1% is a huge preportion! For argument sake, let’s call it 0.1%. For every million downloads, that’s one thousand lost in sales. $20 per sale, $20,000 lost. The same would hold for the movies. If movies didn’t require you to buy a ticket, there would still be some who’d buy tickets just because they like to collect tickets, but there would be a great deal more who would watch it for free. Yes, most of them wouldn’t have paid anyway. Yes, by closing the theatre to those who don’t have tickets, only 1% of them would buy a ticket, but that’s a 1% worth of money that the theatre wouldn’t otherwise have.

Theatres refuse entry to those who don’t have tickets, not because they can’t afford to, they don’t have the room, the security risks or the cleaning bill, but because free entry degrades the value of the ticket.

The same principal applies to any form of art. Copyright gives the creator of the artwork authority over who gets to view the art and who doesn’t. Yes, some art forms pay best in public domain using advertising revenue, but for those that don’t, they rely on sales. Making the same art readily available online, sales drop. Even if only by a small amount, it’s still enough to make actioning against piracy worth while.

If someone stuck a webcam in the back of a theater, and streamed it online, would nobody go to that theater anymore? And since they are being deprived of a small fraction of income (if those watching the webcam couldn’t view the movie that way, would they go out to that theater?), should they just close it down entirely?

Try again.

If you are not a citizen of the US, but you want to protest this or any other US legislation that you find appalling, and wish to protest – feel free to contact the US embassy in your country and lodge complaints.

That’s the only way any government becomes aware that they aren’t fooling anyone!

Oooh. Handsome Merlin is handsome. ^.^

Re: Boycott:

You do what you are convicted is right, Scott.