New Release?

Dear iago0 and all interested parties:

I'm not going to call you names, and I'm not going to disparage you for your remarks regarding "piracy". I hope that you will read this in the spirit it was intended, and hopefully learn something from it.

When an unauthorized person makes a physical copy of an intellectual property such as a film, and then SELLS that physical copy (or specifically sells access to the content as a download), he or she is taking money out of the hands of the legitimate copyright owners, and thus is a pirate. The pirate's actions divert an actual sale of the work.

When people share files or even physical copies of media without charging each other for the privelege, it is NOT piracy, and those of us who happen to be filesharing enthusiasts do not enjoy being labeled as pirates for our hobby. Most of us download (for free) movies and music that we would not otherwise purchase, and this does NOT divert a sale of the work. Furthermore, polls which I myself have conducted of large numbers of people who are enthusiastic online filesharers show that these people STILL BUY DVDs and CDs even though they can easily download virtually anything they want without paying a dime. The simple fact is that when they know they like the work in question, they like owning an original authorized copy, which includes things like the cover art and various extras (like director's commentaries, for instance). They also like to support the artists and studios that produce good work. And why should they buy something sight unseen anyway? Would you buy an automobile you had never seen?

The effects of what is too often called "piracy" are obviously not well-understood by the corporati who own the copyrights. Recent studies indicate that when a film or album is massively well-known, filesharing results in a slight decrease in sales. That's sad, but then again it merely means that the owning corporation reaps a profit of a million zillion dollars instead of a million and a half zillion dollars, so no big deal. It's also only half the story! When a film or album is NOT massively well-known, and particularly when it is something obscure like 'Sir Henry at Rawlinson End', filesharing helps to popularize the work and actually results in INCREASED sales. Your assertion that "piracy can only hinder [your] efforts" is both offensive to people who do not attempt to profit from filesharing, and DEAD WRONG. Your company's release of this title can only benefit from people getting online and sharing it around!

I came across your message because I am just about to share a copy of 'Sir Henry at Rawlinson End' at Secret Cinema (http://www.secret-cinema.com) and I was getting some info on the film from IMDB. I sincerely hope that a lot of people download it, I hope they love it, I hope they tell their friends and encourage their friends to watch it, and I hope that the surviving members of Viv's family along with the people who put their work and money into re-releasing this obscure gem of a film ultimately benefit from increased sales as a direct result of my sharing. Do I sound like a pirate to you, sir?

If my statement of intent to share this work which your company is preparing to re-release angers you, that's too damn bad. There's nothing you can do to me or the site where I'm posting it, as both of us reside in China. I hope, however, that rather than anger you, it opens your miserably clenched eyes to the reality of filesharing's effects on your bottom line. If so, please feel free to come and join us... maybe if you download some movies you wouldn't ordinarily pay to see, your tastes will be broadened and you'll discover some new joy in life (and maybe you'll even start buying DVDs in a genre or two that you never before realized you would enjoy). That has certainly been my experience... for instance, I never liked Westerns until I downloaded some good ones and watched them! Now I own (authorized) copies of a whole slew of Clint Eastwood, John Wayne, and Sterling Hayden films.