Video store owner Derek de Vreugt is struggling to keep his business afloat. To save money he’s moved into the shop and installed an ATM in the window. But after 14 years in the DVD and video rental business he now has less than six months left on his lease and must soon decide whether he will sell his collection of 28,000 DVDs and 3000 VHS tapes to stay afloat. Despite the imminent deadline, Derek continues to spend what little money he has building a library of every film “worth watching”. It’s a strategy he describes as a “piracy insurance policy”. Derek clings to the hope that even in the face of Australia’s high rates of piracy, there will still be room for a video store that has it all
Why are Australians expected to pay higher prices than our overseas counterparts to rent or buy entertainment from digital services? Why do companies who own the local rights to programs like Game of Thrones restrict audience’s access to alternate payment models? For a long time Australia's geographic location and a relatively disperse population has delayed access to internationally made films and television. It’s also contributed to the higher prices we pay for movie tickets, DVDs and Blu-rays. However, even with the arrival of video-on-demand services, prices are high and release dates still delayed. Who is responsible, and are their actions driving Australia's high rates of piracy?
Once the cornerstone of the home video rental market, the VHS tape helped usher in the era of home entertainment, and it wasn’t long before it became one of the motion picture industry’s most profitable revenue streams. However in 1982, the Motion Picture Association of America’s view of the technology, whic could provide them with huge profits, was negative. At the time, the MPAA, and its outspoken president, the late Jack Valenti, were so concerned by the VCR that they argued to restrict the importation and sale of the devices in United States Supreme Court. Now 40 years later, the MPAA continues to wage legal challenges against technologies they perceive as a threat to their profits. Is the MPAA’s opposition to the technology pushing consumers to access entertainment online? Is this a case of history repeating itself?
With 14 years behind the counter at a video store, Derek de Vreugt has experienced firsthand the way people’s viewing patterns change. In recent years widespread piracy has reduced the popularity of latest release movies, and binge viewing of box sets and television series has emerged from a fringe activity to a mainstream one. For Derek it has been clear that audiences have desired serialized viewing experiences for some time, and it was only a matter of time until the entertainment industry seized on the opportunity that existed.
Are the creators of technologies such as bitorrent and Megaupload, responsible for the diminishing profits of Hollywood studios, or is it the actions of their users? Faced with opposition from the likes of Google, Facebook and the wider internet community, on January 20, 2012, the US Senate failed to pass the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), a piece of controversial legislation authored by the MPAA that sought to increase the power of law enforcement agencies in their efforts against piracy. At the same time, in New Zealand, law enforcement officials raided the mansion of Megaupload founder, Kim Dotcom, seizing his assets, freezing his bank accounts and placing him under house arrest. The MPAA may have failed in their bid to get SOPA written into law, but in Australia and around the world, governments are introducing harsher penalties for copyright infringement. Did the MPAA lose the battle but win the war? As the Australian Federal Government debates the introduction of penalties for internet users found guilty of copyright infringement, a move that would assist businesses exposed to piracy, is the Golden Age of Piracy finally drawing to a close? With six months left on his lease, will the Government’s changes come too late for Derek?