Associated Press – June 21, 2007:
He doesn’t want to be an ogre about it, but the father of a fifth-grader thinks teachers are wasting time when they show movies in class — and if the film is a bootleg, he says, “That’s a really terrible lesson.”
Tim Trewhella, 46, said his 10-year-old daughter reported that her class watched the animated movie “Shrek the Third” on Tuesday and recognized it as the fairy-tale hit still showing in theaters.
The Motion Picture Association of America says major American movie studios lost $6.1 billion to piracy in 2005, 20 percent of that in the U.S.
I know you’re quoting the article, but please don’t post the make-believe figures that the **AA’s come up with. Not everyone is smart enough to know that they are full of it.
That aside, if this teacher is stupid enough to show a bootleg movie at a public school, I don’t think he/she is fit to be an educator.
/off topic note to ed.
http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=6639#comments
post 16 is spam
I’m thinking she’s in summer school, and probably an elective/fun course(s) of some kind, not a required course. I went to summer school for various cool classes like model rockets and sci-fi movies, computer programming (Apple BASIC, woohoo!), ceramics, and some other fun silly courses. By late junior high, sometimes I’d just pal around the town with guys and gals from other schools in our district. It was kind of cool going into junior and senior high already knowing kids from many other schools.
Unfortunately, in this case, the teacher will inevitably get a severe reprimand and/or fired — not to mention sued by some rich folks for entertaining kids on a dime. Quoting the article, the guy reporting it, Tim Trewhella, said going public “might be making this unpleasant for the school district. But as a taxpayer and a parent, I don’t want my dollars going for movies. It’s the teacher’s job to make the educational stuff interesting.” Well, once the district and teacher are thoroughly sued by the movie industry, his tax dollars will be going to lawyers and movie studios, instead of his daughter’s and neighbor kids’ education. Like my buddy Bugs said, “What a maroon!”
Related: The Motion Picture Association of America says major American movie studios lost $6.1 billion to piracy in 2005, 20 percent of that in the U.S. I wonder how much money studios lost because they made crappy, ill-conceived, poorly written movies. Maybe they didn’t lose a cent to piracy, because people viewing movies they downloaded wouldn’t have paid to see it in the theater anyway. How can you count something that may or may not have happened? Isn’t that like taking theory as fact?
By the way, I lost $4.6 million dollars in 2006 due to stupid news stories and Hollywood greed — so who’s gonna pay me?
2,
I sent a note ..
information wants to be free. fight copyright laws! artists should make a living selling services (shows) and not products. very good lesson to these kids IMO.
Hell my mum works at a School and they do this thing all the time
#3 – I wonder how much money studios lost because they made crappy, ill-conceived, poorly written movies. Maybe they didn’t lose a cent to piracy, because people viewing movies they downloaded wouldn’t have paid to see it in the theater anyway.
I wonder how your subjective opinion about the artistic merits of the film industry’s product justifies the piracy of the product. I call bullshit.
I submit that if you pick any year since the dawn of Hollywood you’ll find the crap to quality ratio about the same, an that you’ll hear credible defenses of certain crap by some and downright slams of quality by others… And no one is wrong.
I know the MPAA’s position is tenuous and the numbers are cooked and that casual piracy is hardly a problem worth talking about… But real piracy, the bootlegging of this product and the distribution in packaging that can often not be distinguished from the real thing is a real problem.
And on this blog where many a poster extols the virtue of capitalism and free markets and free enterprise – greed is good, it’s right for corps to turn a profit (and it IS right) – then I ask why we seem to want to make an exception for entertainment?
Wal Mart sells shitty Chinese Tupperware knockoffs, but you wouldn’t suggest allowing people to steal them. That guy who makes the stupid prints of puppies and cats with the huge forced perspective noses is a hack, but you wouldn’t let me get away with selling the same dumb animal shots with my name on them. Why is it okay to take from Hollywood?
And don’t try and give me the BS about stars making too much. People are paid what the market allows (and most of you don’t understand Hollywood financing anyway). Tom Cruise gets 20 mil a pic, but 18mil is never gonna see the inside of his wallet. If you get to say they make too much then why can’t I say I don’t make enough? Why can’t I say McDonald’s workers deserve more? Why can’t I say my boss makes too much?
Or are we all just a tad jealous of wealth. We don’t want laws to block our one in a billion chance of making a million, but God forbid someone get paid for being good at an art form.
Look. If you wanna see rednecks driving rice-burners, rent or buy The Fast And The Furious. It’s a dumb ass movie and if you put a gun to Paul Walker’s head he couldn’t act scared, but that isn’t a good reason not to pay for the movie. It is, however, a good reason to not buy or rent the movie and to get The Good Shepard instead. That movie is remarkably good… as is about 10% of all the movies ever made.
How can you count something that may or may not have happened? Isn’t that like taking theory as fact?
In science, a theory is a fact, but that’s for our twice weekly evolution vs. creationism debate. I have no clue how the dubious numbers are reached, but every time someone acquires the product without buying it, someone has their IP without paying the price to which the filmmaker’s are entitled.
Copyright infringement is easily argued not to be stealing, if only because words have meaning and those two things mean different things… but the effect is similar in the end… The movie is in someone’s hands without being paid for.
If you don’t want to pay, don’t see it – or borrow a legit copy from a friend – that’s not illegal – or get it at the library. But don’t claim that its shitty so you shouldn’t have to pay for it. The fact that you want it, and you admit its crappy, just makes you look like an idiot. It makes you look even more like an idiot than the fact that what you bootlegged was a copy of Big Momma’s House 2.
#5 – information wants to be free. fight copyright laws! artists should make a living selling services (shows) and not products. very good lesson to these kids IMO.
That opinion is about the dumbest opinion I’ve ever read. To prove it, I’m going abstain from writing 5000 words about it and let you just wonder why all by yourself.
I guess I showed him.
2 & 4. Thanks!
#5
Heve U been to some Shrek live performances lately?
#7 I think people get upset with copyright of movies because they see the movie studios making the same mistakes the RIAA is making with music. In my opinion, 95% of music and movies copied would never have been purchased anyway. It’s a victimless crime. I think poeple realize this and see the MPAA making the same mistakes, mistakes that will eventually hurt their industry just like the RIAA is digging it’s own grave. Some day the loss of revenue from victimizing it’s customers will come back to haunt it too. Then we will all be losers.
#11 *LOL*
#13, Robert,
#7 I think people get upset with copyright of movies because they see the movie studios making the same mistakes the RIAA is making with music.
Bullshit. Unlike the RIAA, the movie industry is NOT suing every Tom, Dick, and Robert because someone on their computer down loaded a movie.
Second, copying music is far easier and much more prevalent for the average person then is copying movies.
Also, most consumers will view a movie once, unlike music where they will listen repeatedly.
It doesn’t matter if they would have purchased the product or not, they ended up with it. The same as if I took a crappy new car for a test drive and kept it. I wouldn’t have bought it anyway so why can’t I … .