So the industry and the fansubbers got together at Otakon, I see...
darkst...@gmail.com
http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/convention/2008/fansubs-and-industry-panel
And here's my comments:
An immediate misnomer off the bat in the report, saying that fansubs
are increasingly overtaking the legitimate industry. That's like
saying the Jamaican sprinters are increasingly overtaking the rest of
the world (in their steroid-laced... Wait, that's another
flamewar...). Past-tense, people.
Fansub groups represented: LivEEvil, Shinsen, and Dattebayo
Industry reps: Funimation (Heiskell), Media Blasters (Sirabella and
Molyneaux)
The whole thing was a farce immediately: The moderator decided not to
let it, in any way, become "us vs. them". This completely undercut
the credibility of the panel, in my opinion. The whole fansub/legit
situation IS "us vs. them", and I think it's clear as to which side is
winning. To not allow the fire to fly across the table basically
undercuts the real issues which are going on here. I really want to
see a knock-down, drag-out war between the sides, because that's
really what it is. I talked to some fans in LA over the weekend, and
one told me basically that the industry has to "get with reality" --
of course, my immediate response would be that that reality no longer
includes the industry.
Another misnomer: "'Collapse or near-collapse' of at least _two_
companies in the market"?? I can give you three right now without
breathing. Bandai Visual USA, Geneon, ADV... And that's just of the
majors. But here's another tidbit for you: A recent study,
commissioned by Central Park Media, indicates over six million fansubs
viewed in one recent week. This confirms the earlier findings by the
Japanese late last year.
And note: That's not just six million downloaded -- that's six
million just _viewed_. I'll get back to that later with some of the
more laughable stuff later.
So the first question asked was how fansubbing affects both sides.
The fansubbers got it right, in saying that fansubbing _does_ still
increase the visibility of anime to a larger base than DVD-based
models can or ever will, especially with the lack of advertising for
non-TV series.
Heiskell tries to present a more complicated view from the industry
side, and fails miserably. He says there's no monolithic industry,
and then, in the next breath, says that it basically impacts everybody
from retailers on up to the Japanese end. First off, it fails because
it impacts everyone as if it were a monolithic industry. The second
failure comes from that the downsizing of the industry is making it
more monolithic over here in the States, both in creation and in
distribution. The third and final failure is that, without a unified
front against the fansubbers, they've got no prayer because of what
the fansubbers just said: They have a much better medium, at the only
price the fans have chosen to accept, and there's no reason for them
to stop because there's no legal penalties being imposed.
The fansubbers then basically gave the argument that the anime
companies can't meet the demands of speed and availability. With a
sales-based model of any kind -- they _CAN'T_. And they won't.
When talking with the people in LA, I gave the example of what I see
as the last of the major US dubs: Ouran. First off, you're talking
about one of the most popular fansubbed series not named Shonen Jump
over the last _two years_. Now that they've finally decided to
release it in America, here's the reality:
Again, it costs about $35K an episode, according to a December, 2007
AnimeAnime (Japanese industry website) report, to license an anime to
America, and another $45-85K an episode to ADR and produce it.
I'll take the middle figure of that range, and accept the $35K for
licensing, even though I think Ouran demanded a MUCH HIGHER price-
tag. So, per ep, we're looking $100K.
That's $1,300,000 for each of the two 13-episode season sets they're
releasing (one in October, the other in January). The approximate
cost of each set is $60 -- assume half of that gets back to Funimation
and do the math.
That's 43,000 copies (approximately) for each season set that they
have to sell _just to break even_.
Does ANYONE in this group wish to believe that even Ouran is going to
sell that well?
Anyone want me to laugh in their face??
Anyone???
Good. Now you understand why they can't meet the demands. Because
the licensing fees are being made so high to recover some of the money
these fansubbers are snatching out of the Japanese's hands!
The entire market has become markedly unsustainable in any way, shape,
or form -- and, in talking to some anime fans in LA, many of the
companies seem to cover their ears to that reality.
So, let's see what other gems I can pull out of this...
Here's another gem for those who think the industry is fine and will
make it: Dattebayo's own numbers indicate that, in a typical week,
there are over 600,000 file transfers from their site.
SIX HUNDRED THOUSAND, and just from Dattebayo.
Consider that that would be 45,000 13-episode DVD sets. That would
put an approximate loss-value, _per week and just Dattebayo_ (at $40/
set, we'll say, just to be real generous) at almost two million
dollars.
That's about $100,000,000 a year, and that's with a generously low
series figure. The loss-value is probably much higher.
And that's just one of these sites. Three of them of just that size
would beat out the entire legitimate US anime industry. (Probably 2,
but I will be generous and cut the figure...)
Still want to tell me the industry will survive this?
Getting into distribution and revenue streams, Sirabella basically
believes an Internet-only model won't be viable, even though video has
always been the main revenue stream for anime. Epic fail. It's the
sales-based model that won't be viable. I've heard people actually
claim (in discussion about "saving anime" and the like) that the anime
industry has to find a way to be satisfied with titles which sell two
thousand copies -- even though that kind of sales wouldn't even cover
the licensure of the first episode.
Talking about sites like BitTorrent, Heiskell stuck his foot in it
again, basically saying that sites like that are hard to interdict,
even though the availability makes such losses undeniable. Without
interdicting and shutting down these sites, Mr. Heiskell, YOU -- HAVE
-- NO -- PRAYER -- FOR -- SURVIVAL -- AS -- AN -- INDUSTRY.
That clear enough for you? You shut down BitTorrent, you sue the fuck
out of YouTube, or there's no more anime industry. The Japanese
actually wanted to start down that road two years ago, and why they
haven't sicced Google with billions in damages, I have no freaking
clue. None.
And to say a firm stand against these sites found support around the
table is laughable: the fansubbers want the rep (and perhaps the
money) some of these other sites are getting, undercutting the
creators. Not only that, but, without shutting them down (as you're
already seeing with CrunchyShit), THEY will become the licensors, THEY
will become the "industry", and THEY will be the ones who control the
stream.
Heiskell then stuffed his foot completely out of his ass for the last
time when he said the most laughable opinion I've heard on the subject
(including even most of yours): That, even though fansubbing will
never disappear, he opines that 30% of anime fans never buy any anime.
Six million downloads a week, CPM estimates, and only 30% never buy
anime??
I'll laugh in your face personally for that number. I'll laugh in the
face of anyone who wishes to opine that 30% of the fanbase even buys
ONE BIT of their anime. I wouldn't believe that 30% of the fans buy
any anime whatsoever??
You mean to tell me that, in an age where some big cons are doubling
attendance and your industry is halving, that you wish to try to tell
me straight-faced that 70% of anime fans buy any of their anime at
all??
WHAT ARE YOU SMOKING???
Then it got to the question of whether the anime companies could get
more aggressive, to which one fansubber replied he would stop
fansubbing if requested, but immediately demand a viable alternative
to watch the anime in question.
WHO THE FUCK DO YOU THINK YOU ARE?? They paid good money for that
contract, and have the right to ask their terms for when, how, and who
sees it. I mean, think: At $35K/ep, they paid a half a million
dollars (a number Gen Fukunaga wants to drop) before they even get
anyone in the studio to dub it, ADR it, etc.
Fact is (and this is why I said that the "overtaking" comment was
ridiculous): The fansubbers, and the fans, want it all on their terms
and don't give two shits otherwise. I guess I can answer my own
question: They think they are the industry. And, as I've been saying
for a while now, it sounds like they have won out.
I just finally have had to come to the decision that the anime
industry is completely inept and incapable of dealing with something
which is killing their industry, and will kill it. The fansubbers,
thieves, and pirates WILL WIN. That decision has been made by the
anime public. If people actually were forced to pay market prices for
their anime tomorrow, AX wouldn't get 12,000 at their next
convention. Most of the smaller shows would cease to exist.
And to hear some of the things said at the panel by the industry
types, it's clear they don't get it, and they won't get it: The
future reality DOES NOT include dubs, DOES NOT include DVD's, and DOES
NOT include _THEM_.
That's why I will stand behind the "one more year", even though, with
the incompetence shown here, they shouldn't be around today, as I said
six months ago.
Mike
Dave Watson
>
> And here's my comments:
[Mikey's usual stream of diarrhea snipped.]
> That's why I will stand behind the "one more year", even though, with
> the incompetence shown here, they shouldn't be around today, as I said
> six months ago.
Well, guess what? Despite your "mark my words, people" small poultry
blather, they're still around today. They'll still be around in a
year, like they have for over 15 of them already. That's why we don't
take you at all seriously, and never will. Face it. So why don't you
just fuck off and go find a hobby that doesn't involve harassing
people for a change?
Watson.
darkst...@gmail.com
> On Aug 19, 5:29 pm, darkstar7...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > And here's the report:
>
> >http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/convention/2008/fansubs-and-industry-...
>
> > And here's my comments:
>
> [Mikey's usual stream of diarrhea snipped.]
But now I understand _WHY_ you consider it "Mikey's usual stream of
diarrhea..."
It's like the people that were talked to from one of the companies
about prize sponsorship for last weekend, and when the industry came
up, it was literally "LA! LA! LA! I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!" with the
figurative fingers in the ear.
You see, it's as I have said before: You _HAVE_ to ignore reality to
enjoy anime as much as you used to anymore.
> > That's why I will stand behind the "one more year", even though, with
> > the incompetence shown here, they shouldn't be around today, as I said
> > six months ago.
>
> Well, guess what? Despite your "mark my words, people" small poultry
> blather, they're still around today. They'll still be around in a
> year, like they have for over 15 of them already. That's why we don't
> take you at all seriously, and never will. Face it. So why don't you
> just fuck off and go find a hobby that doesn't involve harassing
> people for a change?
They're still around today -- three of the six who were nine months
ago, with another 20% drop in sales forecast, Bandai Entertainment
can't afford a decent replicator, so they can't keep a reasoned
schedule at various points throughout 2008 -- read up on four more
delays for fall titles. Dub actors are retiring left and right as the
dub industry is _DEAD_. All it's going to take is Bandai Namco
getting out of R1, Viz finally dissociating itself completely from the
anime industry, and Navarre going under, and there's no industry at
all.
I give that one year, especially with the US economy in such laughable
state.
And, as for that last comment, you got two ways to make me leave:
Jail me or shoot me. Pick one.
Mike
Travers Naran
darkst...@gmail.com wrote:
> And here's the report:
>
> http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/convention/2008/fansubs-and-industry-panel
> The whole thing was a farce immediately: The moderator decided not
> to let it, in any way, become "us vs. them". This completely
> undercut the credibility of the panel, in my opinion. The whole
> fansub/legit situation IS "us vs. them", and I think it's clear as to
> which side is winning. To not allow the fire to fly across the table
> basically undercuts the real issues which are going on here. I
> really want to see a knock-down, drag-out war between the sides,
> because that's really what it is. I talked to some fans in LA over
> the weekend, and one told me basically that the industry has to "get
> with reality" -- of course, my immediate response would be that that
> reality no longer includes the industry.
I think you need to realise the industry does not view fansubbers the
same way you do. They don't hate them like you do. They are realistic,
clear-eyed business people who know what they can and cannot control,
and want to figure out how to win.
Recently, WB spent a huge effort to prevent the Dark Knight from being
pirated on the opening weekend. And that's it. After the opening
weekend, they just perform basic monitoring and interdiction efforts.
In other words, WB knows they cannot stop piracy entirely, but they can
put in just enough to effort to make some money on it. Which is what I
think the legit anime industry needs to focus on -- take down the
streaming sites as fast as possible and realistic interdiction.
Also, never forget that probably half their staff came from the early
days of fansubbing -- there is a fifth column within the industry, if
you will, and they will not view fansubbers as evil.
> commissioned by Central Park Media, indicates over six million
> fansubs viewed in one recent week. This confirms the earlier
> findings by the Japanese late last year.
> And note: That's not just six million downloaded -- that's six
> million just _viewed_. I'll get back to that later with some of the
> more laughable stuff later.
Remember when someone refused to accept my claim of a similar number? :-)
> The fansubbers then basically gave the argument that the anime
> companies can't meet the demands of speed and availability. With a
> sales-based model of any kind -- they _CAN'T_. And they won't.
Selling physical DVDs? No. Selling digital streaming rights on the day
the episode is aired in Japan? Yes. That was their message. They know
they need to find a new revenue model, and what was more interesting was
the veiled complaint that they blame their Japanese partners. I've read
several times now that Japanese companies don't want to do digital
downloads or streaming simply because THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND IT! The
Japanese companies are run by old men who grew up in the publishing
industry. They cannot wrap their heads around the idea that you can
make money selling individual episodes or episodes with ads. From what
I've read from industry insider interviews, they don't want to talk ill
of their Japanese partners, but they feel the Japanese studios and
publishers are not helping the situation with their hyper-controlling style.
> Good. Now you understand why they can't meet the demands. Because
> the licensing fees are being made so high to recover some of the
> money these fansubbers are snatching out of the Japanese's hands!
That's not what the panel suggested. And from what I've read on
Japanese industry sites, there's still a huge revenue stream in Japan so
international piracy hasn't affected their bottom line. Yet. The legit
industry panelists made an interesting point that the Japanese companies
are beginning to realise the importance of the international market, and
that being nicer to their international licensees might be in their best
interest.
> Here's another gem for those who think the industry is fine and will
> make it: Dattebayo's own numbers indicate that, in a typical week,
> there are over 600,000 file transfers from their site.
>
> SIX HUNDRED THOUSAND, and just from Dattebayo.
Remember when I wrote this?
http://groups.google.ca/group/rec.arts.anime.misc/msg/b6304119f70cbc3e
I was pretty close to the mark. And people didn't believe me... Hmph.
> And that's just one of these sites. Three of them of just that size
> would beat out the entire legitimate US anime industry. (Probably 2,
> but I will be generous and cut the figure...)
>
> Still want to tell me the industry will survive this?
An industry will survive. This specific model and companies, probably not.
The more interesting question is: if you could perfectly shut down the
pirates, would Naruto's market really improve? That is: what percentage
of those pirates would actually become paying customers? My gut feeling
is it's pretty low. This is why you don't see Viz spazzing out about
the Naruto fansubbers.
> Getting into distribution and revenue streams, Sirabella basically
> believes an Internet-only model won't be viable, even though video
> has always been the main revenue stream for anime. Epic fail. It's
> the sales-based model that won't be viable. I've heard people
> actually claim (in discussion about "saving anime" and the like) that
> the anime industry has to find a way to be satisfied with titles
> which sell two thousand copies -- even though that kind of sales
> wouldn't even cover the licensure of the first episode.
Which brings me to an idea I had a long time ago:
Anime producers should switch to a fee per episode sold. That way, the
risk for the local distributors is less and gives them some hope of
bringing prices down.
The panel made some mention about the licensing costs still being set
arbitrarily, and more interestingly, fansubs having little to no impact
on the licensing fee because it's negotiated after only seeing an
episode or two.
> Talking about sites like BitTorrent, Heiskell stuck his foot in it
> again, basically saying that sites like that are hard to interdict,
> even though the availability makes such losses undeniable. Without
> interdicting and shutting down these sites, Mr. Heiskell, YOU -- HAVE
> -- NO -- PRAYER -- FOR -- SURVIVAL -- AS -- AN -- INDUSTRY.
>
> That clear enough for you? You shut down BitTorrent, you sue the
> fuck out of YouTube, or there's no more anime industry. The Japanese
> actually wanted to start down that road two years ago, and why they
> haven't sicced Google with billions in damages, I have no freaking
> clue. None.
Because you don't seem to understand how the international legal system
works for copyright issues. For starters, YouTube is protected by the
"safe harbor" clause of the DMCA -- and that's probably why Viacom is
going to experience epic fail in their lawsuit against YouTube. The
precedent was made in a little noticed lawsuit between Harlan Ellison
and AOL. AOL was sued by Ellison over an act of piracy made by a USENET
poster from a different computer system. AOL appealed and the high
courts agreed: AOL was protected by the safe harbor clause. YouTube
will take down the content if the copyright owner asks.
The more important question is this: Why aren't the companies
(especially the Japanese one) using the easy-to-use YouTube interface to
request infringing content be removed? All the legal streaming sites,
like Veoh, make it very easy for copyright owners to have content
removed. But they're not. I notice every single other content provider
on the planet does it. I click on a link for Most Viewed, and the video
was removed at the request of the copyright owner.
I think the reason is obvious: diminishing returns. It is impossible to
enforce copyrights to the level needed to extinguish fansubs or even
simple piracy. A better approach is to do what the music industry did:
provide such a compelling alternative that you can turn most of the
audience back to legit with only a few token lawsuits.
> Heiskell then stuffed his foot completely out of his ass for the last
> time when he said the most laughable opinion I've heard on the
> subject (including even most of yours): That, even though fansubbing
> will never disappear, he opines that 30% of anime fans never buy any
> anime.
>
> Six million downloads a week, CPM estimates, and only 30% never buy
> anime??
> I'll laugh in your face personally for that number. I'll laugh in
> the face of anyone who wishes to opine that 30% of the fanbase even
> buys ONE BIT of their anime. I wouldn't believe that 30% of the fans
> buy any anime whatsoever??
No, that is believable if you understand what he said:
70% buy _some_ anime at least once in their life. Maybe a movie special
edition or a particular volume, but they buy something. That is
believable. But unlikely.
> Then it got to the question of whether the anime companies could get
> more aggressive, to which one fansubber replied he would stop
> fansubbing if requested, but immediately demand a viable alternative
> to watch the anime in question.
>
> WHO THE FUCK DO YOU THINK YOU ARE?? They paid good money for that
> contract, and have the right to ask their terms for when, how, and
> who sees it. I mean, think: At $35K/ep, they paid a half a million
> dollars (a number Gen Fukunaga wants to drop) before they even get
> anyone in the studio to dub it, ADR it, etc.
I can see your point of view, but at the end of the day, I should remind
you of something Microsoft once said:
"We could force [PC manufacturers] to include a ham sandwich with every
system, but that doesn't mean the customers would buy it."
The licensees can do whatever they want, but it's incredibly silly to
believe that the market should ACCEPT whatever you do to them.
But as the panel stated quite subtely: the real problem is in Japan.
The distributors would LOVE to release subs on-line the same day as in
Japan, but the Japanese companies don't WANT to, and it seems to be for
very silly and arbitrary reasons.
Now if only Gonzo made anime people wanted to WATCH, this might
change... :-)
> Fact is (and this is why I said that the "overtaking" comment was
> ridiculous): The fansubbers, and the fans, want it all on their
> terms and don't give two shits otherwise. I guess I can answer my
> own question: They think they are the industry. And, as I've been
> saying for a while now, it sounds like they have won out.
And as I've said: That's not necessarily a bad thing. :-)
> And to hear some of the things said at the panel by the industry
> types, it's clear they don't get it, and they won't get it: The
> future reality DOES NOT include dubs, DOES NOT include DVD's, and
> DOES NOT include _THEM_.
> That's why I will stand behind the "one more year", even though, with
> the incompetence shown here, they shouldn't be around today, as I
> said six months ago.
And I would point out Funimation's position (ALL CAPS highlighting by me):
> Recently, it has been suggested that if Japanese anime distributors
> embraced digital distribution of their shows, with English subtitles
> and supported by advertising, on the same day that they were shown on
> Japanese television, much of the issues surrounding fansubbing would
> become irrelevant. Only Heiskell was able to comment on the
> possibility of this happening. SUCH A SCENARIO IS DEFINITELY
> SOMETHING HIS COMPANY IS WORKING ON, and of Funimation's Japanese
> partners, Gonzo has shown itself to be particularly understanding.
> However, it is still extremely difficult to convince typical anime
> production committees that are made up of representatives of many
> different companies that an approach of this kind is ever viable.
> Similarly, Japanese companies are - and will likely remain -
> reluctant to directly use fansubbers' expertise during production.
Funimation is the only company that seems to really get the "adapt or
die" mentality that will be required to survive the coming shake down.
And as mentioned, this is like the third time I've seen comments from
industry people about the Japanese companies being pains in the ass. I
know from experience they've often been the cause of a lot of the "bad
features" of American anime: Subs being more expensive than dubs,
delayed release schedules, etc.
--
-----
Travers Naran, tnaran at google's mail.com
"Welcome to RAAM. Hope you can take a beating..." -- E.L.L.
D B Malmquist
>
> It's amusing how we see these things differently. :-)
>
> darkst...@gmail.com wrote:
> > And here's the report:
> >
> > Getting into distribution and revenue streams, Sirabella basically
> > believes an Internet-only model won't be viable, even though video
> > has always been the main revenue stream for anime. Epic fail. It's
> > the sales-based model that won't be viable. I've heard people
> > actually claim (in discussion about "saving anime" and the like) that
> > the anime industry has to find a way to be satisfied with titles
> > which sell two thousand copies -- even though that kind of sales
> > wouldn't even cover the licensure of the first episode.
>
> Which brings me to an idea I had a long time ago:
>
> Anime producers should switch to a fee per episode sold. That way, the
> risk for the local distributors is less and gives them some hope of
> bringing prices down.
Related to this, "Bones" must be congratulating themselves for failing
to get "Xam'd" on television, and instead having to rent it out to
Playstation watchers:
http://blog.us.playstation.com/2008/07/22/xamd-lost-memories-debuts-at-1-on-playstation-network/
Wow. I should say that again. Wow! I would like to give a huge thank
you from the team here at SCEA, Japan Studio and BONES Studio for making
Xam’d: Lost Memories episode 1 the top video download over the PlayStation
Network for the week of E3. We couldn’t have asked for a better reception
to the service or the series, and you made it happen.
http://ps3.ign.com/articles/890/890097p1.html
... users can download [rent!] episodes for 2.99 for SD video and 3.99
for HD video of episodes.
Of course, this revenue model sorta sucks for those of us who do not
play video games, or those of you outside the US (*), but at least they're
trying something.
<<snip>>
> Now if only Gonzo made anime people wanted to WATCH, this might
> change... :-)
GONZO used to have a workable "split" business model: one or two good,
high-concept titles a year ("Last Exile") plus a lot of watchable, cheap
junk food. Somewhere they seem to have lost control over their quality.
-dbm
darkst...@gmail.com
> It's amusing how we see these things differently. :-)
It's amusing how I at least have one person who seems willing to have
a reasoned conversation. I hope I may return the favor.
I think it's as you said before: You say it's a "right-sizing", I say
it's all over.
I think where we disagree is that you believe that the "right size",
as things stand right now, is non-zero. I don't, and I'll explain as
we go.
> darkstar7...@gmail.com wrote:
> > The whole thing was a farce immediately: The moderator decided not
> > to let it, in any way, become "us vs. them". This completely
> > undercut the credibility of the panel, in my opinion. The whole
> > fansub/legit situation IS "us vs. them", and I think it's clear as to
> > which side is winning. To not allow the fire to fly across the table
> > basically undercuts the real issues which are going on here. I
> > really want to see a knock-down, drag-out war between the sides,
> > because that's really what it is. I talked to some fans in LA over
> > the weekend, and one told me basically that the industry has to "get
> > with reality" -- of course, my immediate response would be that that
> > reality no longer includes the industry.
>
> I think you need to realise the industry does not view fansubbers the
> same way you do. They don't hate them like you do. They are realistic,
> clear-eyed business people who know what they can and cannot control,
> and want to figure out how to win.
The problem is simple: Without controlling them and stamping them
out, they _CANNOT_ win.
I think the main disagreement here is that you believe that, at some
point, some substantive fraction of the fanbase will pay sufficient
money to keep some substantive fraction (the "right-sizing" you talked
about earlier) of the industry going. I don't. Especially not the
way these guys are thinking.
The entire basis on which they can get a person to pay ANY realistic
price, especially for an English dub, requires that it be done on the
owners' terms or on the license holders' terms. Once it gets to the
terms of the fans, driven by a price-less model (a free model, if you
will), then it's hard to come back.
I re-submit the Ouran example and ask the question again: Even as
popular as Ouran High School Host Club is, do you think Funimation
will move 43,000 titles to cover the $1.3M estimated for each of the
two season sets?? I don't -- Haruhi Effect.
You now have (as some have admitted) a lost generation of anime fans
-- they're no longer going to go to Little Tokyo in LA, take part in
an anime event, see a Funimation screener of "Beck", and consider
buying the darn thing. It's beyond that now. And without controlling
and stamping out the fire which has already consumed three major
companies whole, it'll take the rest with them.
They lost this game months ago, when they decided they were unable to
legally go after the pirates, the fansubbers, and the sites which host
them. One would've thought (with the Napster precedent) that the
Japanese and the American companies could've wiped out YouTube,
BitTorrent, and really any user-driven interface for such pirated
video before illegal anime became the biggest downloaded entertainment
medium on the entire Internet.
> Recently, WB spent a huge effort to prevent the Dark Knight from being
> pirated on the opening weekend. And that's it. After the opening
> weekend, they just perform basic monitoring and interdiction efforts.
> In other words, WB knows they cannot stop piracy entirely, but they can
> put in just enough to effort to make some money on it. Which is what I
> think the legit anime industry needs to focus on -- take down the
> streaming sites as fast as possible and realistic interdiction.
Again, it's a different model. If the models were similar, it would
be as if the movie was being shot before all the money needed to make
the movie was raised -- and, on top of it, the piracy could so
completely undercut the mass appeal of the particular movie that
people no longer felt the need to drop their $11 (or whatever it is)
to go to the theatre. (The fact that so many people _ARE_, for
whatever reason, not willing to do so for most movies is why you're
seeing the movie industry becoming more and more like the anime
industry in one respect: the number of movies propping the industry
up is becoming fewer and fewer and fewer).
But the thing is that so many people saw it that TDK made back its
investment, and WB probably thought they had the biggest movie of all
time on their hands, and figured they could keep the DVDs selling
(which, _unlike anime_, is ancillary in the case of wildly-successful
movies like this) with only normal actions. Anime's "normal actions"
have been found laughably wanting in this regard.
> Also, never forget that probably half their staff came from the early
> days of fansubbing -- there is a fifth column within the industry, if
> you will, and they will not view fansubbers as evil.
Back in the earlier days of the industry, fansubs may have had a
purpose. That the industry (on both sides of the Pacific) couldn't
put the clamps on it when that purpose was ended will be their cause
of death.
> > commissioned by Central Park Media, indicates over six million
> > fansubs viewed in one recent week. This confirms the earlier
> > findings by the Japanese late last year.
> > And note: That's not just six million downloaded -- that's six
> > million just _viewed_. I'll get back to that later with some of the
> > more laughable stuff later.
>
> Remember when someone refused to accept my claim of a similar number? :-)
Or mine. And I kept hammering and hammering and hammering it. And I
did it for the following reason:
Every week that 6,000,000 episodes are viewed illegally (I'll keep the
$40/13 eps, though that is, for many series, quite low for season
sets), over $18,000,000 is lost to the anime industry. This would
mean that the anime industry loses its entire 2007 DVD market _every
14 weeks_. That's why I believe you could easily sue for billions.
The last two years alone, they could probably claim a minimum of
almost $2 billion in losses to the pirates and thieves.
> > The fansubbers then basically gave the argument that the anime
> > companies can't meet the demands of speed and availability. With a
> > sales-based model of any kind -- they _CAN'T_. And they won't.
>
> Selling physical DVDs? No. Selling digital streaming rights on the day
> the episode is aired in Japan? Yes. That was their message. They know
> they need to find a new revenue model,
Then they need to stop -- dead stop -- the old model, because they
won't have the money for the change-over if it should occur. (They
probably don't now -- on either side of the Pacific -- and that's why
I think the whole matter is screwed.) And they need to stop it _RIGHT
NOW_. Every week is another $18M down the tube, PLUS the amount of
good money they continue to throw after bad.
Essentially, also, all dubs would have to cease, except for a very
very _VERY_ few properties (almost, if not, exclusively foreign-
television properties and the biggest of the movies). As stated, dubs
more than double the real cost of bringing a series to America. If
"bringing a series to America" becomes obsolete (as it almost
certainly would in this model), then so will dubs.
The main reason you don't see this happen?? Very simple: There would
be zero need, with the possible exception of licensors of foreign-
television properties, to continue the industry with intermediaries
like the R1 companies. Funimation and Bandai Ent. would cease to
exist -- they would no longer be needed. Viz would be another
question, as they have television properties which can also be seen as
merchandising for their manga (one of the reasons they don't want
anything to do with the industry at large).
> and what was more interesting was
> the veiled complaint that they blame their Japanese partners. I've read
> several times now that Japanese companies don't want to do digital
> downloads or streaming simply because THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND IT!
The Japanese needed to be told (the moment that JASCRA started going
after YouTube) was that it was either going to be that they were going
to have to understand what was going on and deal with it _then_, or
they have no chance to survive the tidal wave which has swept them
under. In one of my rants, I said that if the companies did not have
the money to prosecute the thievery on all levels (the sites, the
fansubbers, the fans), they didn't have the money to make the anime
anymore.
It's clear -- now -- they don't have the money to make the anime
anymore.
> The Japanese companies are run by old men who grew up in the publishing
> industry. They cannot wrap their heads around the idea that you can
> make money selling individual episodes or episodes with ads. From what
> I've read from industry insider interviews, they don't want to talk ill
> of their Japanese partners, but they feel the Japanese studios and
> publishers are not helping the situation with their hyper-controlling style.
First off, the Japanese owners and creators have the right to be hyper-
controlling. It costs _THEM_ about 105 million yen or so ($1M) to
create one episode of anime. It's clear, from many accounts, they
aren't getting the necessary monies back through the revenue streams
to keep it going much longer.
The Japanese should have the right to demand anyone who watches their
programming outside the "free" television to pay for it. That's off
the Net, DVD, or whatever other means they find. The fact is that you
can say it's "hyper-control", but what stuns me is, if they're so
hyper-controlling, why can't they be that way with the other means the
shows are getting out?
I mean, think: In the day and age of skyrocketing unemployment, you
could actually (and I'm being deathly serious here) employ quite a few
computer-literate people whose job would be (be you a television
network, the WWE or UFC, the anime industry, or whatever) to go on
sites like YouTube, find all the offending material, and have it taken
down. If a serious effort were made to do this for any significant
length of time, YouTube would simply disintegrate down to just those
who _DO_ desire legit content, and Google will lose their shirts AND
their pants.
A side comment on the flip-side, though, a recent spate of Funimation
C&D's does leave me with one question: If a C&D does NOT
automatically mean the company has already licensed the series, why
would the thieves cease and desist? Perhaps a better way to state
it: What legal standing would Funimation (unless they were the sole
R1 licensor left -- and it's not quite there _yet_...) have to issue
such situations and have them be legally binding?
Secondly: Say you do go to an ad-based model. Again, the cost of the
ads would have to be enough to make it financially worth it for all
parties. (This is why you hear such ridiculous numbers for Super Bowl
ads.) How do you do that when you can't even control where these
shows end up? What stops a fansubber from fansubbing an ad-free
viewing and undercutting the entire process again -- much similar to
what they do now to the DVD industry?
> > Good. Now you understand why they can't meet the demands. Because
> > the licensing fees are being made so high to recover some of the
> > money these fansubbers are snatching out of the Japanese's hands!
>
> That's not what the panel suggested.
That was part of my comments. :) You see, the good thing that fans
believe is the lowering of prices is going to put the Japanese out of
business. As you know because I've mentioned it, Gonzo is officially
insolvent right now (or, at the least, liabilities > assets). How
many of these companies are going to keep up if the licensing fees
can't be recovered either?
> And from what I've read on
> Japanese industry sites, there's still a huge revenue stream in Japan so
> international piracy hasn't affected their bottom line. Yet.
My understanding is that that's almost completely merchandise.
Whatever the revenue stream is, one then has to ask the question: Why
not just divorce R1 completely out of the equation, and basically say
"buy it import or go away" to the fans?? This is why I didn't
completely divorce the BVUSA model, because I think it was based on
basically understanding that a US price model isn't sufficient to keep
things going.
Why not just get rid of an increasingly expensive and unnecessary
middleman?
> The legit industry panelists made an interesting point that the Japanese companies
> are beginning to realise the importance of the international market, and
> that being nicer to their international licensees might be in their best
> interest.
But it's irrelevant if no one can stop actions by the fans (and
supposed fans) that make the product worthless. The international
market has no importance at all if the real financial value of the
product being sold in said market has been declared zero.
> > Here's another gem for those who think the industry is fine and will
> > make it: Dattebayo's own numbers indicate that, in a typical week,
> > there are over 600,000 file transfers from their site.
>
> > SIX HUNDRED THOUSAND, and just from Dattebayo.
>
> Remember when I wrote this?http://groups.google.ca/group/rec.arts.anime.misc/msg/b6304119f70cbc3e
>
> I was pretty close to the mark. And people didn't believe me... Hmph.
Of course they didn't. Again, it's a matter that, to enjoy anime in
any real respect, you almost have to be in abject denial of the
present state of the industry and the role of the fans therein. Which
is why I hold many anime fans in such disgust around here.
> > And that's just one of these sites. Three of them of just that size
> > would beat out the entire legitimate US anime industry. (Probably 2,
> > but I will be generous and cut the figure...)
>
> > Still want to tell me the industry will survive this?
>
> An industry will survive. This specific model and companies, probably not.
This is probably why you and I can have a sensible discussion. You,
at the least, understand that this model and these companies are
goners. How much of the rest of it goes is going to depend on how
quickly what is left cuts bait.
> The more interesting question is: if you could perfectly shut down the
> pirates, would Naruto's market really improve? That is: what percentage
> of those pirates would actually become paying customers? My gut feeling
> is it's pretty low. This is why you don't see Viz spazzing out about
> the Naruto fansubbers.
The problem then comes in: Is Naruto an anime, or just a part of a
gigantic merchandising franchise?
If it's the latter, it explains why Viz doesn't really want anything
to do with the _anime_ industry, since the anime is not an end to the
means, but only a means (and not that significant of a one -- with
headbands, cards, posters, manga, blah blah blah) to an end.
> > Getting into distribution and revenue streams, Sirabella basically
> > believes an Internet-only model won't be viable, even though video
> > has always been the main revenue stream for anime. Epic fail. It's
> > the sales-based model that won't be viable. I've heard people
> > actually claim (in discussion about "saving anime" and the like) that
> > the anime industry has to find a way to be satisfied with titles
> > which sell two thousand copies -- even though that kind of sales
> > wouldn't even cover the licensure of the first episode.
>
> Which brings me to an idea I had a long time ago:
>
> Anime producers should switch to a fee per episode sold. That way, the
> risk for the local distributors is less and gives them some hope of
> bringing prices down.
And then the Japanese go out of business, since they can't hope to get
enough money to keep going. Again, remember that Gonzo is already
effectively (if not actually) officially insolvent. Anime series like
the entire FMP arc and the two seasons of Kaleido Star never get made,
much less completed.
I'm not saying the reasoning isn't sound, but the problem is that the
Japanese are starving the animators to begin with and still not
covering costs, in many respects.
> The panel made some mention about the licensing costs still being set
> arbitrarily, and more interestingly, fansubs having little to no impact
> on the licensing fee because it's negotiated after only seeing an
> episode or two.
Part of that is because, in cases like I've mentioned, a lot of the
licensing fee has to be an "advance", since the series might not be
able to be completed if they don't get a license at a good price.
(This is part of what Gen Fukunaga has been trying to cut down.)
> > Talking about sites like BitTorrent, Heiskell stuck his foot in it
> > again, basically saying that sites like that are hard to interdict,
> > even though the availability makes such losses undeniable. Without
> > interdicting and shutting down these sites, Mr. Heiskell, YOU -- HAVE
> > -- NO -- PRAYER -- FOR -- SURVIVAL -- AS -- AN -- INDUSTRY.
>
> > That clear enough for you? You shut down BitTorrent, you sue the
> > fuck out of YouTube, or there's no more anime industry. The Japanese
> > actually wanted to start down that road two years ago, and why they
> > haven't sicced Google with billions in damages, I have no freaking
> > clue. None.
>
> Because you don't seem to understand how the international legal system
> works for copyright issues. For starters, YouTube is protected by the
> "safe harbor" clause of the DMCA -- and that's probably why Viacom is
> going to experience epic fail in their lawsuit against YouTube.
Then the anime industry is finished, and a lot of other entertainment
media will go with it. If YouTube is allowed to only quarter-ass it's
way through with the "safe harbor" provision, why does it really _have
to_ remove _anything_?
Second question: What makes them any real different than Napster,
who, apparently, did not have such "safe harbor" provision?
> The precedent was made in a little noticed lawsuit between Harlan Ellison
> and AOL. AOL was sued by Ellison over an act of piracy made by a USENET
> poster from a different computer system. AOL appealed and the high
> courts agreed: AOL was protected by the safe harbor clause. YouTube
> will take down the content if the copyright owner asks.
Why should it have to? And, on top of it, why is there not the demand
by the copyright owner that makes it a blanket statement that any
copyrighted material by that owner is automatically to be taken down
(unless they choose to start availing some of the other systems which
allow this content to remain up)?
> The more important question is this: Why aren't the companies
> (especially the Japanese one) using the easy-to-use YouTube interface to
> request infringing content be removed? All the legal streaming sites,
> like Veoh, make it very easy for copyright owners to have content
> removed. But they're not. I notice every single other content provider
> on the planet does it. I click on a link for Most Viewed, and the video
> was removed at the request of the copyright owner.
I don't understand why they don't go further and demand compensation
from the uploaders, on top of it. But I can't answer that question.
> I think the reason is obvious: diminishing returns. It is impossible to
> enforce copyrights to the level needed to extinguish fansubs or even
> simple piracy. A better approach is to do what the music industry did:
> provide such a compelling alternative that you can turn most of the
> audience back to legit with only a few token lawsuits.
And the problem is that they aren't even doing _THAT_. As I've said,
the ONLY reason that the iTunes model works is because of those
lawsuits. Without those lawsuits, there's no need to purchase the
product. There's no obligation to purchase the product.
> > Heiskell then stuffed his foot completely out of his ass for the last
> > time when he said the most laughable opinion I've heard on the
> > subject (including even most of yours): That, even though fansubbing
> > will never disappear, he opines that 30% of anime fans never buy any
> > anime.
>
> > Six million downloads a week, CPM estimates, and only 30% never buy
> > anime??
> > I'll laugh in your face personally for that number. I'll laugh in
> > the face of anyone who wishes to opine that 30% of the fanbase even
> > buys ONE BIT of their anime. I wouldn't believe that 30% of the fans
> > buy any anime whatsoever??
>
> No, that is believable if you understand what he said:
>
> 70% buy _some_ anime at least once in their life. Maybe a movie special
> edition or a particular volume, but they buy something. That is
> believable. But unlikely.
Even if that is what he said, and I do believe that is what he said,
my statement stands. I find 70% buying even one anime laughable. I
find _30%_ buying even one anime laughable. This is where I think you
and I part some company.
I mean, think it over: Many cons have doubled their attendance (where
possible) in the same era where DVD sales (even before inflation) have
more than halved??? WTMF??? The numbers do not add up. Where's the
increase in the number of attendees (if it's not coming from pirates
and thieves and the like), since the number of DVDs sold is slashing
20% a year, and will almost certainly do it for the third year in a
row this year?
This is why I made the comment that I do not believe 80% of the people
going to an anime con have any right to be there.
> > Then it got to the question of whether the anime companies could get
> > more aggressive, to which one fansubber replied he would stop
> > fansubbing if requested, but immediately demand a viable alternative
> > to watch the anime in question.
>
> > WHO THE FUCK DO YOU THINK YOU ARE?? They paid good money for that
> > contract, and have the right to ask their terms for when, how, and
> > who sees it. I mean, think: At $35K/ep, they paid a half a million
> > dollars (a number Gen Fukunaga wants to drop) before they even get
> > anyone in the studio to dub it, ADR it, etc.
>
> I can see your point of view, but at the end of the day, I should remind
> you of something Microsoft once said:
>
> "We could force [PC manufacturers] to include a ham sandwich with every
> system, but that doesn't mean the customers would buy it."
But here's the thing: At that point, there should be no PC's for the
people who don't buy it.
You see, I do not buy into (in any form) the difference between
stealing a physical product and one of intellectual property. If the
product being sold is not the anime when one is sold an anime DVD,
then what is it? The DVD as merchandise?
If the anime itself is the product, then people who fansub and the
like are doing the same as if I waltzed into a Best Buy and stole a
PS3 (which is the only way I'm going to have one any time soon)...
> The licensees can do whatever they want, but it's incredibly silly to
> believe that the market should ACCEPT whatever you do to them.
Why??? The licensees should dictate to the market. And all the
market can then do is say yes or no. If they say no, they _don't get
the product_ (such as why I'm not going to have a PS3 any time soon).
They bought that right (for six or seven figures, in many cases)...
And they should expect an opportunity to recoup that cost. Without
that expectation, there is no market and no industry.
> But as the panel stated quite subtely: the real problem is in Japan.
Then, frankly, the real problem is Japan recognizing that the US
actually can provide them enough money to substantively survive. If
the problem _is_ Japan, there is but one solution: Cut off R1.
Diminishing returns, again. (You've gone from $550M in 2004 to $250M
in 2007, with the expectation of it being $200M in 2008). You are not
going to be able to effectively enforce the legal right to your
product to allow for R1 to be a meaningful industry anymore. Get rid
of them and save the expense of having to deal with them.
Since R1 can't effectively enforce their legal rights to the product
they license, the license then becomes useless and worthless. Ouran
could be the biggest seller of 2008, but is it going to get the
necessary number of copies to even break even? No, Hell No, and Hell
Freaking No!
The only real alternative is to make it an all-import business, and do
the subs in Japan and be done with it.
An offshoot of this is that it could make the cons even _bigger_,
because it'd be the only way many would be exposed, at entry-level, to
the product.
> The distributors would LOVE to release subs on-line the same day as in
> Japan, but the Japanese companies don't WANT to, and it seems to be for
> very silly and arbitrary reasons.
Then they need to be slapped (and I know what a slap means in Japan)
and told, simply, that their stands have made it far too late for most
of them to survive economically. Period.
> Now if only Gonzo made anime people wanted to WATCH, this might
> change... :-)
They don't have three years to make a watchable project anymore.
(KS was a three-year project.)
> > Fact is (and this is why I said that the "overtaking" comment was
> > ridiculous): The fansubbers, and the fans, want it all on their
> > terms and don't give two shits otherwise. I guess I can answer my
> > own question: They think they are the industry. And, as I've been
> > saying for a while now, it sounds like they have won out.
>
> And as I've said: That's not necessarily a bad thing. :-)
Why not? If you basically slash the entire economic value of the
anime itself to zero, how could the industry continue and why would it
in the first place?
> > And to hear some of the things said at the panel by the industry
> > types, it's clear they don't get it, and they won't get it: The
> > future reality DOES NOT include dubs, DOES NOT include DVD's, and
> > DOES NOT include _THEM_.
> > That's why I will stand behind the "one more year", even though, with
> > the incompetence shown here, they shouldn't be around today, as I
> > said six months ago.
>
> And I would point out Funimation's position (ALL CAPS highlighting by me):
>
> > Recently, it has been suggested that if Japanese anime distributors
> > embraced digital distribution of their shows, with English subtitles
> > and supported by advertising, on the same day that they were shown on
> > Japanese television, much of the issues surrounding fansubbing would
> > become irrelevant. Only Heiskell was able to comment on the
> > possibility of this happening. SUCH A SCENARIO IS DEFINITELY
> > SOMETHING HIS COMPANY IS WORKING ON, and of Funimation's Japanese
> > partners, Gonzo has shown itself to be particularly understanding.
> > However, it is still extremely difficult to convince typical anime
> > production committees that are made up of representatives of many
> > different companies that an approach of this kind is ever viable.
> > Similarly, Japanese companies are - and will likely remain -
> > reluctant to directly use fansubbers' expertise during production.
Here's the problem with that theory: You still have to make sure
that, if the scenario ever is allowed to come to fruition, that you
can still make the issues irrelevant and force (yes, _FORCE_) people
to actually do something that I believe the vast supermajority of
anime fans refuse to do: pay for the content.
It does NO GOOD to same-day and charge $3/episode for a legal same-day
sub if you don't terminate all illegal subs which most fans would wait
24-48 hours for and pay nothing for. Multiply $3/ep by any decent-
length season, and you'll see why.
Again, I'm not disputing the logic in the emphasis, but there is a
much larger issue. It goes back that I find the 30% laughable as far
as only 30% never will buy. I'd put it much closer to 80% if not
more.
> Funimation is the only company that seems to really get the "adapt or
> die" mentality that will be required to survive the coming shake down.
The shake down is already here. Geneon's titles are now with Funi.
ADV's titles are now with Funi. BVUSA has been folded into Bandai
Entertainment.
Mike
darkst...@gmail.com
rcn.rcn> wrote:
> Related to this, "Bones" must be congratulating themselves for failing
> to get "Xam'd" on television, and instead having to rent it out to
> Playstation watchers:
>
> http://blog.us.playstation.com/2008/07/22/xamd-lost-memories-debuts-a...
>
> Wow. I should say that again. Wow! I would like to give a huge thank
> you from the team here at SCEA, Japan Studio and BONES Studio for making
> Xam’d: Lost Memories episode 1 the top video download over the PlayStation
> Network for the week of E3. We couldn’t have asked for a better reception
> to the service or the series, and you made it happen.
P -- R -- scam.
I want numbers. I want how much money BONES made from that, and
whether that is within expectations which allow them to continue to
remain in business.
They're kissing Sony's ass that they could find any revenue stream at
all.
> ... users can download [rent!] episodes for 2.99 for SD video and 3.99
> for HD video of episodes.
>
> Of course, this revenue model sorta sucks for those of us who do not
> play video games, or those of you outside the US (*), but at least they're
> trying something.
See, if you can read the long comment, the comment I just posted --
you still have to stop everyone else from undercutting that with a
free model. Refuse to do that, and I don't care what you put in
there.
> > Now if only Gonzo made anime people wanted to WATCH, this might
> > change... :-)
>
> GONZO used to have a workable "split" business model: one or two good,
> high-concept titles a year ("Last Exile") plus a lot of watchable, cheap
> junk food. Somewhere they seem to have lost control over their quality.
Because they are now insolvent. They don't have the money anymore, and
their recent work shows that out.
Mike
Dave Watson
> On Aug 19, 6:11 pm, Dave Watson <dwbeingupfr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Aug 19, 5:29 pm, darkstar7...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > And here's the report:
>
> > >http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/convention/2008/fansubs-and-industry-...
>
> > > And here's my comments:
>
> > [Mikey's usual stream of diarrhea snipped.]
>
> But now I understand _WHY_ you consider it "Mikey's usual stream of
> diarrhea..."
Because it's malodorous liquid noisily spewing from the hole of an
incontinent fool who constantly snubs suggestions of taking bismuth,
eating yogurt or just going to the toilet until it passes, and then
you wonder why everybody's holding their nose around you.
> It's like the people that were talked to from one of the companies
> about prize sponsorship for last weekend, and when the industry came
> up, it was literally "LA! LA! LA! I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!" with the
> figurative fingers in the ear.
>
> You see, it's as I have said before: You _HAVE_ to ignore reality to
> enjoy anime as much as you used to anymore.
*splutter* Like I should take notes on what "reality" is from a
fucking stalker.
> > > That's why I will stand behind the "one more year", even though, with
> > > the incompetence shown here, they shouldn't be around today, as I said
> > > six months ago.
>
> > Well, guess what? Despite your "mark my words, people" small poultry
> > blather, they're still around today. They'll still be around in a
> > year, like they have for over 15 of them already. That's why we don't
> > take you at all seriously, and never will. Face it. So why don't you
> > just fuck off and go find a hobby that doesn't involve harassing
> > people for a change?
>
> They're still around today -- three of the six who were nine months
> ago, with another 20% drop in sales forecast, Bandai Entertainment
> can't afford a decent replicator, so they can't keep a reasoned
> schedule at various points throughout 2008 -- read up on four more
> delays for fall titles. Dub actors are retiring left and right as the
> dub industry is _DEAD_.
So who's retired? Cite cases and supply links, or shut your festering
slophole. And how would you know that Bandai can't afford a decent
replicator? Are they telling you this, or are you just supposing
that's the case?
> All it's going to take is Bandai Namco
> getting out of R1, Viz finally dissociating itself completely from the
> anime industry, and Navarre going under, and there's no industry at
> all.
Jesus, can't you wet-dream about sex with people like normal humans do
(although I have my own reasons to wish that Viz would go out of
business)?
> I give that one year, especially with the US economy in such laughable
> state.
So if the industry is still alive one year from now, will you finally
go away? Please?
> And, as for that last comment, you got two ways to make me leave:
> Jail me or shoot me. Pick one.
Tough as fried shit, this boy. Jesus, you sound like the pathetic
hair metal fan losers I went to high school with.
Watson.
selaboc
> > SIX HUNDRED THOUSAND, and just from Dattebayo.
>
>
> I was pretty close to the mark. And people didn't believe me... Hmph.
It's not your numbers people didn't believe, it's that those numbers
mean what you think they mean that they disagreed with. All those
reasons they disagreed then still apply now. Repeating the numbers
don't change that.
Travers Naran
> On Aug 19, 8:14 pm, Travers Naran <tna...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> It's amusing how we see these things differently. :-)
>
> It's amusing how I at least have one person who seems willing to have
> a reasoned conversation. I hope I may return the favor.
Thank you. :-)
> I think the main disagreement here is that you believe that, at some
> point, some substantive fraction of the fanbase will pay sufficient
> money to keep some substantive fraction (the "right-sizing" you talked
> about earlier) of the industry going. I don't. Especially not the
> way these guys are thinking.
I can understand why you see the industry as spiralling to zero, but
hopefully I can defend my position of it being non-zero.
>> Recently, WB spent a huge effort to prevent the Dark Knight from being
>> pirated on the opening weekend. And that's it. After the opening
>> weekend, they just perform basic monitoring and interdiction efforts.
>> In other words, WB knows they cannot stop piracy entirely, but they can
>> put in just enough to effort to make some money on it. Which is what I
>> think the legit anime industry needs to focus on -- take down the
>> streaming sites as fast as possible and realistic interdiction.
>
> Again, it's a different model. If the models were similar, it would
> be as if the movie was being shot before all the money needed to make
> the movie was raised -- and, on top of it, the piracy could so
> completely undercut the mass appeal of the particular movie that
> people no longer felt the need to drop their $11 (or whatever it is)
> to go to the theatre. (The fact that so many people _ARE_, for
> whatever reason, not willing to do so for most movies is why you're
> seeing the movie industry becoming more and more like the anime
> industry in one respect: the number of movies propping the industry
> up is becoming fewer and fewer and fewer).
>
> But the thing is that so many people saw it that TDK made back its
> investment, and WB probably thought they had the biggest movie of all
> time on their hands, and figured they could keep the DVDs selling
> (which, _unlike anime_, is ancillary in the case of wildly-successful
> movies like this) with only normal actions. Anime's "normal actions"
> have been found laughably wanting in this regard.
DVD sales are still a huge part of the equation for Hollywood studios.
I can't find the articles now, but a significant fraction of films
recoup their investments on DVD sales. Even the big ones. Although,
this is a good point to bring up the difference between the Hollywood
movie market and the anime market.
It seems like a significant part of the movie-watching population does
not pirate. Enough to give the Dark Knight a good opening weekend and
to ensure it will have a monster DVD debut. The Anime market (the fan
base), as you've brought up before and I don't entirely disagree with,
has an outsized since of entitlement to anime. They seem to act like
they are OWED anime and that it's somehow bizarre that anime should be
PAID for. (Cf. that cartoon from AnimeNewsNetwork I posted awhile ago)
I've been wondering why anime seems to attract this kind of fan base who
wants it free and wants it now. I suspect it's a combination of high
prices and the industry (esp. in Japan) reacting far too slowly to want
their market wanted -- quick availability of anime in their local
language. And I think that can still be done, but I'll get to it later.
>> Also, never forget that probably half their staff came from the early
>> days of fansubbing -- there is a fifth column within the industry, if
>> you will, and they will not view fansubbers as evil.
>
> Back in the earlier days of the industry, fansubs may have had a
> purpose. That the industry (on both sides of the Pacific) couldn't
> put the clamps on it when that purpose was ended will be their cause
> of death.
I can't entirely disagree with you there, either. But I don't think the
industry realised what _kind_ of fan was being bred in this environment.
One who is highly demanding, but so greedy and selfish that it never
occurs to them that they should pay for their demands.
The people on this newsgroup aren't really part of that group. This new
breed of anime fan eschews USENET and other "old school" anime fandom
hang outs. For example, AX maybe growing, but I doubt it's grown as
fast as the real fan base. Because of this, they aren't exposed to the
old culture and mores which kept a lot of the old school honest. And it
explains why places like this newsgroup don't realise just how bad the
situation is out there.
I didn't realise it either until I found myself working with them
recently, and it was eye-opening and a little appalling to me (as I've
said several times already).
They made FUN[1] of me for buying anime. O_O
[1] It wasn't with heat, but they still thought it was weird.
> Every week that 6,000,000 episodes are viewed illegally (I'll keep the
> $40/13 eps, though that is, for many series, quite low for season
> sets), over $18,000,000 is lost to the anime industry. This would
> mean that the anime industry loses its entire 2007 DVD market _every
> 14 weeks_. That's why I believe you could easily sue for billions.
> The last two years alone, they could probably claim a minimum of
> almost $2 billion in losses to the pirates and thieves.
But I'm not convinced that if you could perfectly end piracy that you'd
recoup that money. My gut feeling is that if you could perfectly end
piracy, the fast majority of them would simply stop watching anime. I
do not believe they would have ever been a buying crowd.
>> Selling physical DVDs? No. Selling digital streaming rights on the day
>> the episode is aired in Japan? Yes. That was their message. They know
>> they need to find a new revenue model,
>
> Then they need to stop -- dead stop -- the old model, because they
> won't have the money for the change-over if it should occur. (They
> probably don't now -- on either side of the Pacific -- and that's why
> I think the whole matter is screwed.) And they need to stop it _RIGHT
> NOW_. Every week is another $18M down the tube, PLUS the amount of
> good money they continue to throw after bad.
We agree. :-)
> Essentially, also, all dubs would have to cease, except for a very
> very _VERY_ few properties (almost, if not, exclusively foreign-
> television properties and the biggest of the movies). As stated, dubs
> more than double the real cost of bringing a series to America. If
> "bringing a series to America" becomes obsolete (as it almost
> certainly would in this model), then so will dubs.
>
> The main reason you don't see this happen?? Very simple: There would
> be zero need, with the possible exception of licensors of foreign-
> television properties, to continue the industry with intermediaries
> like the R1 companies. Funimation and Bandai Ent. would cease to
> exist -- they would no longer be needed. Viz would be another
> question, as they have television properties which can also be seen as
> merchandising for their manga (one of the reasons they don't want
> anything to do with the industry at large).
And that is kind of my view except that Funimation would be the one
handling the few dub releases. It's a smaller market, but it would
exist. And I suspect Funimation would position itself as the digital
assistant to Japanese companies. In other words, Funimation would
become a service organization for these Japanese companies. As we've
now seen, Funimation would track down and enforce copyrights, and I
suspect Funi may try to enter the digital market on BOTH sides of the
Pacific--probably aided-and-abetted by Gonzo.
More interestingly, Viz has been quietly branching out to be more than
an anime/manga company. I've got several novels (non-anime/manga
related) translated and published by Viz. As I've said before: Viz is
merely the North American releasing arm of its Japanese masters.
>> and what was more interesting was
>> the veiled complaint that they blame their Japanese partners. I've read
>> several times now that Japanese companies don't want to do digital
>> downloads or streaming simply because THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND IT!
>
> The Japanese needed to be told (the moment that JASCRA started going
> after YouTube) was that it was either going to be that they were going
> to have to understand what was going on and deal with it _then_, or
> they have no chance to survive the tidal wave which has swept them
> under. In one of my rants, I said that if the companies did not have
> the money to prosecute the thievery on all levels (the sites, the
> fansubbers, the fans), they didn't have the money to make the anime
> anymore.
>
> It's clear -- now -- they don't have the money to make the anime
> anymore.
To be fair, that began happening 10 years ago. All the companies
gambled big starting around the mid-90s on a huge anime boom in Japan
and they produced literally hundreds of hours of anime. I remember
NewType getting one of its staffer to stay in a hotel room for a week
and watch ALL 100+ hours of anime available on TV a week. They
overspent on a lot of bombs, and in such a weakened state, digital
piracy hit them.
It reminds me of Colony Collapse Disorder in the bee-keeping industry:
no single cause explains it, but when you add up the causes, it's a
miracle the hives lasted so long. In this case, the studios
over-extended themselves, got ripped off by the TV Networks[2], dealing
with rising labor costs[3] and now the pain of digital piracy eating
into their revenue streams especially from over-seas.
[2] I can't find the damned article now, but a couple years ago, the
Japanese government acted on complaints from the studios that Japanese
TV networks were grossly understating their revenues on anime.
[3]The limiting factor of production in anime is labor, and guess what
-- the unlimited pool of otaku labor has maxed out and the China & Korea
animation factories are maxed out so wages/prices have risen.
> First off, the Japanese owners and creators have the right to be hyper-
> controlling. It costs _THEM_ about 105 million yen or so ($1M) to
> create one episode of anime. It's clear, from many accounts, they
> aren't getting the necessary monies back through the revenue streams
> to keep it going much longer.
>
> The Japanese should have the right to demand anyone who watches their
> programming outside the "free" television to pay for it. That's off
> the Net, DVD, or whatever other means they find. The fact is that you
> can say it's "hyper-control", but what stuns me is, if they're so
> hyper-controlling, why can't they be that way with the other means the
> shows are getting out?
That's not what I'm talking about. By "hyper-controlling", I mean
demanding that over-seas releases be delayed by up to a year so there
can't be any reverse importing. By REFUSING to let ADV, Funimation et
al to stream big hits on legitimate streaming sites. It's the control
they exert over their foreign licensees.
To demand people pay for use of your property is not hyper-controlling.
That's just justice. :-)
> I mean, think: In the day and age of skyrocketing unemployment, you
> could actually (and I'm being deathly serious here) employ quite a few
> computer-literate people whose job would be (be you a television
> network, the WWE or UFC, the anime industry, or whatever) to go on
> sites like YouTube, find all the offending material, and have it taken
> down. If a serious effort were made to do this for any significant
> length of time, YouTube would simply disintegrate down to just those
> who _DO_ desire legit content, and Google will lose their shirts AND
> their pants.
Well, that's why Viacom did that reach and demanded viewing logs. They
wanted to prove that Google/YouTube viewers mostly watch infringing
content. Good luck with that, Viacom, cause you're going to run smack
into some of the biggest teleco's on the planet who already hate your
guts[4]. Because if they succeed in stripping YouTube of its Safe
Harbor, then all the high-speed providers would be next, and they're not
going to let that happen.
[4] If you remember, Cable and DSS companies were threatening to yank
HBO and others over Viacom's pricing antics.
> A side comment on the flip-side, though, a recent spate of Funimation
> C&D's does leave me with one question: If a C&D does NOT
> automatically mean the company has already licensed the series, why
> would the thieves cease and desist? Perhaps a better way to state
> it: What legal standing would Funimation (unless they were the sole
> R1 licensor left -- and it's not quite there _yet_...) have to issue
> such situations and have them be legally binding?
The same legal binding as a lawyer has. In other words, Funimation has
been retained for its legal services. An interesting development, IMHO.
> That was part of my comments. :) You see, the good thing that fans
> believe is the lowering of prices is going to put the Japanese out of
> business. As you know because I've mentioned it, Gonzo is officially
> insolvent right now (or, at the least, liabilities > assets). How
> many of these companies are going to keep up if the licensing fees
> can't be recovered either?
Which brings me to a point I make later on about changing how anime is
financed.
>> And from what I've read on
>> Japanese industry sites, there's still a huge revenue stream in Japan so
>> international piracy hasn't affected their bottom line. Yet.
>
> My understanding is that that's almost completely merchandise.
It's hard to say for sure because it's not like the production companies
reveal how they earn their money. I do know that DVD sales in Japan are
still decent enough to keep them going, but certainly the extras like
merchandising helps a lot.
> Whatever the revenue stream is, one then has to ask the question: Why
> not just divorce R1 completely out of the equation, and basically say
> "buy it import or go away" to the fans?? This is why I didn't
> completely divorce the BVUSA model, because I think it was based on
> basically understanding that a US price model isn't sufficient to keep
> things going.
But like Hollywood, Japan realises that the prices paid in Tokyo are not
going to be accepted in the rest of the world. Which again leads me to...
>> Anime producers should switch to a fee per episode sold. That way, the
>> risk for the local distributors is less and gives them some hope of
>> bringing prices down.
>
> And then the Japanese go out of business, since they can't hope to get
> enough money to keep going. Again, remember that Gonzo is already
> effectively (if not actually) officially insolvent. Anime series like
> the entire FMP arc and the two seasons of Kaleido Star never get made,
> much less completed.
>
> I'm not saying the reasoning isn't sound, but the problem is that the
> Japanese are starving the animators to begin with and still not
> covering costs, in many respects.
Fair enough, but at this point, their revenue streams are not going to
magically increase. They need to do something if they can't afford an
all-out war on piracy, and I don't see licensing fees increasing anytime
soon. If anything they're going to decrease anyway.
But a per ep fee would apply more to older, already-produced series.
There is still a back catalog of titles that can be re-released or
licensed, and if you can make some money on your back catalog (probably
by streaming w/ ads), that can help.
>> The panel made some mention about the licensing costs still being set
>> arbitrarily, and more interestingly, fansubs having little to no impact
>> on the licensing fee because it's negotiated after only seeing an
>> episode or two.
>
> Part of that is because, in cases like I've mentioned, a lot of the
> licensing fee has to be an "advance", since the series might not be
> able to be completed if they don't get a license at a good price.
> (This is part of what Gen Fukunaga has been trying to cut down.)
Which means a change in financing models is needed. It might be the end
of the independent studio and that every anime will be produced via a
single, major studio which can afford to aggregate the costs of hits and
misses.
>> Because you don't seem to understand how the international legal system
>> works for copyright issues. For starters, YouTube is protected by the
>> "safe harbor" clause of the DMCA -- and that's probably why Viacom is
>> going to experience epic fail in their lawsuit against YouTube.
>
> Then the anime industry is finished, and a lot of other entertainment
> media will go with it. If YouTube is allowed to only quarter-ass it's
> way through with the "safe harbor" provision, why does it really _have
> to_ remove _anything_?
>
> Second question: What makes them any real different than Napster,
> who, apparently, did not have such "safe harbor" provision?
Napster did NOTHING to stop piracy: they had no de-listing policy.
YouTube does have a very fast response time to copyright infringement
requests. In fact, it appears to be automated and they've now
instituted the auto-scanner: it scans uploaded video for known
copyrighted sounds and then automatically blocks the video. These last
two things have pissed off some YouTube users who claim they don't
understand how their video of them dancing with their cat is infringing. :-)
To be protected by the "safe harbor" clause, you have to show that you
do take down infringing material in a timely manner.
>> The precedent was made in a little noticed lawsuit between Harlan Ellison
>> and AOL. AOL was sued by Ellison over an act of piracy made by a USENET
>> poster from a different computer system. AOL appealed and the high
>> courts agreed: AOL was protected by the safe harbor clause. YouTube
>> will take down the content if the copyright owner asks.
>
> Why should it have to? And, on top of it, why is there not the demand
> by the copyright owner that makes it a blanket statement that any
> copyrighted material by that owner is automatically to be taken down
> (unless they choose to start availing some of the other systems which
> allow this content to remain up)?
Because somehow YouTube has to know the clip in infringing. YouTube has
an automated scanner, but it's only using a database of samples provided
by the holders. If the Japanese companies provide the samples required
to auto-detect, it can, but there are no hordes of YouTube employees
scanning for copyright infringement.
But this is the heart of copyright law for two centuries: it is up to
the copyright owner to enforce their copyright. No body else--NOT EVEN
THE GOVERNMENT. The government can only take action when prompted by a
court decision in favor of the owner, but it's still up to the owner to
spot the infringement and bring the case. In fact, if you don't enforce
your copyright, the courts can say you never had it in the first place.
To be fair, the Japanese companies are now taking their copyrights more
seriously, but they don't seem to be putting a lot of effort into it
especially on clearing out the stuff from YouTube.
>> The more important question is this: Why aren't the companies
>> (especially the Japanese one) using the easy-to-use YouTube interface to
>> request infringing content be removed? All the legal streaming sites,
>> like Veoh, make it very easy for copyright owners to have content
>> removed. But they're not. I notice every single other content provider
>> on the planet does it. I click on a link for Most Viewed, and the video
>> was removed at the request of the copyright owner.
>
> I don't understand why they don't go further and demand compensation
> from the uploaders, on top of it. But I can't answer that question.
For YouTube, that is a good question. The uploader is easily identified
and with a little work, you could figure out if they're in an easy to
prosecute jurisdiction (anywhere in the G7) or not. I suspect the vast
majority of the uploads are from the U.S.
>> The licensees can do whatever they want, but it's incredibly silly to
>> believe that the market should ACCEPT whatever you do to them.
>
> Why??? The licensees should dictate to the market. And all the
> market can then do is say yes or no. If they say no, they _don't get
> the product_ (such as why I'm not going to have a PS3 any time soon).
>
> They bought that right (for six or seven figures, in many cases)...
> And they should expect an opportunity to recoup that cost. Without
> that expectation, there is no market and no industry.
I agree that if you, for example, don't like the price of an XBox 360,
all you can do is NOT buy it. You're not allowed to STEAL the damned
thing. :-)
What I'm trying to say is that regardless of the moral rights, looking
at it as a businessman, the audience is not buying because they don't
like your product (or in this case, the way that product is brought to
market). It's time to wake up, like the music industry did, and start
providing content in a timely manner in the manner the market wants or
they will not buy your product.
To their credit, companies are waking up to this idea. But as you point
out, it maybe too little, too late. And without a whip to drive the
audience to the carrot, things won't change.
> Then, frankly, the real problem is Japan recognizing that the US
> actually can provide them enough money to substantively survive. If
> the problem _is_ Japan, there is but one solution: Cut off R1.
> Diminishing returns, again. (You've gone from $550M in 2004 to $250M
> in 2007, with the expectation of it being $200M in 2008). You are not
> going to be able to effectively enforce the legal right to your
> product to allow for R1 to be a meaningful industry anymore. Get rid
> of them and save the expense of having to deal with them.
>
> Since R1 can't effectively enforce their legal rights to the product
> they license, the license then becomes useless and worthless. Ouran
> could be the biggest seller of 2008, but is it going to get the
> necessary number of copies to even break even? No, Hell No, and Hell
> Freaking No!
>
> The only real alternative is to make it an all-import business, and do
> the subs in Japan and be done with it.
That may happen, but for me, that's not necessarily a bad thing. :-)
But I do understand you don't want to see the dub industry die because
you love their product. And I do hope they can find a way to survive.
>> The distributors would LOVE to release subs on-line the same day as in
>> Japan, but the Japanese companies don't WANT to, and it seems to be for
>> very silly and arbitrary reasons.
>
> Then they need to be slapped (and I know what a slap means in Japan)
> and told, simply, that their stands have made it far too late for most
> of them to survive economically. Period.
Yup. Sonotori.
But it seems that a company has to be driven to the wall (like Gonzo)
before they realise this.
Reminds me of the Detroit auto industry. They learned nothing from
their mistakes in the 70s, and they fell into the same trap again today:
they produced gas-guzzlers, and when the signs were there that the
market was changing, they simply offered bigger discounts on their
gas-guzzlers rather than provide what the market wanted.
And now GM is facing bankruptcy.
There are some bad decisions being made in Japan right now, but
hopefully they'll learn quickly and avoid the die off.
Off-topic:
More tellingly, in a recent survey on customer satisfaction, the
American auto companies have dropped below their foreign competitors...
AGAIN!
http://www.wtop.com/?nid=111&sid=1462362
> Here's the problem with that theory: You still have to make sure
> that, if the scenario ever is allowed to come to fruition, that you
> can still make the issues irrelevant and force (yes, _FORCE_) people
> to actually do something that I believe the vast supermajority of
> anime fans refuse to do: pay for the content.
>
> It does NO GOOD to same-day and charge $3/episode for a legal same-day
> sub if you don't terminate all illegal subs which most fans would wait
> 24-48 hours for and pay nothing for. Multiply $3/ep by any decent-
> length season, and you'll see why.
>
> Again, I'm not disputing the logic in the emphasis, but there is a
> much larger issue. It goes back that I find the 30% laughable as far
> as only 30% never will buy. I'd put it much closer to 80% if not
> more.
I'd agree, but I'm not sure if they'd ever buy to be honest...
>> Funimation is the only company that seems to really get the "adapt or
>> die" mentality that will be required to survive the coming shake down.
>
> The shake down is already here. Geneon's titles are now with Funi.
> ADV's titles are now with Funi. BVUSA has been folded into Bandai
> Entertainment.
Now, now, let the otaku continue their swim in denial. :-)
bobbie sellers
> On Aug 19, 10:19�pm, darkstar7...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> On Aug 19, 6:11�pm, Dave Watson <dwbeingupfr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
by the otherwise
reasonable Mr.Watson.]
Forbear(!!) , I urge you from response to those under-bridge
dwellers devoted to
disseminating folly.
later
Bobbie
--
bobbie sellers - a retired nurse in San Francisco
Ningen banji Human beings do
Samazama no Every single kind
Baka a suru Of stupid thing
--- 117th edition of Haifu Yanagidaru published in 1832
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
> It's amusing how we see these things differently. :-)
>
Starky believes the world is dark and evil and the only way anyone does
anything right is by iron fist of law. And threat of their cellmate
Bubba. And maybe not then.
This will tend to color his view on most things.
>
>> And note: That's not just six million downloaded -- that's six
>> million just _viewed_. I'll get back to that later with some of the
>> more laughable stuff later.
>
> Remember when someone refused to accept my claim of a similar number? :-)
Viewed is going to be a much larger number than downloaded, which -- of
necessity -- would be much higher than "bought" even if all the people
inclined to purchase were to do so, since there will be a lot of
downloads and views by those who don't want to pay, can't pay, or who --
after seeing whatever it was -- decide it's not for them.
Six million views of multiple shows? Yeah? And? That's not even a large
audience for a SINGLE REAL TV SHOW.
Starky still doesn't realize that the Big Boys already "get it" -- and
are going with the flow. Doctor Who eps are available for download
across the world within an **HOUR** of first airing. Pirated, no doubt.
The BBC does nothing against this as long as they aren't being sold,
despite the fact that it's by FAR their biggest cash cow. Why?
Because when they release the stuff for sale, people DO buy it.
Fans DO. Teenage fans, old fans, all fans, there's some who don't, but
always some who do. You sell to those who do.
CBS "gets it". They provide SUPPORT for the fans -- down to providing
clips of "evidence" for the fanfic writers to support any pairing you
can imagine. They provide downloads, take fan advice, and -- again
unless it's blatant Make Money stuff -- rarely bother the downloaders
putting CSI on the Net.
Like Napster, Crunchyroll is going legit from being criminal, and that,
too, is a matter of someone in the industry "getting it".
Starky is the one who doesn't get it at all.
--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://seawasp.livejournal.com
Blade
"Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote in message
news:g8hg98$jjl$1...@registered.motzarella.org...
> Like Napster, Crunchyroll is going legit from being criminal, and that,
> too, is a matter of someone in the industry "getting it".
And what, precisely, is it that they are "getting"?
Napster was shut down by court order and then they used its well-known brand
name and logo for a completely different pay service.
Crunchyroll, like every single other site that charges money to view content
which is not theirs, are a bunch of shitbag thieves that deserve jail time.
They are simply fortunate that they are stealing from an industry not big
enough to squash them, and therefore will profit by it. Though the model
they're using is a possibly useful one for legit companies to copy, the
troll is completely correct in his depiction of them.
In both cases, while their method was useful enough to be copyed by a legit
firm (which I suppose could be considered "getting it"), they themselves are
nothing but con artists who profited by illegal actions (actually, I'll give
the Napster guy more credit, since he didn't likely guess at the scale of
what he was creating, whereas the Crunchyroll people intended all along to
sell their site for millions).
I wonder - is there any possible violation of copyright so blatant and
unethical that it would actually be condemned by anime fandom? I guess Son
May went out of business, but then again, Crunchyroll is worse than Son May.
With all due respect, fuck the makers of Crunchroll, and fuck anybody who
ever used their service. And while I understand why the anime companies
worked with them rather than trying to crush them, fuck them for doing that
too; it's a horrible precedent and people like that should never be rewarded
for their actions.
-
Blade
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
> "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote in message
> news:g8hg98$jjl$1...@registered.motzarella.org...
>> Like Napster, Crunchyroll is going legit from being criminal, and that,
>> too, is a matter of someone in the industry "getting it".
>
> And what, precisely, is it that they are "getting"?
>
> Napster was shut down by court order and then they used its well-known brand
> name and logo for a completely different pay service.
Napster was still fighting for its life when Bartelsman (I think it
was) bought them and converted them to a pay service.
>
> Crunchyroll, like every single other site that charges money to view content
> which is not theirs, are a bunch of shitbag thieves that deserve jail time.
Which is the same as Napster was.
Blade
> Blade wrote:
>> "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote in message
>> news:g8hg98$jjl$1...@registered.motzarella.org...
>>> Like Napster, Crunchyroll is going legit from being criminal, and that,
>>> too, is a matter of someone in the industry "getting it".
>>
>> And what, precisely, is it that they are "getting"?
>>
>> Napster was shut down by court order and then they used its well-known
>> brand name and logo for a completely different pay service.
>
> Napster was still fighting for its life when Bartelsman (I think it was)
> bought them and converted them to a pay service.
They'd already been shut down by court order at that point, though. They
were for all intents and purposes dead.
>> Crunchyroll, like every single other site that charges money to view
>> content which is not theirs, are a bunch of shitbag thieves that deserve
>> jail time.
>
> Which is the same as Napster was.
Incorrect; Napster didn't charge money to share songs. As I noted, I will
give more credit to Shawn Fanning than I will the assholes from Crunchyroll.
Not that I'm a big fan of his either, but he did not seem to start Napster
just so he could make money off of it.
-
Blade
selaboc
<seaw...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
> Six million views of multiple shows? Yeah? And? That's not even a large
> audience for a SINGLE REAL TV SHOW.
And, as I recall from the last time that CPM number was brought up,
when you actually go to the origional source (CPM) you find that the
wording they actually used was not the cut and dried "Viewing of
fansubs" as it's being made out to be, but infact was a much vaguer
description "six million anime-related files"
dump...@hotmail.com
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/webscout/2008/08/youtube-and-the.html
Quote:
"Sophisticated “fingerprinting” systems can
dispassionately speed-watch a thousand
clips in the time it would take a human to
watch one. If these copyright robots spot
anything that matches an item in their vast
memory banks of protected content, a red
light goes on and the nasty little copy drops
into video purgatory, forever."
darkst...@gmail.com
> On Aug 19, 10:19 pm, darkstar7...@gmail.com wrote:
> > But now I understand _WHY_ you consider it "Mikey's usual stream of
> > diarrhea..."
>
> Because it's malodorous liquid noisily spewing from the hole of an
> incontinent fool who constantly snubs suggestions of taking bismuth,
> eating yogurt or just going to the toilet until it passes, and then
> you wonder why everybody's holding their nose around you.
No, that's YOUR diarrhea -- see at least one intelligent poster in
this thread whom I've spoken to as for why your stands don't hold
water (_or_ shit -- please get that fixed...).
> > It's like the people that were talked to from one of the companies
> > about prize sponsorship for last weekend, and when the industry came
> > up, it was literally "LA! LA! LA! I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!" with the
> > figurative fingers in the ear.
>
> > You see, it's as I have said before: You _HAVE_ to ignore reality to
> > enjoy anime as much as you used to anymore.
>
> *splutter* Like I should take notes on what "reality" is from a
> fucking stalker.
You don't have to take it from me, then -- read up on the anime
industry yourself.
> > They're still around today -- three of the six who were nine months
> > ago, with another 20% drop in sales forecast, Bandai Entertainment
> > can't afford a decent replicator, so they can't keep a reasoned
> > schedule at various points throughout 2008 -- read up on four more
> > delays for fall titles. Dub actors are retiring left and right as the
> > dub industry is _DEAD_.
>
> So who's retired? Cite cases and supply links, or shut your festering
> slophole. And how would you know that Bandai can't afford a decent
> replicator? Are they telling you this, or are you just supposing
> that's the case?
Geneon is gone, their rescues part of Funi.
BVUSA has been folded into Bandai Entertainment.
And if you honestly believe ADV hasn't retired from anime, you may
want to even talk to the likes of Andrew Kent about it, who recently
said on AnimeonDVD/Mania's forums that he didn't ever think he'd live
to see the day that he'd survive ADV in the anime industry.
Get real, idiot. Your festering piehole is the one which should be
slammed shut, forcibly!!
> > All it's going to take is Bandai Namco
> > getting out of R1, Viz finally dissociating itself completely from the
> > anime industry, and Navarre going under, and there's no industry at
> > all.
>
> Jesus, can't you wet-dream about sex with people like normal humans do
> (although I have my own reasons to wish that Viz would go out of
> business)?
Because they basically have subjugated anime to a secondary form of
merchandising, and your feelings are hurt?
Al Kahn was RIGHT -- unmerchandisable anime should not be made,
period.
As for your question, do you want me to go back to jail for that or
something else?
> > I give that one year, especially with the US economy in such laughable
> > state.
>
> So if the industry is still alive one year from now, will you finally
> go away? Please?
I'd probably be going away one way or the other, but on my own terms,
not yours.
> > And, as for that last comment, you got two ways to make me leave:
> > Jail me or shoot me. Pick one.
>
> Tough as fried shit, this boy. Jesus, you sound like the pathetic
> hair metal fan losers I went to high school with.
Watson, you don't get rid of people like me without shooting us or
jailing us. That simple.
Mike
Antonio E. Gonzalez
<dwbeing...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Aug 19, 10:19 pm, darkstar7...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Aug 19, 6:11 pm, Dave Watson <dwbeingupfr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > On Aug 19, 5:29 pm, darkstar7...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> > > And here's the report:
>>
>> > >http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/convention/2008/fansubs-and-industry-...
>>
>> > > And here's my comments:
>>
>> > [Mikey's usual stream of diarrhea snipped.]
>>
>> But now I understand _WHY_ you consider it "Mikey's usual stream of
>> diarrhea..."
>
>Because it's malodorous liquid noisily spewing from the hole of an
>incontinent fool who constantly snubs suggestions of taking bismuth,
>eating yogurt or just going to the toilet until it passes, and then
>you wonder why everybody's holding their nose around you.
>
Maybe he spends a lot of time in dumpsters . . .
>> It's like the people that were talked to from one of the companies
>> about prize sponsorship for last weekend, and when the industry came
>> up, it was literally "LA! LA! LA! I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!" with the
>> figurative fingers in the ear.
>>
>> You see, it's as I have said before: You _HAVE_ to ignore reality to
>> enjoy anime as much as you used to anymore.
>
>*splutter* Like I should take notes on what "reality" is from a
>fucking stalker.
>
I think he might be moving on to Cindy Lauper . . .
>> > > That's why I will stand behind the "one more year", even though, with
>> > > the incompetence shown here, they shouldn't be around today, as I said
>> > > six months ago.
>>
>> > Well, guess what? Despite your "mark my words, people" small poultry
>> > blather, they're still around today. They'll still be around in a
>> > year, like they have for over 15 of them already. That's why we don't
>> > take you at all seriously, and never will. Face it. So why don't you
>> > just fuck off and go find a hobby that doesn't involve harassing
>> > people for a change?
>>
>> They're still around today -- three of the six who were nine months
>> ago, with another 20% drop in sales forecast, Bandai Entertainment
>> can't afford a decent replicator, so they can't keep a reasoned
>> schedule at various points throughout 2008 -- read up on four more
>> delays for fall titles. Dub actors are retiring left and right as the
>> dub industry is _DEAD_.
>
>So who's retired? Cite cases and supply links, or shut your festering
>slophole. And how would you know that Bandai can't afford a decent
>replicator? Are they telling you this, or are you just supposing
>that's the case?
>
Keep in mind this is the guy who thinks Bandai Visual was a
legitimate company, not an experiment; don't expect any actual names
either . . .
>> All it's going to take is Bandai Namco
>> getting out of R1, Viz finally dissociating itself completely from the
>> anime industry, and Navarre going under, and there's no industry at
>> all.
>
>Jesus, can't you wet-dream about sex with people like normal humans do
>(although I have my own reasons to wish that Viz would go out of
>business)?
>
>> I give that one year, especially with the US economy in such laughable
>> state.
>
>So if the industry is still alive one year from now, will you finally
>go away? Please?
>
>> And, as for that last comment, you got two ways to make me leave:
>> Jail me or shoot me. Pick one.
>
>Tough as fried shit, this boy. Jesus, you sound like the pathetic
>hair metal fan losers I went to high school with.
>
Nature has a way of dealing with his kind . . .
--
- ReFlex 76
- "Let's beat the terrorists with our most powerful weapon . . . hot
girl-on-girl action!"
- "The difference between young and old is the difference between
looking forward to your next birthday, and dreading it!"
- Jesus Christ - The original hippie!
<http://reflex76.blogspot.com/>
<http://www.blogger.com/profile/07245047157197572936>
Katana > Chain Saw > Baseball Bat > Hammer
darkst...@gmail.com
> darkstar7...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Aug 19, 8:14 pm, Travers Naran <tna...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> It's amusing how we see these things differently. :-)
>
> > It's amusing how I at least have one person who seems willing to have
> > a reasoned conversation. I hope I may return the favor.
>
> Thank you. :-)
I'm willing to have an intelligent conversation with people who are
going want to have one. Once they bring up the Gibson Incident,
either get the restraining orders keeping me away from the female
voice talents of anime, or go the fuck away, because you completely
expose yourself as a pro-fansub thief (not talking about you, Travers,
but I think you know where I'm headed on that one).
> > I think the main disagreement here is that you believe that, at some
> > point, some substantive fraction of the fanbase will pay sufficient
> > money to keep some substantive fraction (the "right-sizing" you talked
> > about earlier) of the industry going. I don't. Especially not the
> > way these guys are thinking.
>
> I can understand why you see the industry as spiralling to zero, but
> hopefully I can defend my position of it being non-zero.
I think I can understand that. Not that I agree with it, mind you,
but, again, such is the way of someone like you who at least wants to
try to talk intelligently.
[WB's actions against pirates of "The Dark Knight"]
> > Again, it's a different model. If the models were similar, it would
> > be as if the movie was being shot before all the money needed to make
> > the movie was raised -- and, on top of it, the piracy could so
> > completely undercut the mass appeal of the particular movie that
> > people no longer felt the need to drop their $11 (or whatever it is)
> > to go to the theatre. (The fact that so many people _ARE_, for
> > whatever reason, not willing to do so for most movies is why you're
> > seeing the movie industry becoming more and more like the anime
> > industry in one respect: the number of movies propping the industry
> > up is becoming fewer and fewer and fewer).
> DVD sales are still a huge part of the equation for Hollywood studios.
> I can't find the articles now, but a significant fraction of films
> recoup their investments on DVD sales. Even the big ones. Although,
> this is a good point to bring up the difference between the Hollywood
> movie market and the anime market.
But here's the thing... Specifically for that one, they had something
special -- far beyond the normal DVD release after movie (or even the
normal straight-to-DVD release, as more of the lesser movies and indie
titles are having to do) -- this is probably why they could afford to
take it back to just normal interdictive measures, even though it's
far beyond anything anime would ever be able to put out there.
> It seems like a significant part of the movie-watching population does
> not pirate. Enough to give the Dark Knight a good opening weekend and
> to ensure it will have a monster DVD debut. The Anime market (the fan
> base), as you've brought up before and I don't entirely disagree with,
> has an outsized since of entitlement to anime. They seem to act like
> they are OWED anime and that it's somehow bizarre that anime should be
> PAID for. (Cf. that cartoon from AnimeNewsNetwork I posted awhile ago)
I'll take it even one step further: They seem to act like they OWN
anime -- that the anime industry exists for THEM and THEM ALONE. They
have zero regard for the fact that it costs a million dollars to make
a 13-episode series of anime and another million (according, again, to
the AnimeAnime report referenced back in December of 2007) to
Americanize it. They feel they own the anime and can do whatever they
wish to do with it on their own terms, and not give two damns if the
entire house of cards they have helped build blows over, as much of it
already has.
But your thesis here is correct. Unlike movies, the significant part
of the anime-watching population pirates, and (at least IMODO) pirates
exclusively. That, and ONLY that, is why you are seeing claims of
still-explosive growth in cons like Otakon, Anime Boston, and AX.
> I've been wondering why anime seems to attract this kind of fan base who
> wants it free and wants it now. I suspect it's a combination of high
> prices and the industry (esp. in Japan) reacting far too slowly to want
> their market wanted -- quick availability of anime in their local
> language. And I think that can still be done, but I'll get to it later.
Part of it, I think, is the "kewl" factor. The same "e-penile" thing
which drives fansubbers like Tofusensei to do what they do as fast as
humanly possible (so they can be "FIRST!!!") is the same thing which
gets fans to want to see it NOW so they don't get left behind their
buddies and they can wear all the coolest stuff to the conventions.
(I mean, think: How long have you seen those powder-blue blazers for
Ouran all over the damn place at a number of cons??)
Part of it is one big fat "FUCK YOU!!!" to the industry. Partially
for that reason, and partially because they don't give a shit. (About
much of anything.) I don't think you can find too many anime fans who
would not like to see major parts of the industry go under -- as in,
go under _NOW_. The other part is just regular societal stuff.
The problem about "reacting far too slowly to give what the market
wants -- quick availability in local language" is that you have to
justify the expense of even putting it into the local language.
Again, to even license the series (this is before ADR, production, and
probably dubbing), you're talking about $33-35K/episode -- that's to
even bring it over. That's a half-mil before we even start!
The only way a same-day model would even hope to work would require
the immediate cessation of the R1 industry and probably all foreign
(to Japan) DVD-based anime markets, for that reason.
> > Back in the earlier days of the industry, fansubs may have had a
> > purpose. That the industry (on both sides of the Pacific) couldn't
> > put the clamps on it when that purpose was ended will be their cause
> > of death.
>
> I can't entirely disagree with you there, either. But I don't think the
> industry realised what _kind_ of fan was being bred in this environment.
There _was a time_... There _was a point_... There were shows that
even I saw in fansubs at cons and liked enough that I couldn't wait to
see them come out in the States -- and the problem now is that that
very model has killed the market so much that a number of those shows
have been cut off.
> One who is highly demanding, but so greedy and selfish that it never
> occurs to them that they should pay for their demands.
Again, as I said above, they think, now, that they own the industry,
as a user-driven industry, rather than a company-driven industry which
should damn well expect to recover their necessary costs.
> The people on this newsgroup aren't really part of that group. This new
> breed of anime fan eschews USENET and other "old school" anime fandom
> hang outs. For example, AX maybe growing, but I doubt it's grown as
> fast as the real fan base. Because of this, they aren't exposed to the
> old culture and mores which kept a lot of the old school honest. And it
> explains why places like this newsgroup don't realise just how bad the
> situation is out there.
I disagree about the RAAM crew, at least the better number of them.
As I said in the original post, I really felt the non-adversarial
nature of the panel really invalidated it's point. It is "us vs.
them", especially now. If some of us had actually realized this early
enough, perhaps the argument could be even be made more salient. But
the fact is that I don't believe a lot of these people even really
care about the industry (and would openly campaign for its demise if
they could get the anime for free and on their terms as well), and
that puts many of them in the same company as the "FU" crowd I was
just talking about.
The fact is, that AX is growing is NOT a good thing. That the fanbase
may be growing even faster is far worse -- because, as I've tried to
hammer down these idiots' throats: The anime fandom is not growing --
it's growing fat. And it's time to trim the fat before the entire
body has a heart attack and dies at once.
> I didn't realise it either until I found myself working with them
> recently, and it was eye-opening and a little appalling to me (as I've
> said several times already).
I can definitely understand that -- it's as I've told the people
here: You either have to accuse the anime industry of rampant fraud
(criminal and civil), or you have to admit that they are right and
that they are being killed by piracy.
> They made FUN[1] of me for buying anime. O_O
Of course. And why wouldn't anyone do same at this point, given the
present environment?
> > Every week that 6,000,000 episodes are viewed illegally (I'll keep the
> > $40/13 eps, though that is, for many series, quite low for season
> > sets), over $18,000,000 is lost to the anime industry. This would
> > mean that the anime industry loses its entire 2007 DVD market _every
> > 14 weeks_. That's why I believe you could easily sue for billions.
> > The last two years alone, they could probably claim a minimum of
> > almost $2 billion in losses to the pirates and thieves.
>
> But I'm not convinced that if you could perfectly end piracy that you'd
> recoup that money. My gut feeling is that if you could perfectly end
> piracy, the fast majority of them would simply stop watching anime. I
> do not believe they would have ever been a buying crowd.
But if you could perfectly end piracy:
1) The fanbase would disintegrate to a real level, not an inflated
level.
2) This WOULD put some of the companies out of business, but better
some than an inevitable all.
3) This WOULD put many of the studios out of business, but better many
of them than an inevitable all.
You see, you seem to think that the vast majority of them quitting
anime would be a bad thing.
I don't. I want them GONE. I want the fanbase to shrink back to a
real level -- even if this shuts down most of the cons and anime
events (most of the smaller ones are getting to the point the
localities no longer believe they are worth being held anyway!) --
because, if you are right and there is a non-zero "right-sizing", then
I want it there as soon as plausible. The problem is, to do that
would require a near-draconian effort.
Recouping the costs would be a matter of suing the relevant parties
and gaining judgements against them. The thing is, it still is quite
disconcerting that, for all intents and purposes, pirated anime's
value defeats legitimate anime's value by a minimum of a factor of 4.
You can't stay in business that way.
> >> Selling physical DVDs? No. Selling digital streaming rights on the day
> >> the episode is aired in Japan? Yes. That was their message. They know
> >> they need to find a new revenue model,
>
> > Then they need to stop -- dead stop -- the old model, because they
> > won't have the money for the change-over if it should occur. (They
> > probably don't now -- on either side of the Pacific -- and that's why
> > I think the whole matter is screwed.) And they need to stop it _RIGHT
> > NOW_. Every week is another $18M down the tube, PLUS the amount of
> > good money they continue to throw after bad.
>
> We agree. :-)
I mean, as an example: I believe Ouran will be a MASSIVE loser for
Funi. MASSIVE loser. Epic fail. Why? The numbers I gave
earlier... Do you honestly believe that Funi will be able to move
43,000 $60 boxes of Ouran High School Host Club for EACH box half-
season volume?? If so, I want the number of the bridge you're trying
to sell.
And that's probably one of the last real saleable titles _left_!!
> > Essentially, also, all dubs would have to cease, except for a very
> > very _VERY_ few properties (almost, if not, exclusively foreign-
> > television properties and the biggest of the movies). As stated, dubs
> > more than double the real cost of bringing a series to America. If
> > "bringing a series to America" becomes obsolete (as it almost
> > certainly would in this model), then so will dubs.
>
> > The main reason you don't see this happen?? Very simple: There would
> > be zero need, with the possible exception of licensors of foreign-
> > television properties, to continue the industry with intermediaries
> > like the R1 companies.
> And that is kind of my view except that Funimation would be the one
> handling the few dub releases.
Funimation, if that occurred, would probably have to contract out with
the television outlets which would do so. It's not out of the
question to believe that Viz would want a portion of that for
themselves as well.
> It's a smaller market, but it would
> exist. And I suspect Funimation would position itself as the digital
> assistant to Japanese companies. In other words, Funimation would
> become a service organization for these Japanese companies. As we've
> now seen, Funimation would track down and enforce copyrights, and I
> suspect Funi may try to enter the digital market on BOTH sides of the
> Pacific--probably aided-and-abetted by Gonzo.
I address the C&D issue later, and I expect you responded.
Gonzo, I truly believe, will completely die out. If not before the
required time to either become solvent or be delisted, upon being
delisted.
This is where I think CrunchyShit and the rest of the thieves and
pirates are going to make this very difficult. It is demonstrably
either laziness or impossibility to enforce such a copyright situation
on the Internet. They have a better model, a faster model, and, most
importantly to the masses, a (mostly) free model.
> More interestingly, Viz has been quietly branching out to be more than
> an anime/manga company. I've got several novels (non-anime/manga
> related) translated and published by Viz. As I've said before: Viz is
> merely the North American releasing arm of its Japanese masters.
The only reason I even consider Viz as part of this equation is
because of Shonen Jump -- it's clear that they either want nothing to
do with the anime industry or as little to do with it as possible.
The anime, to them, is only a merchandising arm. They are more a
publishing arm with the manga and other subsidiary outlets. (That's
one of the reasons they want nothing to do with AX.)
> > The Japanese needed to be told (the moment that JASCRA started going
> > after YouTube) was that it was either going to be that they were going
> > to have to understand what was going on and deal with it _then_, or
> > they have no chance to survive the tidal wave which has swept them
> > under. In one of my rants, I said that if the companies did not have
> > the money to prosecute the thievery on all levels (the sites, the
> > fansubbers, the fans), they didn't have the money to make the anime
> > anymore.
>
> > It's clear -- now -- they don't have the money to make the anime
> > anymore.
>
> To be fair, that began happening 10 years ago.
It accelerated hardcore in the last three.
> All the companies gambled big starting around the mid-90s on a huge anime
> boom in Japan and they produced literally hundreds of hours of anime. I remember
> NewType getting one of its staffer to stay in a hotel room for a week
> and watch ALL 100+ hours of anime available on TV a week. They
> overspent on a lot of bombs, and in such a weakened state, digital
> piracy hit them.
Which was one of the reasons they FURTHER overextended into an R1
market which died out the moment people realized they could just take
the product, hence making said product financially worthless.
> It reminds me of Colony Collapse Disorder in the bee-keeping industry:
> no single cause explains it, but when you add up the causes, it's a
> miracle the hives lasted so long. In this case, the studios
> over-extended themselves, got ripped off by the TV Networks[2], dealing
> with rising labor costs[3] and now the pain of digital piracy eating
> into their revenue streams especially from over-seas.
>
> [2] I can't find the damned article now, but a couple years ago, the
> Japanese government acted on complaints from the studios that Japanese
> TV networks were grossly understating their revenues on anime.
It's a wonder to me, given all factors, why the anime industry in
Japan just doesn't throw hands up, walk away, declare a total strike
(perhaps permanent!), and say "NO MORE!!"
> [3]The limiting factor of production in anime is labor, and guess what
> -- the unlimited pool of otaku labor has maxed out and the China & Korea
> animation factories are maxed out so wages/prices have risen.
Bout time there's at least an effort to pay some of these people what
they might actually be worth.
> > First off, the Japanese owners and creators have the right to be hyper-
> > controlling. It costs _THEM_ about 105 million yen or so ($1M) to
> > create one episode of anime. It's clear, from many accounts, they
> > aren't getting the necessary monies back through the revenue streams
> > to keep it going much longer.
That should be for 13 episodes, by the by. Whoops.
> > The Japanese should have the right to demand anyone who watches their
> > programming outside the "free" television to pay for it. That's off
> > the Net, DVD, or whatever other means they find. The fact is that you
> > can say it's "hyper-control", but what stuns me is, if they're so
> > hyper-controlling, why can't they be that way with the other means the
> > shows are getting out?
>
> That's not what I'm talking about. By "hyper-controlling", I mean
> demanding that over-seas releases be delayed by up to a year so there
> can't be any reverse importing. By REFUSING to let ADV, Funimation et
> al to stream big hits on legitimate streaming sites. It's the control
> they exert over their foreign licensees.
The problem with that is simple: They honestly believed the only way
they could sell to this group is to cut the price to $24.99-29.99...
Perhaps, if they had done the BVUSA model to begin with, anime would
never have gotten so big and the down-sizing could have occurred at a
time that the industry might've been able to survive.
The problem here is that they were _legitimately_ afraid of being
completely undercut, with this being the ultimate manifestation of
that undercut. If they had allowed the reverse importation, it's like
trading an end-of-season free-agent at the trading deadline -- you get
something. Now, they get nothing, because of the same undercut.
I mean, see fansubbing and piracy as the ultimate forms of reverse
importation, as you will.
And I assert again: Why wouldn't they exert that control -- it's
_THEIR_ product...
> To demand people pay for use of your property is not hyper-controlling.
> That's just justice. :-)
The problem is that most fans (see discussion above) see even paying
for the property as a similar hyper-control.
> > I mean, think: In the day and age of skyrocketing unemployment, you
> > could actually (and I'm being deathly serious here) employ quite a few
> > computer-literate people whose job would be (be you a television
> > network, the WWE or UFC, the anime industry, or whatever) to go on
> > sites like YouTube, find all the offending material, and have it taken
> > down. If a serious effort were made to do this for any significant
> > length of time, YouTube would simply disintegrate down to just those
> > who _DO_ desire legit content, and Google will lose their shirts AND
> > their pants.
>
> Well, that's why Viacom did that reach and demanded viewing logs. They
> wanted to prove that Google/YouTube viewers mostly watch infringing
> content. Good luck with that, Viacom, cause you're going to run smack
> into some of the biggest teleco's on the planet who already hate your
> guts[4]. Because if they succeed in stripping YouTube of its Safe
> Harbor, then all the high-speed providers would be next, and they're not
> going to let that happen.
I'm still waiting to see (and, again, I'm sure we discuss this later
in the post) how YouTube has this safe harbor and old Napster did not.
I think it could almost be proven as a factor of infringing content
vs. legitimate content on the service itself -- and then you use the
numbers of views of each to provide the further evidence, without
necessarily (unless you wish to act against individual viewers as
well!!) going after individual viewers by getting the logs.
> [4] If you remember, Cable and DSS companies were threatening to yank
> HBO and others over Viacom's pricing antics.
I think it's time to really start looking at all this as a factor of
the "user-driven Internet". This is one of the reasons that I fear
that the end result is going to be the functional end of all copyright
protection and the end of any real value at all of entertainment
intellectual property. I believe, eventually, either a real
discussion of whether the ISP's are liable may have to be made, or
copyright will have to be struck down as ineffective and
unenforceable.
> > A side comment on the flip-side, though, a recent spate of Funimation
> > C&D's does leave me with one question: If a C&D does NOT
> > automatically mean the company has already licensed the series, why
> > would the thieves cease and desist? Perhaps a better way to state
> > it: What legal standing would Funimation (unless they were the sole
> > R1 licensor left -- and it's not quite there _yet_...) have to issue
> > such situations and have them be legally binding?
>
> The same legal binding as a lawyer has. In other words, Funimation has
> been retained for its legal services. An interesting development, IMHO.
This would appear to be a precursor to Funimation being the only R1
licensor -- I don't believe that has long left, mind you, before that
becomes reality. But this would appear to be a precursor to say: "If
you want to play with us, you go through Funimation."
> > That was part of my comments. :) You see, the good thing that fans
> > believe is the lowering of prices is going to put the Japanese out of
> > business. As you know because I've mentioned it, Gonzo is officially
> > insolvent right now (or, at the least, liabilities > assets). How
> > many of these companies are going to keep up if the licensing fees
> > can't be recovered either?
>
> Which brings me to a point I make later on about changing how anime is
> financed.
And, as I said, I believe that, at that point, most anime studios
would simply disintegrate immediately.
> >> And from what I've read on
> >> Japanese industry sites, there's still a huge revenue stream in Japan so
> >> international piracy hasn't affected their bottom line. Yet.
>
> > My understanding is that that's almost completely merchandise.
>
> It's hard to say for sure because it's not like the production companies
> reveal how they earn their money. I do know that DVD sales in Japan are
> still decent enough to keep them going, but certainly the extras like
> merchandising helps a lot.
My understanding is that most of the DVD sales are actually what we
would consider "Limited Edition" releases with merchandise of some
form already in them.
> > Whatever the revenue stream is, one then has to ask the question: Why
> > not just divorce R1 completely out of the equation, and basically say
> > "buy it import or go away" to the fans?? This is why I didn't
> > completely divorce the BVUSA model, because I think it was based on
> > basically understanding that a US price model isn't sufficient to keep
> > things going.
>
> But like Hollywood, Japan realises that the prices paid in Tokyo are not
> going to be accepted in the rest of the world. Which again leads me to...
Then get rid of that fandom, as it does you no good. In fact, I would
assert that (if not for all series, the vast majority of them) the R1
industry is a massive money-loser for Japan.
> >> Anime producers should switch to a fee per episode sold. That way, the
> >> risk for the local distributors is less and gives them some hope of
> >> bringing prices down.
>
> > And then the Japanese go out of business, since they can't hope to get
> > enough money to keep going. Again, remember that Gonzo is already
> > effectively (if not actually) officially insolvent. Anime series like
> > the entire FMP arc and the two seasons of Kaleido Star never get made,
> > much less completed.
>
> > I'm not saying the reasoning isn't sound, but the problem is that the
> > Japanese are starving the animators to begin with and still not
> > covering costs, in many respects.
>
> Fair enough, but at this point, their revenue streams are not going to
> magically increase. They need to do something if they can't afford an
> all-out war on piracy, and I don't see licensing fees increasing anytime
> soon. If anything they're going to decrease anyway.
Then they're screwed one way or the other -- and they still have no
guarantee of an income stream from the fandom on top of it.
The only thing which I see might work is the following: Licensure
before the series is ever started... Licensure as a condition of even
starting the series. This, effectively, would mean they would have to
make a pilot and shop it (much like the American model for television
series), and the series is never made unless it is sufficiently
financed through licensures and sponsorships before it even starts.
THEN we can get into how you come up with the fees, but the fact is
that it doesn't work if you don't have a sustainable income stream.
Which see ADV, Geneon USA, and BVUSA...
> But a per ep fee would apply more to older, already-produced series.
> There is still a back catalog of titles that can be re-released or
> licensed, and if you can make some money on your back catalog (probably
> by streaming w/ ads), that can help.
And they'd probably have to find some way to do that to keep going in
the first place. New licenses are going to get really thin really
soon (they probably already are now, vis-a-vis R1).
> > Part of that is because, in cases like I've mentioned, a lot of the
> > licensing fee has to be an "advance", since the series might not be
> > able to be completed if they don't get a license at a good price.
> > (This is part of what Gen Fukunaga has been trying to cut down.)
>
> Which means a change in financing models is needed. It might be the end
> of the independent studio and that every anime will be produced via a
> single, major studio which can afford to aggregate the costs of hits and
> misses.
But even the major studios in Japan are getting nailed. Gonzo's
insolvent...
> >> Because you don't seem to understand how the international legal system
> >> works for copyright issues. For starters, YouTube is protected by the
> >> "safe harbor" clause of the DMCA -- and that's probably why Viacom is
> >> going to experience epic fail in their lawsuit against YouTube.
>
> > Then the anime industry is finished, and a lot of other entertainment
> > media will go with it. If YouTube is allowed to only quarter-ass it's
> > way through with the "safe harbor" provision, why does it really _have
> > to_ remove _anything_?
>
> > Second question: What makes them any real different than Napster,
> > who, apparently, did not have such "safe harbor" provision?
>
> Napster did NOTHING to stop piracy: they had no de-listing policy.
Here's the point, though: Why should YouTube have to have one to gain
"safe harbor" status if it's clear that it's so damn quarter-assed,
it's not even funny.
Let me give you an example: Say I'm Diane Gibson, Deborah Gibson's
manager (stop snickering, morons, I'm trying to actually make a point
here) -- Why couldn't I go to YouTube and say that all of Deborah's
copyrighted works are to come down (except those authorized by Gibson
Inc. or other relevant copyright holders (Atlantic Records for the
older stuff, etc.)), now _AND IN PERPETUITY_, as long as Gibson, Inc.
owns the copyright?
This is where things become quarter-assed. Since the Internet has
become such a haven for criminal and civil illegal activity, it
shouldn't take a million take-down notices to take down a million
copyrighted things off of YouTube (this is why copyright has become
nigh unenforceable -- see above on the discussion of how this could,
and would have to, employ quite a number of computer-literate people
to process this number of notices...). If I own the material, I
should demand that all material in my ownership and copyright be taken
down, now and at all times in the future. You can't do that? Don't
provide the service, or prepare to have me sue your asses off.
On top of that, wasn't Napster just a medium, not unlike BitTorrent,
where individual users could provide files in their computers to a
common "market", as it were?
> YouTube does have a very fast response time to copyright infringement
> requests. In fact, it appears to be automated and they've now
> instituted the auto-scanner: it scans uploaded video for known
> copyrighted sounds and then automatically blocks the video.
We'll see about that. I can tell you from just a brief scan of the
service that they haven't done that good of a job.
> These last two things have pissed off some YouTube users who claim they don't
> understand how their video of them dancing with their cat is infringing. :-)
Frankly, what are they dancing to? You do seem to recall that YouTube
and the Japanese had to come to a deal to even allow that kind of
stuff, with Japanese songs, to be allowed on the service.
> To be protected by the "safe harbor" clause, you have to show that you
> do take down infringing material in a timely manner.
That would require quite the expenditure on both YouTube's part and
the part of the individual companies'. (See above.)
> >> The precedent was made in a little noticed lawsuit between Harlan Ellison
> >> and AOL. AOL was sued by Ellison over an act of piracy made by a USENET
> >> poster from a different computer system. AOL appealed and the high
> >> courts agreed: AOL was protected by the safe harbor clause. YouTube
> >> will take down the content if the copyright owner asks.
>
> > Why should it have to? And, on top of it, why is there not the demand
> > by the copyright owner that makes it a blanket statement that any
> > copyrighted material by that owner is automatically to be taken down
> > (unless they choose to start availing some of the other systems which
> > allow this content to remain up)?
>
> Because somehow YouTube has to know the clip in infringing.
Given the amount of infringing content, frankly, the onus should be on
the uploader to establish it's not infringing. Otherwise, it probably
is. (Yes, guilty until proven innocent.)
> YouTube has an automated scanner, but it's only using a database of samples provided
> by the holders. If the Japanese companies provide the samples required
> to auto-detect, it can, but there are no hordes of YouTube employees
> scanning for copyright infringement.
And, for that negligence, YouTube should be sued out of existence,
especially given the known problem of infringing material.
> But this is the heart of copyright law for two centuries: it is up to
> the copyright owner to enforce their copyright. No body else--NOT EVEN
> THE GOVERNMENT. The government can only take action when prompted by a
> court decision in favor of the owner, but it's still up to the owner to
> spot the infringement and bring the case. In fact, if you don't enforce
> your copyright, the courts can say you never had it in the first place.
Again, there's SO MUCH infringing material on YouTube that you
basically either have to hire a whole bunch of people on the holder's
end (as stated a couple times now) or go with the blanket take-down.
And that last statement of that last paragraph is exactly why I
believe, first, the anime industry is dead -- since the courts could
easily state that the copyright never existed, even on the Japanese
end, for many of these shows -- as well as that copyright might well
be declared unenforceable.
> To be fair, the Japanese companies are now taking their copyrights more
> seriously, but they don't seem to be putting a lot of effort into it
> especially on clearing out the stuff from YouTube.
Provide me an office, a desk, a chair, sufficient Internet, a
sufficient computer, and a reasoned salary, and look out below. This
could be a great idea for employing the un- and under-employed.
> >> The more important question is this: Why aren't the companies
> >> (especially the Japanese one) using the easy-to-use YouTube interface to
> >> request infringing content be removed?
> > I don't understand why they don't go further and demand compensation
> > from the uploaders, on top of it. But I can't answer that question.
>
> For YouTube, that is a good question. The uploader is easily identified
> and with a little work, you could figure out if they're in an easy to
> prosecute jurisdiction (anywhere in the G7) or not. I suspect the vast
> majority of the uploads are from the U.S.
Ding-dong.
> >> The licensees can do whatever they want, but it's incredibly silly to
> >> believe that the market should ACCEPT whatever you do to them.
>
> > Why??? The licensees should dictate to the market. And all the
> > market can then do is say yes or no. If they say no, they _don't get
> > the product_ (such as why I'm not going to have a PS3 any time soon).
>
> > They bought that right (for six or seven figures, in many cases)...
> > And they should expect an opportunity to recoup that cost. Without
> > that expectation, there is no market and no industry.
>
> I agree that if you, for example, don't like the price of an XBox 360,
> all you can do is NOT buy it. You're not allowed to STEAL the damned
> thing. :-)
The problem is: What's occurring now is exactly that. As I said in
the last post, I don't buy into the "piracy != stealing/shoplifting"
discussion.
> What I'm trying to say is that regardless of the moral rights, looking
> at it as a businessman, the audience is not buying because they don't
> like your product (or in this case, the way that product is brought to
> market). It's time to wake up, like the music industry did, and start
> providing content in a timely manner in the manner the market wants or
> they will not buy your product.
No, they like the _product_. They want to take it on THEIR terms.
And the difference, I fear, between my stand and yours is that I
believe a significant supermajority of the fandom would rather wait to
get it free than pay for it now.
The current situation is that they get their cake and eat it too.
> To their credit, companies are waking up to this idea. But as you point
> out, it maybe too little, too late. And without a whip to drive the
> audience to the carrot, things won't change.
What needs to happen is that the free model needs to go away, with
force. This will drive most anime fans out. Fine. There are too
many fans, still too many studios, and even one R1 licensor at this
point might, in fact, be too many for the reality of the market.
> > Then, frankly, the real problem is Japan recognizing that the US
> > actually can provide them enough money to substantively survive. If
> > the problem _is_ Japan, there is but one solution: Cut off R1.
> > Diminishing returns, again. (You've gone from $550M in 2004 to $250M
> > in 2007, with the expectation of it being $200M in 2008). You are not
> > going to be able to effectively enforce the legal right to your
> > product to allow for R1 to be a meaningful industry anymore. Get rid
> > of them and save the expense of having to deal with them.
>
> > Since R1 can't effectively enforce their legal rights to the product
> > they license, the license then becomes useless and worthless. Ouran
> > could be the biggest seller of 2008, but is it going to get the
> > necessary number of copies to even break even? No, Hell No, and Hell
> > Freaking No!
>
> > The only real alternative is to make it an all-import business, and do
> > the subs in Japan and be done with it.
>
> That may happen, but for me, that's not necessarily a bad thing. :-)
I think it has to happen now. For all the reasons we've discussed.
> But I do understand you don't want to see the dub industry die because
> you love their product. And I do hope they can find a way to survive.
Frankly, the dub industry keeps me in anime. Meeting a lot of the
people behind it is one of the few reasons I would go to cons. (Laura
Bailey single-handedly saved an AX for me, and helped in saving a
second.)
> >> The distributors would LOVE to release subs on-line the same day as in
> >> Japan, but the Japanese companies don't WANT to, and it seems to be for
> >> very silly and arbitrary reasons.
>
> > Then they need to be slapped (and I know what a slap means in Japan)
> > and told, simply, that their stands have made it far too late for most
> > of them to survive economically. Period.
>
> Yup. Sonotori.
We only really disagree on whether there's a survivable descendant of
it.
> But it seems that a company has to be driven to the wall (like Gonzo)
> before they realise this.
And, by then, they're already THROUGH the wall. Where is Gonzo
getting the money to become solvent again? CrunchyShit??
> Reminds me of the Detroit auto industry. They learned nothing from
> their mistakes in the 70s, and they fell into the same trap again today:
> they produced gas-guzzlers, and when the signs were there that the
> market was changing, they simply offered bigger discounts on their
> gas-guzzlers rather than provide what the market wanted.
And most, if not all, of the Detroit auto industry is gone. Dead.
Kaput.
> And now GM is facing bankruptcy.
>
> There are some bad decisions being made in Japan right now, but
> hopefully they'll learn quickly and avoid the die off.
Many of them are going to have to die, sadly.
> > Here's the problem with that theory: You still have to make sure
> > that, if the scenario ever is allowed to come to fruition, that you
> > can still make the issues irrelevant and force (yes, _FORCE_) people
> > to actually do something that I believe the vast supermajority of
> > anime fans refuse to do: pay for the content.
>
> > It does NO GOOD to same-day and charge $3/episode for a legal same-day
> > sub if you don't terminate all illegal subs which most fans would wait
> > 24-48 hours for and pay nothing for. Multiply $3/ep by any decent-
> > length season, and you'll see why.
>
> > Again, I'm not disputing the logic in the emphasis, but there is a
> > much larger issue. It goes back that I find the 30% laughable as far
> > as only 30% never will buy. I'd put it much closer to 80% if not
> > more.
>
> I'd agree, but I'm not sure if they'd ever buy to be honest...
And I would say that of at least 80% of the fanbase. Most estimates
and fans involved would put that number far lower.
Mike
darkst...@gmail.com
And you're still full of shit, for the same reasons you were full of
shit before.
That figure alone represents approximately a $2,000,000 loss to the
anime industry from JUST THAT ONE SITE -- _PER WEEK_ -- and, as he
demonstrated before, far more people are stealing the anime than
buying it or watching it from any legitimate channels.
Mike
darkst...@gmail.com
<seaw...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
> Travers Naran wrote:
> > It's amusing how we see these things differently. :-)
>
> Starky believes the world is dark and evil and the only way anyone does
> anything right is by iron fist of law. And threat of their cellmate
> Bubba. And maybe not then.
>
> This will tend to color his view on most things.
You're right. The only way you can keep order, especially as more and
more have nothing left to lose, IS by the iron fist of law. Would you
like to ask the good people left in New Orleans about the alternative?
(This, by the by, is the main reason I do not believe there will be an
election this November, but that's for the political newsgroups to
flame-war over.)
Have you ever heard of the old saying: "The only reason the cops can
enforce the law is because they can shoot you."? That's about as
close to a true reading of law enforcement (and why most cities
couldn't enforce their laws if they tried -- not enough jail space,
and no real willingness to pull out the guns when they might become
necessary...) as I've ever read.
And, trust me, the only way any degree of law and order is kept behind
bars is threats of massive violence. You ever see someone spray gas
into a snitch's cell and light the match?? I know it occurs, I saw
the smoke. Also saw the riot patrol come out to carry his ass out
when it was over.
The fact that it colors my view on things still doesn't make the view
inaccurate, there or here. The only basis that the copyright holders
have to take the actions they need to take to survive financially IS
the law, hence, if it has to come down to an iron fist on the
Internet, I'll take my lumps, but I don't think you're prepared to
have your lumps be taken.
> >> And note: That's not just six million downloaded -- that's six
> >> million just _viewed_. I'll get back to that later with some of the
> >> more laughable stuff later.
>
> > Remember when someone refused to accept my claim of a similar number? :-)
>
> Viewed is going to be a much larger number than downloaded, which -- of
> necessity -- would be much higher than "bought" even if all the people
> inclined to purchase were to do so, since there will be a lot of
> downloads and views by those who don't want to pay, can't pay, or who --
> after seeing whatever it was -- decide it's not for them.
Quoted from the Mikhail Koulikov article (http://
www.animenewsnetwork.com/convention/2008/fansubs-and-industry-panel),
draw your conclusions:
"All of these factors combine to produce some stunning figures: in one
recent week, there were at least six million fansubs viewed, according
to research conducted by Central Park Media, and in fact, there are
more viewers watching the fansubbed versions of some anime than there
are people who have legally bought the DVD releases of those series."
The fact is that there should not be any decision as to whether an
anime is "for them" until they have the right to view it for
themselves, and not just take that right whenever it suits them.
I mean, that would be like me deciding the PS3 is not for me after I
shoplifted one and tried to play it for 9 months and didn't like the
Sixaxis (or whatever it's called) controller.
> Six million views of multiple shows? Yeah? And? That's not even a large
> audience for a SINGLE REAL TV SHOW.
But it's a GIGANTIC audience for anime. You're taking this completely
out of scale.
Let me put this to the type of scale it could be. You would have
trouble, right now, fitting AX into some football stadiums. That's
how large anime has gotten, almost exclusively on thievery, piracy,
and fansubs.
And, here's the final kicker: Not one of those views is legal, not
one of those views is authorized, and every one of those views should
be, therefore, compensated.
> Starky still doesn't realize that the Big Boys already "get it" -- and
> are going with the flow. Doctor Who eps are available for download
> across the world within an **HOUR** of first airing. Pirated, no doubt.
And you don't realize that you are NOT -- and probably NEVER WILL BE
-- dealing with the same business model, you blooming fucking
idiot!!! They need the money that these first views would provide to
stay alive, especially as the DVD anime industry, especially outside
of Japan and almost completely outside of merchandise inserts, dies!
> The BBC does nothing against this as long as they aren't being sold,
> despite the fact that it's by FAR their biggest cash cow. Why?
Because the BBC is probably as corrupt as a lot of the pirates (which
see the recent fines against the Beeb for trying to put on "phone
competitions" in which none of the real callers actually ever won and
the real prizes were never given away -- http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7497168.stm),
and should be taken from the air as a result.
Yes, I AM talking about the BBC.
> Because when they release the stuff for sale, people DO buy it.
In such laughably small numbers that even people who believe in saving
anime now believe that companies should be satisfied when the DVD
sales of their titles hit two thousand.
> Fans DO. Teenage fans, old fans, all fans, there's some who don't, but
> always some who do. You sell to those who do.
And when there's no real prayer of recovering the better part of $2
million for every 13 episodes (on both sides of the Pacific), then
what?
> CBS "gets it". They provide SUPPORT for the fans -- down to providing
> clips of "evidence" for the fanfic writers to support any pairing you
> can imagine. They provide downloads, take fan advice, and -- again
> unless it's blatant Make Money stuff -- rarely bother the downloaders
> putting CSI on the Net.
AND YOU ARE -- _AGAIN_ -- NOT TALKING THE SAME BUSINESS MODEL.
CSI is already paid for when it hits air. Anime, for the better part,
is NOT!!!!
Jesus Christ, when are you going to get it??
You are attempting to apply the same business model that exists in
American television to anime in Japan, and I'm not going to let you
even THINK of getting away with that one.
If CSI had the same business model, the production company would have
to pay CBS for the time, seek its own sponsors, and what have you.
> Like Napster, Crunchyroll is going legit from being criminal, and that,
> too, is a matter of someone in the industry "getting it".
Oh fuck no. Oh fuck no. If they actually wanted to go legit, they'd
wipe out their entire customer base and their entire catalog of
illegal material and start from zero legit.
I get it, moron.
Mike (And, let's not forget, Napster only exists because the music
companies now essentially own it.)
darkst...@gmail.com
> "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <seaw...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote in messagenews:g8hg98$jjl$1...@registered.motzarella.org...
>
> > Like Napster, Crunchyroll is going legit from being criminal, and that,
> > too, is a matter of someone in the industry "getting it".
>
> And what, precisely, is it that they are "getting"?
Oh, I'm sure the great thief defender Sea Wasp will answer that --
yep, in his/her next response.
> Napster was shut down by court order and then they used its well-known brand
> name and logo for a completely different pay service.
I actually thought they had to sell all such trademarks to pay off the
lawsuits they got slapped down with.
> Crunchyroll, like every single other site that charges money to view content
> which is not theirs, are a bunch of shitbag thieves that deserve jail time.
Unfortunately, though I agree with you, the more likely result will be
the complete dissolution of copyright -- there will be no ownership of
such content in the very, very, VERY near future. All it's going to
take is one case and one judge willing to put politics aside and make
a statement.
> They are simply fortunate that they are stealing from an industry not big
> enough to squash them, and therefore will profit by it. Though the model
> they're using is a possibly useful one for legit companies to copy, the
> troll is completely correct in his depiction of them.
And will not only profit from it, but squash and replace it. (Their
legitimization at AX was a major step toward these last two ends.)
The only question is whether any _new_ content will come into the pipe
(and, within five years, it'll be far too expensive to do so, as I
told Sea Wasp several months back). I fully expect, either through
purchasing the carcasses of the remaining companies or by just the
right granted by the dissolution of copyright I inferred will probably
happen above, CrunchyShit will continue to profit as the sole source
(or at least the sole type of medium) of anime left when all others
fail.
> In both cases, while their method was useful enough to be copyed by a legit
> firm (which I suppose could be considered "getting it"), they themselves are
> nothing but con artists who profited by illegal actions (actually, I'll give
> the Napster guy more credit, since he didn't likely guess at the scale of
> what he was creating, whereas the Crunchyroll people intended all along to
> sell their site for millions).
I don't even think they actually have sold the site -- I think someone
just bought in.
> I wonder - is there any possible violation of copyright so blatant and
> unethical that it would actually be condemned by anime fandom? I guess Son
> May went out of business, but then again, Crunchyroll is worse than Son May.
I discussed earlier as to what kind of anime fandom might NOT be
considered some form of infringement, and I'm having some trouble
coming up with anything on that list even now. (Including artistry
and cosplay as trademark infringement, doujinshi and the like,
fansubbery, etc. and so forth...)
I don't believe the arrogance of anime fandom knows that many bounds.
It's one of the reasons I don't believe that they ever want their
actions to be put under legal scrutiny of any real kind.
> With all due respect, fuck the makers of Crunchroll, and fuck anybody who
> ever used their service. And while I understand why the anime companies
> worked with them rather than trying to crush them, fuck them for doing that
> too; it's a horrible precedent and people like that should never be rewarded
> for their actions.
As I said, and the circumstances are proving me right, CrunchyShit is
going to win out and the actions of bankrupt/insolvent companies like
Gonzo represent capitulation to the thieves and shitheads who now,
effectively, run anime. The only real question is where on the
hierarchy of the most powerful people in US anime do you put King
CrunchyShit?
Mike (I put him no lower than about #3 or #4. Fukunaga is still #1,
for now - after that, it comes down to KCS, the head of Viz's Shonen
Jump, and the head of Bandai Entertainment USA...)
darkst...@gmail.com
<seaw...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
> Blade wrote:
> > "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)" <seaw...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote in message
> >news:g8hg98$jjl$1...@registered.motzarella.org...
> >> Like Napster, Crunchyroll is going legit from being criminal, and that,
> >> too, is a matter of someone in the industry "getting it".
>
> > And what, precisely, is it that they are "getting"?
>
> > Napster was shut down by court order and then they used its well-known brand
> > name and logo for a completely different pay service.
>
> Napster was still fighting for its life when Bartelsman (I think it
> was) bought them and converted them to a pay service.
Much like Nixon tried to save face and resign, only to be saved by
Ford and his impeachable pardon?
Come on... They -- lost.
> > Crunchyroll, like every single other site that charges money to view content
> > which is not theirs, are a bunch of shitbag thieves that deserve jail time.
>
> Which is the same as Napster was.
Worse, as Blade discussed already. I note you had no real answer for
him.
Mike
darkst...@gmail.com
> No, it doesn't represent any loss of money at all. You can't be sure
> that if they were unable to download or pirate the content in any way
> that they would purchase the episodes. My bet is that no more than 50%
> would buy it.
What is the product: The anime itself, or the medium you get it on?
If the medium (the DVD as merchandise) is the product you are buying,
then we might be able to have an intelligent conversation.
If the anime itself is the product, the money is lost at the moment of
illegal viewing of the file -- perhaps even at its illegal download.
If they won't buy the product without stealing it first, they had no
right to the product, now or in perpetuity. Unless you believe the
anime is worth nothing to begin with...
Mike
darkst...@gmail.com
> darkstar7...@gmail.com wrote on [Wed, 20 Aug 2008 18:10:21 -0700 (PDT)]:
>
> > On Aug 20, 5:53 pm, Justin <nos...@insightbb.com> wrote:
>
> >> No, it doesn't represent any loss of money at all. You can't be sure
> >> that if they were unable to download or pirate the content in any way
> >> that they would purchase the episodes. My bet is that no more than 50%
> >> would buy it.
>
> > What is the product: The anime itself, or the medium you get it on?
>
Choosing to ignore the entire point of why I asked the question...
> Just because someone gets something for free and it is illegal does not
> mean they would pay for it.
He non-sequitors.
They have no right to the product the moment they download it. Now,
again, the question: Is the product the anime or the DVD medium in
which the anime is transported to you? If it's the latter, then the
anime itself is essentially worthless and any rights to it
indefensible.
If the product is the anime itself, then one download == one lost
sale.
When you don't have the license to view the anime, you have no right
to the anime, now or ever -- unless the whole concept of such right is
worthless and indefensible.
> Assuming that every download equates to a lost sale is flat wrong.
Then you believe the product is the DVD. That's why I asked the
question.
It also means you believe the anime to be financially worthless.
> If it were not possible to download or receive without proper license,
> there is no way in hell that all the people that are watching without proper
> license would pay for it.
Good. And if they don't want to be anime fans as a result, so much
the better. That means they -- wait for it -- DO NOT GET TO VIEW THE
ANIME!!
You see, I used to think otherwise too, but now we see where that line
of thinking has to go.
> In other words, 1 download does not equal one lost sale.
If you believe the anime itself not to be the product, and, therefore,
believe the anime to be worthless in the final (and financial)
analysis.
> > If the medium (the DVD as merchandise) is the product you are buying,
> > then we might be able to have an intelligent conversation.
>
> The product is the show.
Then my argument applies. You have no right to view the show except
under the terms of the show's owners or their assignees.
> > If the anime itself is the product, the money is lost at the moment of
> > illegal viewing of the file -- perhaps even at its illegal download.
>
> No, it's not. Because there is no way in hell that every download
> equates to a lost sale.
The viewing of an illegal product makes it a lost sale. You said the
show is the product, right?
Then you cannot view the show unless under the terms which were given
to you by the owners of the product.
> > If they won't buy the product without stealing it first, they had no
> > right to the product, now or in perpetuity. Unless you believe the
> > anime is worth nothing to begin with...
>
> I did not say nor allude to either of those in my reply.
Because you are full of it.
Mike
Travers Naran
But I did think your shrinking the fan base seems born out of a hate and
spite. I'm not sure that's so healthy to feel hate for them. They
aren't worth it.
I think on this group, or maybe ANN, I posted a similar sentiment about
shrinking the fanbase. I didn't think the anime bubble was going to be
good for the industry nor was it sustainable. But I also noticed this
new crop of fans were going to upset the apple cart with their disdain
for the old otaku culture. I never suspected it would change this much!
But I'm OK with change, and those who sow the wind reap the whirlwind.
In other words, when the releasing companies go under and the big
studios either go under or "sell out" (think merchandising anime), the
pirating class of fans might realise the cost of their actions. But to
be honest, I don't think they would and still can't grasp why there's no
good anime to watch anymore.
darkst...@gmail.com wrote:
>> I'd agree, but I'm not sure if they'd ever buy to be honest...
>
> And I would say that of at least 80% of the fanbase. Most estimates
> and fans involved would put that number far lower.
I'm inclined to predict of the people pirating anime today, if you could
somehow create a perfect shutdown of piracy, 99% of them would not pay
for anime, especially not at the traditional prices.
Which is why I think it's better to focus your energy on the people who
buy your product and treat them well. :-)
selaboc
> darkstar7...@gmail.com wrote on [Wed, 20 Aug 2008 20:36:26 -0700 (PDT)]:
>
> > On Aug 20, 6:14 pm, Justin <nos...@insightbb.com> wrote:
> >> darkstar7...@gmail.com wrote on [Wed, 20 Aug 2008 18:10:21 -0700 (PDT)]:
>
> >> > On Aug 20, 5:53 pm, Justin <nos...@insightbb.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> No, it doesn't represent any loss of money at all. You can't be sure
> >> >> that if they were unable to download or pirate the content in any way
> >> >> that they would purchase the episodes. My bet is that no more than 50%
> >> >> would buy it.
>
> >> > What is the product: The anime itself, or the medium you get it on?
>
> >> Step back, reread what I said.
>
> > Choosing to ignore the entire point of why I asked the question...
>
> common sense.
There's no parhaps about it, that's exactly what he does. repeatedly
> > The viewing of an illegal product makes it a lost sale. You said the
> > show is the product, right?
>
> No, it doesn't. As I said, just because someone viewed it for free
> illegally doesn't mean they would have paid for it if paying was the
> only possibly option of viewing it. Therefore a download does not equate
> to a lost sale.
>
> Also, the downloads that DO equate to a sale, how do you account for
> those?
He doesn't, he just keeps going on about how a download, any download,
equals a lost sales while simultaneously ignoring every point made to
the contrary.
> > Then you cannot view the show unless under the terms which were given
> > to you by the owners of the product.
>
> To which I haven't stated my opnion.
>
> > Because you are full of it.
>
> You are the one who is full of it, though you are trying to spew as much
> of it up here as you can.
Now you see why over half this group has him killfiled.
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
> darkst...@gmail.com wrote on [Wed, 20 Aug 2008 20:36:26 -0700 (PDT)]:
>> On Aug 20, 6:14 pm, Justin <nos...@insightbb.com> wrote:
>>> darkstar7...@gmail.com wrote on [Wed, 20 Aug 2008 18:10:21 -0700 (PDT)]:
>>>
>>>> On Aug 20, 5:53 pm, Justin <nos...@insightbb.com> wrote:
>>>>> No, it doesn't represent any loss of money at all. You can't be sure
>>>>> that if they were unable to download or pirate the content in any way
>>>>> that they would purchase the episodes. My bet is that no more than 50%
>>>>> would buy it.
>>>> What is the product: The anime itself, or the medium you get it on?
>>> Step back, reread what I said.
>> Choosing to ignore the entire point of why I asked the question...
>
> common sense.
This is his stock-in-trade.
>
>> They have no right to the product the moment they download it.
No one here has argued that.
>
>> If the product is the anime itself, then one download == one lost
>> sale.
>
> No, it doesn't. As I said, if it weren't possible to download it it
> would still not equal a sale as it wouldn't be bought either.
As in so many things, Starky has no clue here, and resolutely refuses
to GET one when offered.
This isn't theft. It's immoral, yes. It's illegal, yes. But it's not
theft, and download does not equal loss of sale.
Theft requires that when I take the thing, the thing is no longer
available for sale or use by someone else. In the case of cars, cash,
and physical DVDs, this is clearly the case.
It isn't for downloads. A million people can download the same
identical file from the same identical source, and that same identical
file remains in the same identical place that it always was, available
for another million people.
And despite Starky's rantings elsewhere, I don't "champion" illegal
downloaders. I think they're all a bunch of whiny weasels who aren't
WORTH the time and effort it would take to imprison them,
entitlement-obsessed twits who think "I want" equates to "I should have
regardless of anyone else's rights".
What the industry is "getting" and Starky isn't is that you don't fight
cultural and technological change. The fact that this level of
downloading is POSSIBLE, and that it is being used for this specific
purpose, is a direct signal to the industry: "Your way of operation does
not suit our needs. If you don't adapt to the way WE want to do things,
you will die."
Slowly but surely, the industry is adapting. Buying out your criminal
competitors WHO SEEM TO HAVE SOMETHING YOU CAN USE is a time-honored
tradition. Rather than continuing an adversarial stance, you convert
enemies into allies. You gain their experience and expertise, while
suddenly putting THEM into a position of having to CARE about your
product. There was a period of time, for instance, in the 1970s through
early - mid 80s, when a really good hacker could be almost guaranteed of
a job offer if he got the right person's attention. That was because the
hackers were often excellent and reliable security consultants once you
hired them. They'd gotten recognition for their skill, they were now
being paid to exercise it, and they did so with enthusiasm. (Then the
colleges, etc., caught up in the education curve and there were
generally enough trained professionals available so that you could hire
them and jail the hackers).
Fighting this kind of change in the way Starky proposes is the same as
the Luddites who, wanting to protect their livelihoods, tried to smash
machines that would take away their jobs. The problem is you can't stop
the change of the society and the industry. You have to ADAPT to it. If
you make buggy whips and horses are going out of style, you had better
figure out what you can make that will fit into the new industry, or
you'll be gone.
(A little-remarked on industry which is fading fast: check printing. In
a generation, I doubt anyone will be writing paper checks. We've seen
others in our lifetimes: 8-track tapes, LP's, cassettes, VCR tapes.
Physical media is good for permanent records, but sales will be
increasingly electronic. If your business model is built on selling
physical media, your business model had better change, or you're trying
to sell buggy whips to Honda drivers.)
Dave Watson
> On Aug 20, 1:41 am, Dave Watson <dwbeingupfr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Aug 19, 10:19 pm, darkstar7...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > But now I understand _WHY_ you consider it "Mikey's usual stream of
> > > diarrhea..."
>
> > Because it's malodorous liquid noisily spewing from the hole of an
> > incontinent fool who constantly snubs suggestions of taking bismuth,
> > eating yogurt or just going to the toilet until it passes, and then
> > you wonder why everybody's holding their nose around you.
>
> No, that's YOUR diarrhea -- see at least one intelligent poster in
> this thread whom I've spoken to as for why your stands don't hold
> water (_or_ shit -- please get that fixed...).
So one person is attempting to make you less of an asshole by
attempting to hold an intelligent conversation with you. Everyone
else has either killfiled you or sees you for what you really are.
> > *splutter* Like I should take notes on what "reality" is from a
> > fucking stalker.
>
> You don't have to take it from me, then -- read up on the anime
> industry yourself.
Yeah, I do, and...it's not dead yet.
> > > They're still around today -- three of the six who were nine months
> > > ago, with another 20% drop in sales forecast, Bandai Entertainment
> > > can't afford a decent replicator, so they can't keep a reasoned
> > > schedule at various points throughout 2008 -- read up on four more
> > > delays for fall titles. Dub actors are retiring left and right as the
> > > dub industry is _DEAD_.
>
> > So who's retired? Cite cases and supply links, or shut your festering
> > slophole. And how would you know that Bandai can't afford a decent
> > replicator? Are they telling you this, or are you just supposing
> > that's the case?
>
> Geneon is gone, their rescues part of Funi.
They were pulled by Dentsu in Japan for reasons none of us have been
told yet. They weren't doing that badly otherwise.
> BVUSA has been folded into Bandai Entertainment.
Because customers in North America were not going to pay $45 for one
or two episodes of an OVA series several times for the whole series,
without even a dub to begin to justify the price. Come on, it was
obvious they weren't going to last.
> And if you honestly believe ADV hasn't retired from anime, you may
> want to even talk to the likes of Andrew Kent about it, who recently
> said on AnimeonDVD/Mania's forums that he didn't ever think he'd live
> to see the day that he'd survive ADV in the anime industry.
Andrew Kent is a translator, not a dub actor, and he hasn't retired--
he left ADV and now works for Bang Zoom Entertainment, where he does
the subs for Lucky Star.
> Get real, idiot. Your festering piehole is the one which should be
> slammed shut, forcibly!!
Why? Because you can't supply one single case to back up your flimsy
allegations?
> > > All it's going to take is Bandai Namco
> > > getting out of R1, Viz finally dissociating itself completely from the
> > > anime industry, and Navarre going under, and there's no industry at
> > > all.
>
> > Jesus, can't you wet-dream about sex with people like normal humans do
> > (although I have my own reasons to wish that Viz would go out of
> > business)?
>
> Because they basically have subjugated anime to a secondary form of
> merchandising, and your feelings are hurt?
No, because they ruined the adaptations of the Video Girl Ai anime and
manga, and are now censoring the living bejesus out of a lot of their
current properties.
> Al Kahn was RIGHT -- unmerchandisable anime should not be made,
> period.
Whoever Al Kahn is, fuck him. If we had that sort of attitude in the
music industry, there wouldn't be a single bit I could stand to listen
to.
> As for your question, do you want me to go back to jail for that or
> something else?
"Look at me! Look at me, guys, I'm tough, I'm tough!"
*snicker*
> > > I give that one year, especially with the US economy in such laughable
> > > state.
>
> > So if the industry is still alive one year from now, will you finally
> > go away? Please?
>
> I'd probably be going away one way or the other, but on my own terms,
> not yours.
Hopefully by then I'll have a news server and browser that will allow
me to killfile you.
> > > And, as for that last comment, you got two ways to make me leave:
> > > Jail me or shoot me. Pick one.
>
> > Tough as fried shit, this boy. Jesus, you sound like the pathetic
> > hair metal fan losers I went to high school with.
>
> Watson, you don't get rid of people like me without shooting us or
> jailing us. That simple.
"No, really, guys, I'm tough. I swear to you." You're not making
yourself look any less of a silly dickhead, Stark. So either back up
your arguments with real facts--not anecdotes by people who aren't
actually involved in the business side of things or by taking
statistics out of context--or go away.
Watson.
selaboc
> On Aug 20, 7:13 pm, darkstar7...@gmail.com wrote:
> > No, that's YOUR diarrhea -- see at least one intelligent poster in
> > this thread whom I've spoken to as for why your stands don't hold
> > water (_or_ shit -- please get that fixed...).
>
> So one person is attempting to make you less of an asshole by
> attempting to hold an intelligent conversation with you. Everyone
> else has either killfiled you or sees you for what you really are.
Well those that killfiled him did so because they saw him for what he
really is, but other than that very minor nit you've hit the nail
squarely on his pointy little head.
> > > *splutter* Like I should take notes on what "reality" is from a
> > > fucking stalker.
>
> > You don't have to take it from me, then -- read up on the anime
> > industry yourself.
>
> Yeah, I do, and...it's not dead yet.
Nope, depite the 6 months he should "really" give it 6 months ago, and
you know what (well, *you* do, but he apparently doesn't) it still
won't be dead yet one year from now, either.
> > I'd probably be going away one way or the other, but on my own terms,
> > not yours.
>
> Hopefully by then I'll have a news server and browser that will allow
> me to killfile you.
Just ignore the idiot. I only read these thread because of the
trainwreck that they are, And for the most part I've given up
responding to him as he never listens to any viewpoint other than his
own, he never backs up his assertions with facts that he hasn't
distorted beyond all semblance to reality through his own view point
(he is, after all, the one that characterized Funimation's report of
making a profit as somehow being a loss).
> > Watson, you don't get rid of people like me without shooting us or
> > jailing us. That simple.
>
> "No, really, guys, I'm tough. I swear to you." You're not making
> yourself look any less of a silly dickhead, Stark. So either back up
> your arguments with real facts--not anecdotes by people who aren't
> actually involved in the business side of things or by taking
> statistics out of context--or go away.
Never going to happen, he is incapable of doing that.
ender
> A little-remarked on industry which is fading fast: check printing. In
> a generation, I doubt anyone will be writing paper checks.
I haven't seen a check in the last 10-15 years or so, and as far as I know,
it's similar in other European countries. Pretty much everybody stopped
accepting them, and they just faded away.
--
< ender ><><><><><><><>◊<><><><><><><>◊<><><><><><><>< e at ena dot si >
Because 10 billion years' time is so fragile, so ephemeral...
it arouses such a bittersweet, almost heartbreaking fondness.
DBBrandell
> On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 09:15:12 -0400, Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote:
>
>> A little-remarked on industry which is fading fast: check printing. In
>> a generation, I doubt anyone will be writing paper checks.
>
> I haven't seen a check in the last 10-15 years or so, and as far as I know,
> it's similar in other European countries. Pretty much everybody stopped
> accepting them, and they just faded away.
>
About half my family here in the US doesn't use 'em much, but my
brother-in-laws insurance co. works with a lot of small farmers and
businesses that insist on 'em. They still like having something they
can file in their own records, just in case of a dispute. But for the
average person, yeah, they're a vanishing species.
DBB
Farix
> On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 09:15:12 -0400, Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote:
>
>> A little-remarked on industry which is fading fast: check printing. In
>> a generation, I doubt anyone will be writing paper checks.
>
> I haven't seen a check in the last 10-15 years or so, and as far as I know,
> it's similar in other European countries. Pretty much everybody stopped
> accepting them, and they just faded away.
It's in no small part that business have stopped accepting checks,
severely limited which checks they accept, and/or have made using checks
a pain the the ass. It the past, all I had to do was write the check and
present my drivers license. But recently, I've been required to present
my debit or credit card as well before the clerk will accept my check.
And until a year ago, I didn't have either one.
Farix
ender
> It's in no small part that business have stopped accepting checks,
> severely limited which checks they accept, and/or have made using checks
> a pain the the ass.
IIRC, the nail in the coffin here was when banks shifted the burden of
uncovered cheque to the business that accepted it - it took less than 6
months after that that pretty much everybody stopped accepting cheques, and
everything shifted to cards. When you open a bank account here, you
automatically get the bank's card, which is usable practically everywhere,
so nobody actually misses the cheques.
ender
> About half my family here in the US doesn't use 'em much, but my
> brother-in-laws insurance co. works with a lot of small farmers and
> businesses that insist on 'em. They still like having something they
> can file in their own records, just in case of a dispute. But for the
> average person, yeah, they're a vanishing species.
Everything shifted to electronic transactions years ago, and the software
makes it easy to track everything.
Bobby Clark
"Farix" <dhstr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:g8khgc$2ue$1...@news.parasun.com...
Many stores now process the check on the spot and hand the cancelled one
back to you on the spot. Just like cash then. Most stores in the US will
still take a check, but it will all go electronic soon.
Bobby
darkst...@gmail.com
> On Aug 20, 7:13 pm, darkstar7...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > On Aug 20, 1:41 am, Dave Watson <dwbeingupfr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 19, 10:19 pm, darkstar7...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > But now I understand _WHY_ you consider it "Mikey's usual stream of
> > > > diarrhea..."
>
> > > Because it's malodorous liquid noisily spewing from the hole of an
> > > incontinent fool who constantly snubs suggestions of taking bismuth,
> > > eating yogurt or just going to the toilet until it passes, and then
> > > you wonder why everybody's holding their nose around you.
>
> > No, that's YOUR diarrhea -- see at least one intelligent poster in
> > this thread whom I've spoken to as for why your stands don't hold
> > water (_or_ shit -- please get that fixed...).
>
> So one person is attempting to make you less of an asshole by
> attempting to hold an intelligent conversation with you. Everyone
> else has either killfiled you or sees you for what you really are.
No, everyone else is either accusing the industry of the greatest
criminal fraud in its history, or it's deliberately ignoring the truth
because, if it doesn't, their precious enjoyment of anime is going to
go away.
It's that simple -- and it's one or the other. Choose.
> > > *splutter* Like I should take notes on what "reality" is from a
> > > fucking stalker.
>
> > You don't have to take it from me, then -- read up on the anime
> > industry yourself.
>
> Yeah, I do, and...it's not dead yet.
It's dead. It's _QUITE DEAD_.
If you really want to use that criterion to create an ad hominem, then
please start contacting police departments about me -- start with Las
Vegas.
But to get back to the real argument:
If you're not going to read me, read Travers. He DOES believe that
some sufficient fraction of the fanbase will buy anime in sufficient
amounts in certain forms to keep things afloat. I don't. That's
about the extent of our differences.
The current model, sir, is dead, DEAD, _DEAD_. And so are all the
companies on both sides of the Pacific reliant on it.
> > Geneon is gone, their rescues part of Funi.
>
> They were pulled by Dentsu in Japan for reasons none of us have been
> told yet. They weren't doing that badly otherwise.
Then why did Dentsu want out of R1, idiot?
If they weren't doing that poorly, the decision would've been one of
the worst alive, especially given the state of the rest of the
industry -- and don't tell me Dentsu didn't know about the rest of the
industry (they'd have been stupid not to!).
> > BVUSA has been folded into Bandai Entertainment.
>
> Because customers in North America were not going to pay $45 for one
> or two episodes of an OVA series several times for the whole series,
> without even a dub to begin to justify the price. Come on, it was
> obvious they weren't going to last.
Then I go back to my one remaining suggestion for Japan: Cut America
off. Now and totally.
North America isn't going to pay $25 for four volumes of an anime
series. Hell, they won't pay $5!!
The amount of money coming into the system cannot support the system.
It's the same problem with the whole US economy. You seem to forget
or ignore that it costs a million dollars (low end) to create 13
episodes in Japan and another million (middle) to Americanize it.
Where the Hell are you going to get that money when people like you
ain't paying for the anime you watch?
The surviving companies (should there be any, and I don't believe
there _WILL_ be any, as evidenced by both the article referenced and
Travers' comments about the Japanese) would have to be companies that
stop throwing money at markets which do not economically exist.
Cut the US market off completely and immediately, or lose the whole
damn shot instead of most of it.
> > And if you honestly believe ADV hasn't retired from anime, you may
> > want to even talk to the likes of Andrew Kent about it, who recently
> > said on AnimeonDVD/Mania's forums that he didn't ever think he'd live
> > to see the day that he'd survive ADV in the anime industry.
>
> Andrew Kent is a translator, not a dub actor, and he hasn't retired--
> he left ADV and now works for Bang Zoom Entertainment, where he does
> the subs for Lucky Star.
OK, let me find his post, because he didn't say HE retired, he said he
was surprised he would outlast ADV in the industry:
http://www.mania.com/aodvb/showthread.php?p=1396197#post1396197 pretty
much sums it up the same way I have.
And the direct reference is here: http://www.mania.com/aodvb/showthread.php?p=1394329#post1394329
There. You no longer have the ad hominem to fall back on. Answer
_that_!
> > Get real, idiot. Your festering piehole is the one which should be
> > slammed shut, forcibly!!
>
> Why? Because you can't supply one single case to back up your flimsy
> allegations?
No, because you choose to ignore that I already have, a number of
times.
Either you are right, and the anime industry is pulling one big fat
criminal scam, or they're all going and quickly.
Choose.
Or are you going to be like some others and just figuratively put your
fingers in your ears and hope all the problems go away?
> > Because they basically have subjugated anime to a secondary form of
> > merchandising, and your feelings are hurt?
>
> No, because they ruined the adaptations of the Video Girl Ai anime and
> manga, and are now censoring the living bejesus out of a lot of their
> current properties.
Well, sorry. You're not their market. They don't want any part of
the anime industry, for all intent and purpose. They are Shonen Jump
and essentially Shonen Jump _only_. If you're not a Narutard or a
Shonen Jump manga fan, they -- don't -- want -- you.
> > Al Kahn was RIGHT -- unmerchandisable anime should not be made,
> > period.
>
> Whoever Al Kahn is, fuck him. If we had that sort of attitude in the
> music industry, there wouldn't be a single bit I could stand to listen
> to.
CEO of 4Kids. Made the statements at the ICv2 panel last year in New
York, and got a lot of shit for it:
http://www.icv2.com/articles/home/11741.html
And isn't that the sort of attitude in the music _industry_? (Note
that I underline "industry" for emphasis...)
It is one of the reasons that I can't stand to listen to most music --
certainly next to nothing of the last 15 years or so.
> > As for your question, do you want me to go back to jail for that or
> > something else?
>
> "Look at me! Look at me, guys, I'm tough, I'm tough!"
> *snicker*
Hey, I wasn't the one who basically believed I could kill someone
before 1998-99.
If a NY judge wants to put into the record that he believes I could've
murdered Deborah Gibson, then I wouldn't be so flippant with those
kinds of statements, Mr. Watson.
> > > > I give that one year, especially with the US economy in such laughable
> > > > state.
>
> > > So if the industry is still alive one year from now, will you finally
> > > go away? Please?
>
> > I'd probably be going away one way or the other, but on my own terms,
> > not yours.
>
> Hopefully by then I'll have a news server and browser that will allow
> me to killfile you.
I wish I had the same. I'd probably had killfiled 3/4 of RAAM by
now.
> > > > And, as for that last comment, you got two ways to make me leave:
> > > > Jail me or shoot me. Pick one.
>
> > > Tough as fried shit, this boy. Jesus, you sound like the pathetic
> > > hair metal fan losers I went to high school with.
>
> > Watson, you don't get rid of people like me without shooting us or
> > jailing us. That simple.
>
> "No, really, guys, I'm tough. I swear to you." You're not making
> yourself look any less of a silly dickhead, Stark. So either back up
> your arguments with real facts--not anecdotes by people who aren't
> actually involved in the business side of things or by taking
> statistics out of context--or go away.
You want me to go away, you have your two options.
You really want to consider me a troll? Then read up on trolls and
understand why I come to this conclusion.
Mike
darkst...@gmail.com
> On Aug 21, 12:22 pm, Dave Watson <dwbeingupfr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Aug 20, 7:13 pm, darkstar7...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > No, that's YOUR diarrhea -- see at least one intelligent poster in
> > > this thread whom I've spoken to as for why your stands don't hold
> > > water (_or_ shit -- please get that fixed...).
>
> > So one person is attempting to make you less of an asshole by
> > attempting to hold an intelligent conversation with you. Everyone
> > else has either killfiled you or sees you for what you really are.
>
> Well those that killfiled him did so because they saw him for what he
> really is, but other than that very minor nit you've hit the nail
> squarely on his pointy little head.
Again, trying to delude yourself into believing what is clearly not
true (about the anime industry).
I, again, will state it this simply: Either they're dying, or
committing massive criminal fraud.
> > > > *splutter* Like I should take notes on what "reality" is from a
> > > > fucking stalker.
>
> > > You don't have to take it from me, then -- read up on the anime
> > > industry yourself.
>
> > Yeah, I do, and...it's not dead yet.
>
> Nope, depite the 6 months he should "really" give it 6 months ago, and
> you know what (well, *you* do, but he apparently doesn't) it still
> won't be dead yet one year from now, either.
I really should've given it six months. And the statements made
during the panel demonstrate such open incompetence as to why that
figure was not that unreasonable.
I did decide to give it 18, ONLY because of the inertia that the
industry still had. Just because the body is in motion until acted
upon by an outside force does not mean the body is still living.
> > > I'd probably be going away one way or the other, but on my own terms,
> > > not yours.
>
> > Hopefully by then I'll have a news server and browser that will allow
> > me to killfile you.
>
> Just ignore the idiot. I only read these thread because of the
> trainwreck that they are, And for the most part I've given up
> responding to him as he never listens to any viewpoint other than his
> own, he never backs up his assertions with facts that he hasn't
> distorted beyond all semblance to reality through his own view point
> (he is, after all, the one that characterized Funimation's report of
> making a profit as somehow being a loss).
Mainly because of the fact that there is only one right answer: mine.
Sorry to put it to you like that, but, since you have chosen to be so
damn delusional that it's not even worth having an intelligent
conversation with you (unlike some people here), there it is.
Or ask the heads of ADV, BVUSA, and Geneon if things are so healthy
right now.
> > > Watson, you don't get rid of people like me without shooting us or
> > > jailing us. That simple.
>
> > "No, really, guys, I'm tough. I swear to you." You're not making
> > yourself look any less of a silly dickhead, Stark. So either back up
> > your arguments with real facts--not anecdotes by people who aren't
> > actually involved in the business side of things or by taking
> > statistics out of context--or go away.
>
> Never going to happen, he is incapable of doing that.
No. Because I actually back it up with anecdotes of people in the
business who actually see what's been going on.
Of course, you aren't going to be satisfied until I personally hand
you the bankruptcy papers -- you delusionals have already said exactly
that.
Mike
darkst...@gmail.com
> I really had nothing to add to your well-explained response. :-)
>
> But I did think your shrinking the fan base seems born out of a hate and
> spite. I'm not sure that's so healthy to feel hate for them. They
> aren't worth it.
There is hatred and spite. _A LOT OF IT_...
I mean, I used to be able, on top of the cons I went to, to go to at
least 4 (if not 6!) weekends a year in Japantown in San Francisco
where this one guy basically ran screening events sponsored by local
businesses in Japantown.
They ran him and his anime con (which he ran on top of those events)
out of the area, as part of an economic gentrification of Japantown
which may or may not succeed.
He started running anime bowling events, and we talked over supper at
one of them, and he told me that basically the screening room as a
concept was obsolete, essentially. And he said it was because of the
increased exposure to anime (pirated anime, at that) on the Internet.
Take that, and you can see why festivals which either used to or still
are incorporating anime events are, more and more, relegating them to
the margins. I do not expect Nisei Week in LA to have him back for
2009, as one example.
When you add on the narrowing of what anime are coming out anymore,
it's easy to see my resentment.
> I think on this group, or maybe ANN, I posted a similar sentiment about
> shrinking the fanbase. I didn't think the anime bubble was going to be
> good for the industry nor was it sustainable. But I also noticed this
> new crop of fans were going to upset the apple cart with their disdain
> for the old otaku culture. I never suspected it would change this much!
It's clearly not sustainable -- you are right.
The big thing is that people don't realize that the fandom is the
bubble now -- these companies still (utterly foolishly) believe they
can market to a bunch of people who wouldn't pay a plugged nickel for
their anime outside of what it costs them to have a Net connection.
When you understand what that all means, the result is inevitable.
> But I'm OK with change, and those who sow the wind reap the whirlwind.
> In other words, when the releasing companies go under and the big
> studios either go under or "sell out" (think merchandising anime), the
> pirating class of fans might realise the cost of their actions. But to
> be honest, I don't think they would and still can't grasp why there's no
> good anime to watch anymore.
No. They won't care. I'm not even sure they would care if ANY new
anime came out -- just as long as the anime that they've been stealing
doesn't come down with it.
> darkstar7...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> I'd agree, but I'm not sure if they'd ever buy to be honest...
>
> > And I would say that of at least 80% of the fanbase. Most estimates
> > and fans involved would put that number far lower.
>
> I'm inclined to predict of the people pirating anime today, if you could
> somehow create a perfect shutdown of piracy, 99% of them would not pay
> for anime, especially not at the traditional prices.
Which basically eliminates 80% of the fanbase right there.
You see why I don't think there's enough money left to sustain any
model?
> Which is why I think it's better to focus your energy on the people who
> buy your product and treat them well. :-)
You can't. You don't have enough money to treat them well. If you
did, you'd probably be able to sue the others out of the fandom.
Mike
darkst...@gmail.com
> darkstar7...@gmail.com wrote on [Wed, 20 Aug 2008 20:36:26 -0700 (PDT)]:
>
> > On Aug 20, 6:14 pm, Justin <nos...@insightbb.com> wrote:
> >> darkstar7...@gmail.com wrote on [Wed, 20 Aug 2008 18:10:21 -0700 (PDT)]:
>
> >> > On Aug 20, 5:53 pm, Justin <nos...@insightbb.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> No, it doesn't represent any loss of money at all. You can't be sure
> >> >> that if they were unable to download or pirate the content in any way
> >> >> that they would purchase the episodes. My bet is that no more than 50%
> >> >> would buy it.
>
> >> > What is the product: The anime itself, or the medium you get it on?
>
> >> Step back, reread what I said.
>
> > Choosing to ignore the entire point of why I asked the question...
>
> common sense.
"Common sense" == That which everyone else believes.
Why do you think they call it _COMMON_ sense???
Doesn't make it right.
> > They have no right to the product the moment they download it. Now,
> > again, the question: Is the product the anime or the DVD medium in
> > which the anime is transported to you? If it's the latter, then the
> > anime itself is essentially worthless and any rights to it
> > indefensible.
>
> I didn't say they had the right to see it, you inferred that from your
> own warped mind.
Uhh, thanks for playing, idiot. You missed the point completely -- as
I thought you did.
If the program is the product, as you said later, they have no right
to see it if they don't either pay for it or get it from a venue to
which the license to show has been given. Under those grounds, those
who own the product have the right to compensation -- in this case,
LOTS of compensation.
Thanks for playing.
> > If the product is the anime itself, then one download == one lost
> > sale.
>
> No, it doesn't. As I said, if it weren't possible to download it it
> would still not equal a sale as it wouldn't be bought either.
No. If it weren't possible to illegally download it, then zero lost
sales because the product is not stolen.
The product is the anime, hence illegal downloading of it is the same
thing as me shoplifting the DVD.
> > When you don't have the license to view the anime, you have no right
> > to the anime, now or ever -- unless the whole concept of such right is
> > worthless and indefensible.
>
> So, you are taking your response into an area that I didn't refer to at
> all.
Because you completely ignored the reality on which my question was
based.
If they don't have the right to view the anime, then either those who
steal that right owe the grantors of that right money, or the whole
concept of such a right is now worthless and indefensible -- and it's
that latter concept that keeps the anime industry (and many other
entertainment venues) from complete and immediate collapse.
> > Then my argument applies. You have no right to view the show except
> > under the terms of the show's owners or their assignees.
>
> Which I didn't state that I agree or disagree with that statement.
Doesn't matter. Doesn't change the fact that my statement is correct.
> > The viewing of an illegal product makes it a lost sale. You said the
> > show is the product, right?
>
> No, it doesn't. As I said, just because someone viewed it for free
> illegally doesn't mean they would have paid for it if paying was the
> only possibly option of viewing it. Therefore a download does not equate
> to a lost sale.
And your argument doesn't hold water either, because it doesn't matter
whether the person ever would've paid for it in the first place.
It's the same as shoplifting a PS3. Would you have ever paid for a
PS3 if the option to shoplift it were not practical? Probably not.
But that means you don't have, and will never get, a PS3. Period.
End. What is so hard for you to not understand?
Replace the PS3 with the anime program.
> Also, the downloads that DO equate to a sale, how do you account for
> those?
If they're legal downloads, they're not in the discussion.
If they're illegal, we went through this before: You now have TWO
copies of the product, and they should expect compensation for BOTH
copies.
> > Then you cannot view the show unless under the terms which were given
> > to you by the owners of the product.
>
> To which I haven't stated my opnion.
Your opinion is inferred from your comments.
Mike
darkst...@gmail.com
> > > The viewing of an illegal product makes it a lost sale. You said the
> > > show is the product, right?
>
> > No, it doesn't. As I said, just because someone viewed it for free
> > illegally doesn't mean they would have paid for it if paying was the
> > only possibly option of viewing it. Therefore a download does not equate
> > to a lost sale.
>
> > Also, the downloads that DO equate to a sale, how do you account for
> > those?
>
> He doesn't, he just keeps going on about how a download, any download,
> equals a lost sales while simultaneously ignoring every point made to
> the contrary.
There are no arguments to the contrary. You have two copies to the
product if you illegally download and then buy because of it, and they
are entitled to TWO compensations.
You still owe them for the first compensation which led to the second.
This is UNLESS (and, again, the point -- which Justin completely
ignored or missed -- of which I asked the "anime the product or the
DVD the product?" question) the DVD is the product as merchandise and
the anime thereon effectively worth nothing financially.
Mike
darkst...@gmail.com
<seaw...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
> Justin wrote:
> > darkstar7...@gmail.com wrote on [Wed, 20 Aug 2008 20:36:26 -0700 (PDT)]:
> >> They have no right to the product the moment they download it.
>
> No one here has argued that.
No, because none of you probably believe it or practice it!
If you did, you'd realize the rest of my argument and at least come to
the conclusion that Travers has: That the entire present system is
gone.
If they have no right to the product the moment they download it, then
it's a lost sale _at that point_. A lost sale that, without legal
compensation, can never be recovered _even if the download results in
a later sale of legitimate product_. This is, again, unless the DVD
as merchandise is the product, and the anime itself financially worth
zero.
> >> If the product is the anime itself, then one download == one lost
> >> sale.
>
> > No, it doesn't. As I said, if it weren't possible to download it it
> > would still not equal a sale as it wouldn't be bought either.
>
> As in so many things, Starky has no clue here, and resolutely refuses
> to GET one when offered.
*whoosh*
That point sailed so far over your head that you are either
deliberately ignoring the point or you're so clueless that you need a
conservator.
(I opt the former.)
Again, if you are not willing to argue that the person has no right to
the product when he downloads it, it must then IMMEDIATELY follow that
downloading the product means you stole it -- you denied them a
rightful sale of the product, _even if the product is not currently
available for sale_. The alternative, in that case? You wait.
Period.
This is why you see such delays by the Japanese companies for fears of
reverse importation. Do you not believe that this kind of conduct
could not be considered the ultimate in reverse importation? (With
the associated losses...)
> This isn't theft. It's immoral, yes. It's illegal, yes. But it's not
> theft, and download does not equal loss of sale.
The only way you could support that is to deny that the person has no
right to the product. You would have to basically state that the
anime itself is not even a product, and has no financial value
whatsoever.
> Theft requires that when I take the thing, the thing is no longer
> available for sale or use by someone else. In the case of cars, cash,
> and physical DVDs, this is clearly the case.
No. Theft is the denial of a sale of the product, or the taking of a
product that belongs to someone else. That the product can be easily
replicated does not stop it from being theft.
You are denying them compensation for a product you now own and HAVE
NO RIGHT TO OWN. It is that you have no right to own it outside of
THEIR jurisdiction that forces compensation to come onto the table.
Otherwise, there is no such thing as that right.
> It isn't for downloads. A million people can download the same
> identical file from the same identical source, and that same identical
> file remains in the same identical place that it always was, available
> for another million people.
And the first million are all civilly liable to pay for those copies.
That another million can join them does not change that fact.
This is probably where the scenario I fear (that there will be no such
thing as copyright) will come to pass.
> And despite Starky's rantings elsewhere, I don't "champion" illegal
> downloaders. I think they're all a bunch of whiny weasels who aren't
> WORTH the time and effort it would take to imprison them,
> entitlement-obsessed twits who think "I want" equates to "I should have
> regardless of anyone else's rights".
You absolutely do through your opinions. You seem to want to state a
middle ground where no middle ground exists. Either you put the slice
to it all, or you're just another "entitlement-obsessed twit".
> What the industry is "getting" and Starky isn't is that you don't fight
> cultural and technological change. The fact that this level of
> downloading is POSSIBLE, and that it is being used for this specific
> purpose, is a direct signal to the industry: "Your way of operation does
> not suit our needs. If you don't adapt to the way WE want to do things,
> you will die."
And that's the problem: You're asking THEM (the OWNERS OF THE
PRODUCT) to conform to (collective) YOU (the CRIMINALS). Do you see
how offensive that is?
It would effectively be the same situation as if stores could not
control shoplifting in the least and looting ran rampant. No
effective difference.
Why, at that point, would ANY sale-based model suit their needs? Why
would ANY ad-based model suit their needs? They have a more popular,
more effective, and "free" model, and don't give two shits as to
whether the industry dies.
> Fighting this kind of change in the way Starky proposes is the same as
> the Luddites who, wanting to protect their livelihoods, tried to smash
> machines that would take away their jobs. The problem is you can't stop
> the change of the society and the industry. You have to ADAPT to it. If
> you make buggy whips and horses are going out of style, you had better
> figure out what you can make that will fit into the new industry, or
> you'll be gone.
It would be that way if the machines were illegal, yes.
The adaptation should've been the elimination of these situations
before they became the much-preferred way of getting anime. Now, it's
far too late and they will make the industry bow to them and be the
survivors.
Mike
David Johnston
wrote:
>On Aug 21, 6:15 am, "Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)"
><seaw...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>> Justin wrote:
>> > darkstar7...@gmail.com wrote on [Wed, 20 Aug 2008 20:36:26 -0700 (PDT)]:
>
>> >> They have no right to the product the moment they download it.
>>
>> No one here has argued that.
>
>No, because none of you probably believe it or practice it!
>
>If you did, you'd realize the rest of my argument and at least come to
>the conclusion that Travers has: That the entire present system is
>gone.
>
>If they have no right to the product the moment they download it, then
>it's a lost sale _at that point_. A lost sale that, without legal
>compensation, can never be recovered _even if the download results in
>a later sale of legitimate product_.
Big whoop.
darkst...@gmail.com
> >If they have no right to the product the moment they download it, then
> >it's a lost sale _at that point_. A lost sale that, without legal
> >compensation, can never be recovered _even if the download results in
> >a later sale of legitimate product_.
>
> Big whoop.
And you just demonstrated the attitude of anime fandom which I
resent: One which will end anime.
'Cause you don't care if you have the right to it or whether they
expect to ever see money for each copy of the product that goes to the
consumer. It's that antipathy toward the industry which will kill it.
I hope you are ready to lie down in the bed you've been making.
Mike
David Johnston
wrote:
>On Aug 21, 6:21 pm, David Johnston <da...@block.net> wrote:
>> On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 17:53:45 -0700 (PDT), darkstar7...@gmail.com
>> wrote:
>
>> >If they have no right to the product the moment they download it, then
>> >it's a lost sale _at that point_. A lost sale that, without legal
>> >compensation, can never be recovered _even if the download results in
>> >a later sale of legitimate product_.
>>
>> Big whoop.
>
>And you just demonstrated the attitude of anime fandom which I
>resent: One which will end anime.
No it won't.
>
>'Cause you don't care if you have the right to it or whether they
>expect to ever see money for each copy of the product that goes to the
>consumer. It's that antipathy toward the industry which will kill it.
How?
Ansgar -59cobalt- Wiechers
> On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 17:53:45 (PDT), darkst...@gmail.com wrote:
>> If they have no right to the product the moment they download it,
>> then it's a lost sale _at that point_.
No, it still isn't, because downloading an item still doesn't mean that
the downloader would've bought the item if he or she hadn't been able to
download it in the first place.
However, that has been explained to Chicken Little ad nauseam and it
still fails to understand, so ...
> Big whoop.
... can we please, please, please, with sugar on top, stop feeding the
fucking troll? Thank you.
cu
59cobalt
--
"My surname is Li and my personal name is Kao, and there is a slight
flaw in my character."
--Li Kao (Barry Hughart: Bridge of Birds)
Travers Naran
> On Aug 20, 10:50 pm, Travers Naran <tna...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I really had nothing to add to your well-explained response. :-)
>>
>> But I did think your shrinking the fan base seems born out of a hate and
>> spite. I'm not sure that's so healthy to feel hate for them. They
>> aren't worth it.
>
> There is hatred and spite. _A LOT OF IT_...
>
> I mean, I used to be able, on top of the cons I went to, to go to at
> least 4 (if not 6!) weekends a year in Japantown in San Francisco
> where this one guy basically ran screening events sponsored by local
> businesses in Japantown.
> Take that, and you can see why festivals which either used to or still
> are incorporating anime events are, more and more, relegating them to
> the margins. I do not expect Nisei Week in LA to have him back for
> 2009, as one example.
>
> When you add on the narrowing of what anime are coming out anymore,
> it's easy to see my resentment.
No, it's not easier for me to see it. I can see how the loss of that
kind of event would hurt, but I can't see why this change is worth
getting ill over.
I think we have two different ways of looking at the world and change.
You rail against it, especially if it's the end of a very positive time
in your life. It's going away, but the people who should care don't
seem to realise it and aren't lifting a finger to fight the end. The
ship is sinking and they're still partying.
For me, the phrase I've lived with all my life is: "This too shall pass"
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_too_shall_pass> Good things _always_
come to an end. The replacement doesn't always match up, and quite
often is a worse thing, but this too shall pass.
I can't help view this anime explosion-bust as but a part of the cycle
of society. I've seen it happen to SF (my original and ever-constant
passion), I've seen it happen to TV and movies, and I've experienced it
in life. When I saw my little side-hobby in anime suddenly blossom and
bloom in the 90s, I was quite thrilled, but I always knew it would fade
and shrink back (maybe smaller than before). I figured I'd just enjoy
the party while it lasted, and hope it left a few survivors.
I've heard some people say my attitude is the right one, but I can't
agree. I think the world can sometimes be better when people rage
against the dying of the light. And it is a little sad that the other
fans on this group can't seem to see beyond your pain and rage. All
they can do is label you a nut-case or a stalker and don't have to deal
with what you are trying to tell them.
> The big thing is that people don't realize that the fandom is the
> bubble now -- these companies still (utterly foolishly) believe they
> can market to a bunch of people who wouldn't pay a plugged nickel for
> their anime outside of what it costs them to have a Net connection.
>
> When you understand what that all means, the result is inevitable.
Yeah, that's why we seem to be able to talk. I viewed the fan-base from
the beginning as a bubble or fad, and that the companies tripped over
their own nuts trying to capitalize on it, but I knew this fan base was
inconstant. To be honest, 7 years ago, I would not believe that the
anime expos would still be going, but I think that too will change, and
it'll be funny (for me) and a little sad when the newer anime expos
collapse and AX becomes the small event it used to be.
As I've said a dozen times before: ADV built its plan on the idea that
the new large audience was like the old one. That was like building
your castle on sand. And now the tide has come in to sweep it all away.
I've seen this boom-bust cycle so many times over my 30+ years of life
on this Earth that it hardly seems noteworthy. :-)
> No. They won't care. I'm not even sure they would care if ANY new
> anime came out -- just as long as the anime that they've been stealing
> doesn't come down with it.
And when it does, they'll blame everyone but themselves.
>> somehow create a perfect shutdown of piracy, 99% of them would not pay
>> for anime, especially not at the traditional prices.
>
> Which basically eliminates 80% of the fanbase right there.
>
> You see why I don't think there's enough money left to sustain any
> model?
>
>> Which is why I think it's better to focus your energy on the people who
>> buy your product and treat them well. :-)
>
> You can't. You don't have enough money to treat them well. If you
> did, you'd probably be able to sue the others out of the fandom.
But I see there is still a market to buy anime, but it's different from
before and definitely not that big. It's not worth worrying about or
wasting dollars trying to drive the pirates out completely -- just
enough that the honest fans stick to legit channels.
darkst...@gmail.com
> >> If they have no right to the product the moment they download it,
> >> then it's a lost sale _at that point_.
>
> No, it still isn't, because downloading an item still doesn't mean that
> the downloader would've bought the item if he or she hadn't been able to
> download it in the first place.
>
> However, that has been explained to Chicken Little ad nauseam and it
> still fails to understand, so ...
And you're still full of shit ad my nauseam.
Here's a hint: If they downloaded it, THEY ALREADY HAVE THE PRODUCT.
(Unless you wish to believe the product is the DVD as merchandise and
that the anime itself is utterly worthless.)
But they already have the product, hence, for having the product,
whether or not it is on sale or whether or not the person would ever
buy it is irrelevant to the discussion.
They have the product, and the owners of the product should demand
compensation from the fans and from the media which illegally allow
them to see the material. Without that, there is no industry.
Again, without that, THERE IS NO INDUSTRY.
> > Big whoop.
>
> ... can we please, please, please, with sugar on top, stop feeding the
> fucking troll? Thank you.
Especially when idiots like David Johnston make it so easy.
First off, he completely and without explanation denies the absolute
truth that the fans' attitudes will kill anime and then asks me how
the antipathy toward the industry will kill it??
Where do you think a lot of these people are getting money to continue
to make anime?? Where do you think the American companies are getting
money to license and Americanize it?
I'd like to know, because the numbers do not add up, David.
Mike
darkst...@gmail.com
and dealing with you.
On Aug 21, 10:30 pm, Travers Naran <tna...@gmail.com> wrote:
> darkstar7...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Take that, and you can see why festivals which either used to or still
> > are incorporating anime events are, more and more, relegating them to
> > the margins. I do not expect Nisei Week in LA to have him back for
> > 2009, as one example.
>
> > When you add on the narrowing of what anime are coming out anymore,
> > it's easy to see my resentment.
>
> No, it's not easier for me to see it. I can see how the loss of that
> kind of event would hurt, but I can't see why this change is worth
> getting ill over.
It's not just the events - it's also, as I've tried to tell these
people, that it also limits the types of anime made to safe, saleable
titles and archetypes.
I'm not interested in most of the saleable archetypes. I'm just
_not_... It's one of the reasons that, until I go out and buy Beck,
chances are I haven't bought much anime at all, and can't see much
(other than Ouran later this year) which I would want to purchase.
> I think we have two different ways of looking at the world and change.
> You rail against it, especially if it's the end of a very positive time
> in your life. It's going away, but the people who should care don't
> seem to realise it and aren't lifting a finger to fight the end. The
> ship is sinking and they're still partying.
I can see the argument, so let me clarify something -- change that
actually do some good, I don't mind. Change just for change's sake,
which clearly won't work (partially because it doesn't address the
core problem, and partially for the reason you gave (that they either
don't care or don't realize it) -- that's what I rail against.
Without some mechanism to demand the rightful monies, you could go
same-day and it won't fundamentally matter -- the thieves and pirates
have an entrenched mechanism which is better, more popular, and at the
price the public demands (none, or at least pseudo-none in the case of
CrunchyShit and some similar).
Since the Japanese are even unwilling to change the necessary
situations to demand their due monies, I do not have faith in their
continued ability to make anime. That's why I made the prediction I
did to Sea Wasp.
> For me, the phrase I've lived with all my life is: "This too shall pass"
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_too_shall_pass> Good things _always_
> come to an end. The replacement doesn't always match up, and quite
> often is a worse thing, but this too shall pass.
It's like I've been talking to my friend lately: There isn't that
much that I can have faith in in this world that won't die out --
we're entering a very dark time in our society, IMHO. At some point,
you have to have a reason (especially if you're someone like me) not
to just decide to go off and make the evening news, and anime has been
that for the better part of four or five years.
And now, bluntly, it may be time to look elsewhere, but there may be
no safe places to look.
> I can't help view this anime explosion-bust as but a part of the cycle
> of society. I've seen it happen to SF (my original and ever-constant
> passion), I've seen it happen to TV and movies, and I've experienced it
> in life. When I saw my little side-hobby in anime suddenly blossom and
> bloom in the 90s, I was quite thrilled, but I always knew it would fade
> and shrink back (maybe smaller than before). I figured I'd just enjoy
> the party while it lasted, and hope it left a few survivors.
I guess the difference, to me, is that this was a willful, malicious,
and deliberate act by the fanbase to undercut its own industry -- and
that makes it slightly different than a lot of the boom-busts you
speak of.
This is one of the things which irritates me the most: The fanbase is
saying: "We're robbing you blind and don't give a fuck, but you still
have to cater to us."
I see that as a symptom of a larger societal problem: IGMFU. I Got
Mine, Fuck You. It doesn't matter a whit to them what they do,
because they got their product and they don't even care if the
product's makers go under, because they got theirs.
> I've heard some people say my attitude is the right one, but I can't
> agree. I think the world can sometimes be better when people rage
> against the dying of the light. And it is a little sad that the other
> fans on this group can't seem to see beyond your pain and rage. All
> they can do is label you a nut-case or a stalker and don't have to deal
> with what you are trying to tell them.
All I'm telling them is, if they're going to do the ad hominem, take
the ad hominem where the ad hominem has to go. I mean, I've seen
Laura Bailey in a short skirt. :)
Anyhoo, the point is that these people are part and indicative of a
malicious fanbase hell-bent on either getting anime for free, not
caring whether there's any new (or good new) anime at all. That
pisses me off. I used to think differently too. It was in watching
the Kaleido Star unlicensed OVAs that I wanted to see Serena Varghese
and Cynthia Martinez and the crew take shots at it, and I asked the
ADV panel and the 2006 AND 2007 AX's about it.
But now I've seen the damage. Three companies dead, and at least one
of the other three seemingly hanging on.
> > The big thing is that people don't realize that the fandom is the
> > bubble now -- these companies still (utterly foolishly) believe they
> > can market to a bunch of people who wouldn't pay a plugged nickel for
> > their anime outside of what it costs them to have a Net connection.
>
> > When you understand what that all means, the result is inevitable.
>
> Yeah, that's why we seem to be able to talk. I viewed the fan-base from
> the beginning as a bubble or fad, and that the companies tripped over
> their own nuts trying to capitalize on it, but I knew this fan base was
> inconstant. To be honest, 7 years ago, I would not believe that the
> anime expos would still be going, but I think that too will change, and
> it'll be funny (for me) and a little sad when the newer anime expos
> collapse and AX becomes the small event it used to be.
AX should've collapsed under its own weight 3 or 4 years ago. The
only reason it's still supposedly growing is the same reason the anime
fandom is getting fat: They're picking up all the fansub thieves.
Most all the people who buy anime either already go or won't ever go.
Either a whole ton of people lied when they said they'd never go
again, the number of 43-50K is badly inflated, or they picked up a
whole bunch of the CrunchyShit crowd when CrunchyShit got its
legitimization as the only future of the anime industry at AX.
AX 2008 was the funeral for the present industry.
> As I've said a dozen times before: ADV built its plan on the idea that
> the new large audience was like the old one. That was like building
> your castle on sand. And now the tide has come in to sweep it all away.
Agreed. And here's where I really get pissed at ADV: Not just
admitting that they're dead just not to prove me wrong, but it seems
like, on top of helping to commit acts to kill singles in the anime
market, they're now basically making people distrust the anime market
as a whole.
As I said after AX: ADV and the people at the top need to be
eliminated from the industry with greatest prejudice. Failing to do
so will only accelerate the end.
> > No. They won't care. I'm not even sure they would care if ANY new
> > anime came out -- just as long as the anime that they've been stealing
> > doesn't come down with it.
>
> And when it does, they'll blame everyone but themselves.
Of course. I'll probably catch more than a little blame, since I've
made some fame railing against these SOBs.
> > Which basically eliminates 80% of the fanbase right there.
>
> > You see why I don't think there's enough money left to sustain any
> > model?
>
> >> Which is why I think it's better to focus your energy on the people who
> >> buy your product and treat them well. :-)
>
> > You can't. You don't have enough money to treat them well. If you
> > did, you'd probably be able to sue the others out of the fandom.
>
> But I see there is still a market to buy anime, but it's different from
> before and definitely not that big. It's not worth worrying about or
> wasting dollars trying to drive the pirates out completely -- just
> enough that the honest fans stick to legit channels.
And the only thing you and I seem to disagree on is that I don't think
there's enough money with the honest fans to even do _that_. Again, I
submit: At $100K/episode, Ouran is going to have to sell 43000 copies
of each volume to break even.
Even if Funimation got EVERY PENNY of the $60 list price, they'd still
need about 21500-21700 copies to break even, and, as fansubbed as this
series is, I have serious doubts they'll get _that_.
I think Funi will lose it's shirt on Ouran.
Mike
Bill Martin
Shoot, fast food restaurants don't even accept them around here. Some
sit-down restaurants make you put down your work number, home number,
or some other crud that people leery of ID theft refuse to put on their
checks.
darkst...@gmail.com
Mike
Pumbaa
news:4357656f-44ad-4c86...@q5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
I'm surprised ANYONE ever accepts checks anymore.
Mike
The Internal Revenue Service still accepts mine!
Checks are good when you absolutely need a receipt for payment.
Pumbaa
news:slrngbbs1d...@debian.dns2go.com...
Nobody returns checks anymore.
True, but I get a statement from my bank that includes a reduced size
photocopy of both sides of the actual cleared checks.
Captain Nerd
"Pumbaa" <pinkert...@hotmail.com> wrote:
And Maryland Unemployment was good about sending the check, and the
new BankAmerica ATMs will scan them in on deposit, and give you a
tiny copy on your receipt.
The infrastructure is still there, just not as commonly used.
Gee, I just indirectly replied to a post from He Who Must Be Ignored
By Everyone, I hope I don't get in trouble again...
Cap.
--
Since 1989, recycling old jokes, cliches, and bad puns, one Usenet
post at a time!
Operation: Nerdwatch http://www.nerdwatch.com
Only email with "TO_CAP" somewhere in the subject has a chance of being read
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
Um, I get receipts for almost everything.
--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://seawasp.livejournal.com