Even if we don’t watch their movies in a theater or buy their plastic discs of hostility, we’re still supporting them. If we watch their movies on Netflix or other flat-rate streaming or rental services, the service effectively pays them on our behalf next time they negotiate the rights or buy another disc. And if we pirate their movies, we’re contributing to the statistics that help them convince Congress that these destructive laws are necessary.
Marco Arment makes some great points, and he is probably right that a boycott of the intellectual property produced by MPAA members, coupled with support of campaign finance reform, would reduce the ease with which the Association purchases pro-industry, anti-consumer legislation.
The depressing thing, though, is that it's just not a realistic suggestion. Netflix is one of, if not the, most bandwidth-intensive services in the world (see Todd Wasserman's write-up at Mashable). People won't stop going to theaters, or purchasing films online or in stores, or simply pirating them.
The problem is one of delayed consequences. Smokers continue to smoke, despite widespread knowledge about the undisputed health dangers, because the consequences are so delayed (cigarette now, cancer in ten years). The same principle applies to the fact that consumers won't stop buying films now to prevent consumer-hostile legislation in five or ten years.
Image via Briar Press
No comments:
Post a Comment