camera. It also had an annoying 4 degrees of tilt and the bightness was constantly fading up an down. The sound was good though, as long as you don't mind it fading from left to right to both to neither.
  • At last.... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @09:52AM (#6047220)
    Slashdot subscriptions have real added value... subscribers can get their copy of Reloaded before the whole site gets /.ed
  • by Azghoul (25786) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @09:52AM (#6047223) Homepage
    The writeup says it all: The friggin' movie has made 365M already! Not to mention to utter PILES of cash from all the merchandizing and cross-promotion...

    I don't know what it cost to make, but to whine that "a few hundred million isn't enough, those bastards are ripping us off" doesn't leave me with a whole lot of sympathy.

    How much is enough, Hollywood?
    • by praxim (117485) <pat@@@thepatsite...com> on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @09:59AM (#6047299) Homepage
      I don't know, but I'm posting this from work right now, and I'm pretty sure I wouldn't want someone else who has nothing to do with my work determining when I've made enough money from it and telling me I'm "whining" if somebody steals it.
      • by JimDabell (42870) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:37AM (#6047707) Homepage

        I'm pretty sure I wouldn't want someone else who has nothing to do with my work determining when I've made enough money from it and telling me I'm "whining" if somebody steals it.

        Absolutely. But in the case of copyright infringements against the copyright holders of the Matrix, this is not a valid argument.

        The sole reason that they have special reproduction rights over Reloaded is because they are working for us, the public.

        The entire point of copyright is to reward people who create original works. We reward them by allowing them sole reproduction rights over their works for a limited time. Then the works pass into the public domain, which they would have done instantly without copyright law.

        The idea is that we are rewarding them for something we will eventually possess collectively. Creators are essentially working for the public. So I wouldn't say that we, the public, have nothing to do with their work.

        Of course, this system is breaking down as our (the public's) property gets dragged further and further out of reach by extensions to copyright periods, copyright holders are attempting to extert more control than simple copyrights, and people are infringing on those copyrights more and more.

      • by dissy (172727)
        > I don't know, but I'm posting this from work right now, and I'm pretty sure I
        > wouldn't want someone else who has nothing to do with my work determining when
        > I've made enough money from it and telling me I'm "whining" if somebody steals
        > it.

        Well, too bad. I mean seriously, you have no options to do that.

        The two options are

        1) You copyright your work. In that case the public owns your work after 14 years (I do not observe the new laws, explained below)

        2) You do not copyright your work,
  • by Doom Ihl' Varia (315338) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @09:52AM (#6047224)
    I've paid about $30 so far to watch The Matrix: Reloaded. Reloaded has provoked many philosophical debates. Is Neo a genuine Jesus-like messiah? Is there a Matrix within a Matrix? Then there is speculation on what will happen next. Is it so wrong, after paying $30 total to see it in theatres, to download a low quality telesync just to double check your facts for arguements sake?
    • by gfxguy (98788) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:02AM (#6047339)
      Let's face facts - you probably don't have the same profile as the majority of people downloading the movie.

      On the surface, I agree with you - I've seen it, and even if I downloaded a copy I'm going to buy it when it comes out on DVD anyway. Yet, if I downloaded it, they'd claim I "cost them" $30 or so (1 ticket price and one DVD price).

      But the fact is that it is their content and as long as it's available to you (currently in the theater). There's never been a good argument for piracy, but then there's no evidence that piracy is really costing them money anyway. I wish they'd wake up and smell the coffee - every time a newer, better, more flexible medium comes along they throw a shit fit, and yet end up making more money than they ever did before.
      • by Doom Ihl' Varia (315338) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:12AM (#6047451)
        I believe The Matrix: Reloades is a special case. Of all the people online I know of several people who paid to see the movie and then downloaded. Yet, I know not a single person who has simply downloaded without seeing it in a theatre. I realize this is only anecdotal evidence and prooves nothing, I am comepelled to believe that wide spread piracy without paying is not nearly as bad as the MPAA would like everyone to believe.
    • by ryanvm (247662) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:39AM (#6047721)
      Is it so wrong, after paying $30 total to see it in theatres, to download a low quality telesync just to double check your facts for arguements sake?

      Yes. It is wrong that you are that much of a dork.
  • Social Event (Score:5, Insightful)

    by KrunZ (247479) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @09:53AM (#6047230)
    Movies like the Matrix, Lords of the Rings etc are social events. People will watch it in the cinema among their friends family no matter how easy it is to get at divx copy.
    • by inaeldi (623679)
      Speak for yourself, Mr. Social. Signed, A social reject
    • by GT_Alias (551463) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:50AM (#6047838)
      Yeah man, it was definitely a social event the night we caught it. If the people couldn't bring their friends or family with them, they sure as hell could have them call on their cell phone! I'm sure the caller was enjoying the movie vicariously through the movie-watcher, and I know we were all enjoying the incessant bleeps and burbles of cute little ring patterns.

      And hey, don't let age be a factor in bringing that family. Got an infant!? Grab an extra diaper or two and bring 'em right in with you! After all, what infant wouldn't love special effects blasting at 1000 db with flashing explosions lighting up the room. They were absolutely screaming with joy!

  • by Junior J. Junior III (192702) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @09:54AM (#6047235) Homepage
    Those hundreds of Agent Smiths that Neo had to fight were actually multiple streaming BitTorrent threads. It all makes sense now.
  • So what? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Stargoat (658863) <stargoat@gmail.com> on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @09:55AM (#6047243) Journal
    This is nothing new. People have been downloading movies for at least three years. Simply because this movie is new and popular, is this suddenly an issue that needs to be addressed? The answer is no. There is nothing here more serious than the downloading of an MP3. In fact, it might even be less of a problem. After all, the price of a movie ticket ($7.50) is cheaper than the price of a CD ($12.00).

    So all I can say is: Bah.

    • Re:So what? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by John3 (85454) <john3@cor3.14nells.com minus pi> on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:37AM (#6047706) Homepage Journal
      It's considered "news" because the Matrix Reloaded is such a marketing success. Every media outlet is trying to find a way to come up with a new story covering the movie, so this P2P article is just another angle. If a sea of Keanu biographies and rehashes of the Matrix philosophy, this P2P article probably seemed "new" to the editors even though it's just another article about piracy/sharing.
  • by GMontag (42283) <gmontag AT guymontag DOT com> on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @09:55AM (#6047249) Homepage Journal
    The story speculates about the source of the copy, suggesting it's from a film or digital source rather than a cinema-screen-leech.

    Wow, sounds like the culprit is an insider! Perhaps someone should contact these guys and point out the "inadvertant error" in their analysis before the real criminals get away?
  • by CiaranMc (149798) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @09:55AM (#6047261)
    This is pure nonsense. There are about 6 different versions of Reloaded floating about online but all the ones I've seen are Telesyncs.

    There aren't any screener versions or similar online yet... believe me, I'd have looked!

    At the end of the day, I can't imagine any Matrix fans are going to download the movie rather than seeing it on the big screen and/or buying the DVD.
    • by stratjakt (596332) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:02AM (#6047332) Journal
      No, but many non-matrix fans will download it just for the sake of seeing it, instead of waiting to rent it at blockbuster.

      The rental industry is getting killed by movie piracy online. If you're a fan of a film, you'll go to the theatre to see it.

      But all those so-so films that you tell yourself "I'll wait and rent it", can now be downloaded free-as-in-hobo at your leisure.

      Of course we only need justify this the same way as we do with MP3 'sharing'; Why should I pay to see a movie that only has one good character and the rest is filler?
      • by phr2 (545169) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:12AM (#6047458)
        I've heard that online file sharing has led to DVD's making it into the rental stores much sooner after the theatrical release than used to happen. That means people are getting to rent DVD's while the movie is still sort of fresh. The rental places can only benefit from that.

        I've also heard that movie theaters are in far more trouble from video rentals than they could possibly be from file sharing. Who wants to go to some sticky-floor theater and eat overpriced greasy popcorn and pay $10 per person for tickets when you can rent a DVD and watch it on your home theater with your friends for less than the price of one ticket? Viewers are starting to figure that out.

        These days I hardly ever go see big-release movies in the theater. I saw Spiderman and LOTR 1 and that's about it. Oh yeah, Attack of the Clones because a friend dragged me to the theater. I haven't seen LOTR 2 yet and I'm looking forward to seeing it, but I'm going to wait for a DVD rental. If that puts another nail into the MPAA's coffin, I'm all for it.

  • by Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @09:56AM (#6047265)
    I've tried getting the movie 3 times with eMule, and each time it wasn't Matrix but a porn movie. The female characters were reloaded alright, but not the Matrix ...

    I guess I'll just go the theater to see it.
  • by bushboy (112290) <lttc@lefthandedmonkeys.org> on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @09:58AM (#6047285) Homepage
    Considering that some people are seeing the movie more than once and how much it has grossed so far, complaining about illegal downloads seems so redundant, it's almost laughable !

    I'll take a bet 95% of people who have an illegal copy of the movie have paid to see it.

    There's no substitue for seeing a movie like the matrix on a big screen.
    • There's no substitue for seeing a movie like the matrix on a big screen.

      Too bad so many of the multiplex theaters don't have a big screen any more. Just 10 or 12 small to mid-sized ones.

      If I have to watch on a small screen I'll watch at home.

  • by victorvodka (597971) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @09:58AM (#6047293) Homepage
    Though it's true the Matrix Reloaded is a far better film to see on the BIG SCREEN than in some cheesy little window on my PC, my enjoyment of it that way (and I took my wife with me to see it too!) did not contribute anything towards the 380 million dollars it has collected to date. Why? We snuck in! Never pay to see a movie at a megaplex... just leave your coat in your car and claim you're returning from a cigarette break. It's the punk rock thing to do!!
  • by caffeinex36 (608768) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @09:59AM (#6047304)
    Becuase Bruce Almighty [cnn.com] made more money than them....they have to come up with some excuse for a shitty Jim Carrey movie beating them. Wouldn't you?

    Rob
    • Save your mod points.
      No need to click on the article, it compares Bruce Almighty [imdb.com]'s first week with TMR [imdb.com]'s second week.
      A noticebly more scientific study is available at IMDB.com [imdb.com].
      To be fair to CNN, they do point out their article is crap, with a quote from Warner Bros.
      You can't compare an R-rated movie over a holiday period with movies that appeal to a broad family audience.
      This would appear to be what they have done - and further bias it by comparing chalk with cheese.
  • Real Menace (Score:5, Funny)

    by slaker (53818) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:01AM (#6047326)
    "Digital piracy has become a real menace," - Jack Valenti (see, I RTFA!)

    I'd say SARS is a real menace. Or AIDS. Or rednecks in the white house. How many people has my piratred copy of Matrix 2 killed? Injured even?

    OK, there was the Russian. But I didn't know he was standing there when threw the CD.

    Clearly ones and zeroes are dangerous things. We shouldn't be teaching these things in school. Think of the children! Won't someone think of the children!

    Oh, the humanity.

    Jack Valenti must not have a very good grip on reality if he thinks my vain effort to figure out if Carrie-Anne Moss shows either of her no-doubt perfect nipples in that one scene is in any way dangerous to civilization as we know it. Fucktard.
  • by smd4985 (203677) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:05AM (#6047359) Homepage
    In other news, the Associated Press is reporting that 85% of Matrix2 bootleg bytes flow over Cisco routers. Therefore, Cisco is to blame for bootlegging. Several users reported that their Cisco products simply began downloading a Matrix2 bootleg without their permission.
  • Here's a hint (Score:5, Insightful)

    by rabtech (223758) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:08AM (#6047389) Homepage
    Release the DVDs earlier, and people will buy them instead of downloading. And those who still download probably wouldn't have bought a DVD anyway - for them the choice was a) don't have it or b) pirate it. They were not open to choice c) 'buy it' in the first place. That is the fallacy that the MPAA/RIAA rely on when citing "piracy concerns" - they assume that everyone who has Item X would have paid for it if it were not available in pirated form; that is a faulty assumption.

    The fact that large-scale movie piracy (and indeed, any piracy) is happening is an indicator that people are largely unsatisfied with the current prices and/or distribution methods.
  • by Andy_R (114137) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:08AM (#6047398) Homepage Journal
    Apart from the obvious one that the 'low quality DVDs' are probably exactly the same data that is being touted as a high quality bit-torrent file...

    There was no 'co-ordinated worldwide release' for Reloaded, here in Britain we got it a week an a half later than the US.

    There were a whole host of pirate versions on alt.pictures.binaries.divx before the film was even released over here.

    As for a solution to the problem, I've seen the film at the cinema, and I'd buy it on DVD, but guess what, there is no legitimate DVD yet.

    I'd be tempted to download a divx as a stop-gap until the DVD is released (in it's final, most complete version) but I know that divx files rarely play back with sound even with the latest 5.05 release of the divx codec for Mac.
  • by Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:09AM (#6047418)
    I can share the Matrix on Slashdot. Here :

    _O__-._O__
    _|\___\|__ Dodge this !
    _|_____|__
    _/\____/\_
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:10AM (#6047424)
    Who gives a damn about BitTorrent?

    Newsgroups are where it's at. All three cd's of the Centropy SVCD release are in many of the alt.binaries groups.

    Criticising BitTorrent shows just how clueless these guys are. Always aim at the end-user sharing program, and never at the underlying violators who are hosting the actual data being shared. Maybe if they went after Centropy, something might get done, but then again where could we go to download status symbols and be sup4r l33t??

    Can't help noticing that it still somehow managed to gross a totally ridiculous amount of money..

  • A little perspective (Score:4, Interesting)

    by morcheeba (260908) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:16AM (#6047490) Journal
    $365mil is a lot of moolah; it needs a comparison.

    Let's assume the worst case scenario*: Every college student in the united states downloads the movie and don't pay their $7 to see the movie in a theater. There are about 5 million college students**, so that works out to $35 million. That's ten percent of the total. And that total is still rising -- the movie hasn't been out that long, and the DVD is still far away.

    * Ok, this isn't the worst case - sorry to be us-centric and imply that college students are the pirates. But, this is their propoganda and I'm following it to the MPAA's extreme.
    ** 1.3 mil college bound seniors [nais.org] * 4 = guesstimate
  • Arr, they be rich! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by gobbo (567674) <wrewrite @ g m a i l.com> on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:18AM (#6047518) Journal
    "Despite the availability of pirate copies, The Matrix Reloaded has made more than $363.5m at the box office worldwide so far. "

    Piracy: a crucial part of viral marketing.

    Pirates have been given a bad rap, historically. History is written by the victors, remember. Many of the pirates from the great sailing age freed slaves and the indentured, set up their own kingless mini-republics and functional anarchies, and would appear more modern to us than their other contemporaries.

    See this excert from TAZ on pirate utopias [sacred-texts.com] or this article [eco-action.org] or google it [google.com]. And of course if you're really into the spirit of things, you could goof around reading No Quarter Given [noquartergiven.net].

    "They vilify us, the scoundrels do, when there is only this difference, they rob the poor under the cover of law, forsooth, and we plunder the rich under the protection of our own courage. Had you not better make then one of us, than sneak after these villains for employment" - D. Defoe

  • by Zog The Undeniable (632031) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:18AM (#6047522)
    The Matrix program just made you *think* you did, so you could believe you were sticking one on The Man. This made you happy and contented so the machines could suck a few more amps out of your neural synapses.
  • In other news... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jdreed1024 (443938) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:19AM (#6047532)
    ...Ford is being blamed by families of pedestrians who got hit by cars. 3M is being blamed by the RIAA for producing CD-Rs which pirates can used to store music on. Oh, and Sony is being blamed by parents whose kids are dumb because they watch TV all the time.

    *yawn*. All things can be used for good or evil. Duh. What would be ideal would be for the BitTorrent folks to publicly denounce this. Or add a little disclaimer to their page (like Apple did with Rip Mix Burn) saying "We do not endorse or support the use of BitTorrent for illegal activities".

    Now, here come the cries of "waaah, censorship, you're a fascist, etc". But think about it for just a second. All BitTorrent would be saying is "look, we created this to solve the problem of distributing things like ISO images to hundreds of people. We didn't create this to help you download the matrix. We stronly encourage you not to use it for that". That's not censorship, nor is it selling out. (Unless, of course, they really did create BitTorrent specifically for downloading movies.) They can't actively prevent you from downloading illegal files, but they can tell you that they think it's not such a bright idea.

    Napster, Kazaa, and all the others really couldn't pull the "people can download anything from our networks, not just music" without the entire world laughing. Seeing as how BitTorrent has been used by RedHat and others to distribute ISOs, they actually can pull that argument and have it stick. And I really hope the BitTorrent folks don't pass on this opporuntity. Because then the RIAA has two choices: 1) accuse RedHat and others of supporting piracy by encouarging BitTorrent (which, while it would have MSFT dancing with glee, just isn't going to stick in this day and age); 2) suck it up and realize that tools can be used for both good and evil

  • by MORTAR_COMBAT! (589963) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:23AM (#6047577)
    "BitTorent Blamed for Matrix2 Downloads"

    Gun blamed for killing spree

    Circular saw blamed for rash of new buildings

    Gasoline blamed for smog

    People kill people with guns. People build buildings using various tools. People burn gasoline in their cars. People illegally download the Matrix: Reloaded.
  • by Gyorg_Lavode (520114) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:31AM (#6047652)
    Ok, so a quality version is pirated. These are the same people who released 4 of the animatrix shorts for free? I thought they would have realized that their real fans want the dvd. The film has grossed roughly 350 in the box office so I find it hard to say their being hit there, (didn't the first film gross about that in it's entire run?) And the people downloading to get a copy at home are most likely either teenagers who 1: aren't (or shouldn't be for an R movie) their target audience, and 2: are likely to find a way around buying it anyway.

    The majority of their target are probably 20's-30's, working males. Many of them downloading it are probably only filling the gap between when they no longer want to see it in the theater and when they can get the DVD. I did the same thing for LotR:FotR and LotR:TTT. I downloaded the movie, but the second that dvd comes out I"m getting the extended edition. Why? I want to watch the movie now, but I want the actual DVD when I can get it. Will I download Matrix Reloaded? Maybe. Will I buy Animatrix, matrix:reloaded and matrix when they come out on dvd? Of course. (And yes I realize matrix is out, I want to get it w/ reloaded though.)

    350 million in a couple of weeks is not "'debilitating' for the industry no matter how they slice the pie.

    But hey, at least bittorrent is getting some advertising in.

  • Governing Dynamics (Score:5, Interesting)

    by user no. 590291 (590291) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:34AM (#6047679)
    I wonder if anybody at the MPAA has bothered to see "A Beautiful Mind"? If they did, they might realize that getting a piece of a really large pie is sometimes better than getting an entire small pie.
  • by bizitch (546406) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:39AM (#6047720) Homepage
    The one advantage the movie industry has with piracy is the fact that to really enjoy a movie like The Matrix - you gotta go see it on the BIG screen with Dolby/THX at bone crushing volume

    Try doing that at home without the wife ripping your head off ...
  • Hypocrisy (Score:3, Insightful)

    by kin_korn_karn (466864) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:42AM (#6047742) Homepage
    OK, you rail against the MPAA but pay twice to see shallow garbage like "The Matrix Reloaded"?

    I didn't expect journalistic integrity but I'd like to see a longer-than-10-second attention span..
  • by Remik (412425) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:43AM (#6047751)
    ...for making a movie about Philosophy and then charging $9 to see it. No one with a philosophy degree can afford to pay $9.

    -R
  • by MongooseCN (139203) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:47AM (#6047798) Homepage
    Everyone is trying to figure out the recipe for the OrgAsMo Cake.
  • by beef3k (551086) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @10:52AM (#6047869)
    ...if they'd put the thing up for grabs themselves to whoever was willing to pay, say 5 bucks for the download. People like myself who really want to see this movie will still be headed to the cinemas.
  • by dark-br (473115) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @11:03AM (#6047996) Homepage
    None of those are digital copys, only DTS but i got the REAL PROPER and its quite good quality.

    ESOTERiC Release [siol.com]

    REAL PROPER-APM Release [10mbit.com]

    Centropy SVCD Release [10mbit.com]

    Daduck-sn Release [10mbit.com]

  • by Quixadhal (45024) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @11:27AM (#6048230) Homepage Journal
    If the movie was leaked from a film or digital source, then it seems to me that the MPAA needs to settle down and take care of itself before they start wagging fingers at everyone else.

    How do movies get leaked? Who has access to them? What potential fines/penalties/criminal charges can and should be levied aginast people who actually have physical access to prints or digital copies?

    If it was a digital copy leak... how was it done? If it was copied over a network, why wasn't it secured? Why wasn't in ecncrypted to prevent this in the first place?

    Seems to me that the MPAA has much bigger problems than a few people who want to copy semi-decent quality rips of their products to watch on little tiny desktop monitors after they've already gone to see it in the theatres and helped make the movie a huge sucess.

    It doesn't matter if there's a spoon or not.
  • by SuperKendall (25149) * on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @12:09PM (#6048642)
    If they really wanted to cut down on piracy, all they would have to do is offer zero-day official DVD's - they could have just the movie with no extras for $5. Most people would probably buy that to get a great copy, and also go to the theater as well for the experience...

    They can then offer the DVD later with all the extras, and most people would buy that too. At least for movies like the Matrix... it would probably only be a good plan for mega-movies and not smaller stuff.
  • Say it with me (Score:4, Insightful)

    by CaptainSuperBoy (17170) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @01:05PM (#6049211) Homepage Journal
    Cars blamed for drunk driving deaths
    Guns blamed for armed robbery
    Airport security blamed for terrorism
    Music blamed for school shootings
    McDonald's blamed for fat people

    I could go on...
  • stategic criticism (Score:4, Informative)

    by bigpat (158134) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @02:04PM (#6049796)
    Sounds a bit like big media has made a strategic decision to criticise file sharing whenever their revenues don't meet initial estimates. Works nicely to cover their own overblown estimates and lays the groundwork for more federal intelectual property laws. While in reality the file trading has a negligable effect on their revenues and really they are just seeking legal controls on the medium which will maintain the high equipment costs that will keep the barriers to entry high for small movie makers. This is restraint of competition at it's simplest and most underhanded.

    Also, if they are so concerned about the state of their art, why don't they focus on making the movie theatres enforce a modicum of civility. Last time I went to the movies (for the matrix reloaded) two people's cell phones rang and they answered them... they had conversations that went something like "hey" ... "I'm at the movies" ... "Watching matrix reloaded"... "yup"... "right"... "uh huh" "do you think I can call you later?"... "oh okay" ... "yup" ... "alright" ... "I'll call you tonight, or maybe tomorrow" ... "bye" And that was the shorter of the two. Not to mention the man that seemed to have no understanding that his constant commentary might disturb those around him... We ended up moving only to suffer the constant questions of a confused 10 year old kid with his father, I can't blame the kid, but the father should have known better.

    A company can't charge $10 a pop for that kind of experience and then complain that they aren't getting all the money you deserve. You deserve what you get.

  • by compiler e rror (676349) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @02:13PM (#6049877)
    I really don't understand the "Wanhh, the movie industry isn't giving me exactly what I want exactly how I want it, so I'm going to steal it since they're clearly ripping me off... yet I'm doing nothing wrong" mentality.

    I actually help pirate movies and games, and I think any attempt to justify my actions is ridiculous. I know what I'm doing is wrong; I'm not foolish enough to pretend it isn't.

    The movie industry has the right to produce crap and distribute it however they like. They have the right to charge you $100 a ticket. And guess what... even if they did, you STILL wouldn't have any right to sneak into a theater or pirate the movie. If you think they're charging too much, or they're taking too long to get the DVD to you.. tough shit. I know it's painful to hear, but you don't have any rights when it comes to movies.. unless you've already paid your money.

    It's absurd: Someone makes a product you want, but you don't need. They don't want to sell it to you at the price you would like to pay for it.. and they don't want to give it to you (in DVD form, in this case) when you want to receive it. Too damn bad. It's THEIRS.. they can do with it whatever they please. If you have a problem with it, then don't support them... but it's never justifiable to steal something you merely WANT, simply because you can't legitimately obtain it in a manner that would please you.

    That being said... I pirate some stuff because I want it quickly, and half of the stuff I seriously wouldn't buy even if I couldn't pirate it.. For the most part, I just enjoy collecting things. If someone makes a product that I think should be supported, I pay for it. I do not think, however, that what I'm doing is okay. I just acknowledge that I'm not the most morally upstanding person around. Piracy supporters: Stop fooling yourselves.
  • by RestiffBard (110729) on Tuesday May 27, 2003 @03:52PM (#6050806) Homepage
    Matrix Reloaded

    1. saw it in the theater
    2. saw it twice or more in theater
    3. theater, then Divx
    4. theater, then Divx, then Matrix box set
    5. there is no Divx

Some people have a great ambition: to build something that will last, at least until they've finished building it.

Working...