42
LINI WORKING PAPERS Nº7 Users as Distributors: European Cinema in P2P Networks Gustavo Cardoso; Rita Espanha; Pedro Jacobetty; Tiago Lima
LINI WORKING PAPERS Nº7
Users as Distributors: European Cinema in
P2P Networks
Gustavo Cardoso; Rita Espanha; Pedro Jacobetty; Tiago Lima
Users as Distributors.
European Cinema in P2P Networks.
Gustavo Cardoso; Rita Espanha; Pedro Jacobetty; Tiago Lima
Abstract
This essay departs from the idea that, given the steady decline in the distribution
channels for European movies both in cinema theatres and direct sales or renting, new
distribution channels are emerging among the viewers who prefer that kind of cinema.
In this paper we suggest that a natural consequence of the lack of investment in other
distribution channels to promote European cinema is its rise on P2P networks. The
combination of content and viewers in the same environment bolsters the presence of
European cinema on P2P networks when compared with the scenario outside the
Internet. Given the financing procedure for European Cinema based on public funding,
as opposed to the US tradition of private financing, there might be very good arguments
for considering this a first step in terms of changing the business rationale of European
movies towards a model of open network and commons.
Keywords: Peer-to-Peer; European Cinema.
Peer-to-Peer in Context
Peer-to-Peer (P2P) networks are part of an emerging phenomenon that‟s taking place all
over the Internet. A growing community of users, along with the relatively easy access
to high-speed connections, enables and strengthens user-based networks that connect
people‟s everyday lives through computers. New cyber-communities are emerging out
of the bits flowing over the Internet. They are based on new communication processes
that allow people to integrate different mediums in wide, shared-access networks.
Distance has virtually no effect on this kind of communication, which is bringing
people together from all over the world. These communities and their capabilities are
reinforced by the increase of high-speed connections, which facilitate online content
submission. From 2005 to 2008 the broadband penetration rate1 for OECD countries
had an increase of 174.2% and the figures grew by 22.6% in the last quarter of 2008.
Broadband penetration rates
Source: OECD Broadband Portal
The significance that the Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) have in
a globalized world and their communicative efficiency and rapid technological
development make it likely that broadband Internet access around the globe will
increase2. This is the basis for P2P networks, where users are both enablers of, and
participants in a content and technological resource sharing process.
BigChampagne‟s analysis illustrates that the average simultaneous P2P population has
increased from December 2002 to the same month in 2004. What is also surprising is
1 The penetration rate is the number of broadband connections (speed over 256 kbit/s) over the country‟s
population. 2 Broadband penetration rate was 4.6% in 2007 for the whole world (Internet World Stats).
the fact that this relatively small percentage of users is responsible for most of the
overall Internet traffic volume. The information superhighways are being overloaded
and available bandwidth is being consumed by this file sharing process.
Average Simultaneous Global P2P Users
0
500.000
1.000.000
1.500.000
2.000.000
2.500.000
3.000.000
3.500.000
4.000.000
4.500.000
5.000.000
5.500.000
6.000.000
6.500.000
7.000.000
7.500.000
8.000.000
8.500.000
9.000.000
9.500.000
10.000.000
10.500.000
Au
gu
st,
2003
Sep
tem
ber,
2003
Octo
ber,
2003
No
vem
ber,
2003
Decem
ber,
2003
Jan
uary
, 2004
Feb
ruary
, 2004
Marc
h,
2004
Ap
ril,
2004
May,
2004
Ju
ne,
2004
Ju
ly,
2004
Au
gu
st,
2004
Sep
tem
ber,
2004
Octo
ber,
2004
No
vem
ber,
2004
Decem
ber,
2004
Jan
uary
, 2005
Feb
ruary
, 2005
Marc
h,
2005
Ap
ril,
2005
May,
2005
Ju
ne,
2005
Ju
ly,
2005
Au
gu
st,
2005
Sep
tem
ber,
2005
Octo
ber,
2005
No
vem
ber,
2005
Decem
ber,
2005
Jan
uary
, 2006
Feb
ruary
, 2006
Marc
h,
2006
Ap
ril,
2006
May,
2006
Ju
ne,
2006
Ju
ly -
2006
Au
gu
st,
2006
Sep
tem
ber,
2006
Source: Big Champagne
Distribution of protocol classes’ traffic volume
Source: Ipoque Internet Study 2008/2009
In fact, P2P traffic volume is higher than all others together in most regions studied by
Ipoque, with the exception of North Africa and the Middle East, where it is still the
protocol that generates the most traffic According to CacheLogic research, the P2P
traffic share has been growing since the creation of the famous Napster (September
1999).
This, however, does not directly account for the number of users in these networks or
the amounts of files being shared over P2P networks: user traffic and file size are
extremely irregular. Size is a major issue in video files, which are much bigger than
text, picture or audio files. “As bandwidth increases, however, so does the amount of
data that needs to be transferred if consumers desire to download movies in the next
generation high definition quality.” (Mayer-Schönberger, 2008: 252).
“In the larger EU countries, between 15% and 30% of broadband Internet
subscribers use at least one Peer-to-Peer application and most Peer-to-Peer
households use two.” (Gavosto [et al.], 2008: 289)
There are several P2P protocols operating over the Internet. Several criteria can be used
to map the most significant ones: the number of computers with their clients installed,
content availability and the amount of generated traffic inside each protocol. When it
comes to reading the numbers, all these criteria allow for misinterpretations. One could
argue that, despite having the client installed, users could not be actively using it. As for
content availability, it is not definitely clear whether it is actually being downloaded or
not. And one could always argue that a small number of users are generating large
traffic volumes, making this a less significant indicator.
Internet protocol evolution 1993-2006
Source: CacheLogic (2006)
A query analysis conducted by Kwok and Yang (2004) on Gnutella found that file
formats (or extensions) are amongst the terms with the highest frequencies. File format
often refers to the specific content of that file. Figure shows the distribution of those
formats aggregated by the type of content they carry. This distribution suggests there
was a high demand for video files.
Distribution of file categories specified in queries.
Source: Kwok and Yang (2004)
P2P networks based on percentage of computers with client installed
0.0%
2.5%
5.0%
7.5%
10.0%
12.5%
15.0%
17.5%
20.0%
22.5%
25.0%
Sep-05 Oct-05 N o v-05 D ec-05 Jan-06 F eb-06 M ar-06 A pr-06 M ay-06 Jun-06 Jul-06 A ug-06
Gnutella B itT o rrent eD o nkey F astT rack A res
G2 N eo N etwo rk OpenN ap So ulSeek D irect C o nnect
Source: BigChampagne (2006)
Large data volume makes it harder to share, which encourages users to take advantage
of efficiency of the BitTorrent protocol.
Number of users on main BitTorrent trackers
Source: TorrentFreak
BitTorrent‟s architecture also combats free riding, which is the term used in P2P
networks to describe users who download without sharing. To prevent free riding, two
mechanisms are integrated in the protocol: BitTorrent users cannot download a file
without automatically uploading parts of the incompletely retrieved file; and faster
download speeds are granted as a reward to users with higher upload/download ratio
(Werbach, 2008: 103). While BitTorrent‟s characteristics help in achieving successful
downloads, one should not assume that downloads will always be fast and easy,
especially for video content.
This paper will analyze one of BitTorrents most popular trackers and index site,
ThePirateBay3. It is the biggest tracker in terms of both user number and traffic volume,
as Figures show. In fact, for every region analyzed by Ipoque, this tracker has the
highest traffic volume of all other BitTorrent trackers. When one takes a closer look at
ThePirateBay user statistics, one finds a large number of users, from around the world,
connected to this tracker. ThePirateBay was thus considered an observation site par
excellence. The following analysis is mainly focused on this website and its content user
data.
3 A tracker is a server, a special node on the network that assists the communication between peers. A
BitTorrent index is a list of .torrent files managed.
BitTorrent traffic per tracker
Source: Ipoque Internet Study 2007
ThePirateBay users/day by country (thousands)
Source: ThePirateBay Tracker Geo Statistics (http://geo.keff.org)
However, it is important to pause here and contextualize the current situation in terms of
the platforms we decided to include in this study. Despite the fact that this report (and
the empirical part in particular) was begun before the closure of The Pirate Bay (17
April 2009), and even though the great majority of the data we report on are directly
linked to it, we still consider the data and the considerations we present herein to be
credible. Given that the total number of users in all the BitTorrent platforms is clearly
higher than the number of The Pirate Bay users (see the table “Number of users on
BitTorrent platforms”), we see no reason to question the validity of our study because
all the other platforms, on account of the number of users they have, also end up being
representative of the P2P universe, making the later a mass phenomenon as we have
known it. One can add to this the likelihood of the Pirate Bay users migrating to the
other BitTorrent platforms, thus making them more representative of the P2P
phenomenon in question.
What is European Cinema?
A historical approach and the relationship with the American cinema market
Like all forms of art, cinema is a product of collective work. As Howard Becker points
out in Art Worlds, the analysis of art should always incorporate the socially organized
networks of activities (which range from the creator to the consumer, passing through
the intermediaries, the industries producing the materials needed, the media coverage,
etc.). This demystifies the socially constructed term “art” and enables a sociological
approach to those phenomena.4 Conventions have a central role in Becker‟s thought,
where the audience creates "aesthetic systems”, or “art worlds”. These “worlds”, such
as European cinema, have different inherent logics in both the sphere of production and
that of consumption. Bourdieu, another art theorist, uses the term “symbolic capital” to
suggest that the possession of a work of art can be seen as a form of capital that is
complementary to economic capital: “When duplicating the purely economic
differences by differences created through possession of symbolic goods, such as works
of art, or symbolic distinctions in the ways of using such goods, the privileged classes
can attain their dream […] reconciling, in the way of the old aristocracy, the temporal
power and spiritual greatness or mundane elegance.” (Bourdieu, 1992: 280). Today, an
empowered and educated middle class also values art consumption as a form of capital.
However, not having the resources of the upper classes to acquire expensive works of
art, they turn to other kinds of art production that do not require as much economic
investment but still provide some kind of “distinction” in the ways they are used. This is
one of the reasons for the demand for European cinema in a world dominated by major
Hollywood media companies and their blockbuster movies.
The debate on cinematographic styles is not a recent one. Indeed, it is a debate that has
accompanied the evolution of the film-making industries for decades. The first
important thing is to recognize that there is not just one film industry working with
unified production and operation codes; there is an enormous variety of industries
favouring distinct styles and ideas. The idea that everything that has taken place has
been an extension of the American film industry‟s hegemony is erroneous. Thus, in
relegating the commonplace that gives Europe the title of creator of cinema to a lower
level, it is important to begin by speaking, in historical terms, of the positionings and
repositionings of European cinema in reaction to threats from other markets, in
particular the American market. The beginnings of cinema, in the early 20th century, are
strongly marked by developments coming out of France. “So much so that, in countries
that imported more French films, the intrinsic need for subtitles led to subtitling
establishing itself as an inexpensive option. “Since a silent film only needed English
titles to transform itself, the cost of producing an English version of a French silent
movie was insignificant”. (Taplin: 2007). However, the growing political turbulence
that took hold of the old continent led to a collapse of the whole predominance of
European cinema. Many producers began to move to California, where a small number
4 “When Marcel Duchamp drew a mustache on a commercial reproduction of the Mona Lisa and signed
it, he turned Leonardo into one of his support personnel.” (Becker, 1982: 20) This appropriation of other
people‟s artistic work is now very common in the form of music remixes and video assemblages, often
posted on popular internet sites such as YouTube.
of large studios were later established, giving rise to the Hollywood Studio System. This
was the beginning of Hollywood‟s golden age. The post-World War II climate confirmed the unstable environment that characterized
world cinema, and major innovations in terms of logistics and materials in European
and Asian cinema resulted in a new challenge being laid down to the American
industry. In particular, these changes were above all due to the “adoption of lighter
weight cameras made in Europe (Arriflex, Aaton) that had been developed for newsreel
production. Unlike the cumbersome Mitchell cameras used in Hollywood that required
a mechanical crane to move, the hand held cameras allowed production on the streets
with minimal crews and an absence of set-building”. Thus began the Neo-realist
movement in Italy and the New Wave in France, with directors such as Fellini and
Antonioni beginning to produce films that depicted the real world. “In France, by the
late 50s, directors like Truffaut, Chabrol and Godard were telling romantic tales of
sophistication that would have never passed the Hollywood Code of Screen Conduct”
(Idem). In Sweden, Ingmar Bergman also produced innovative work, creating films that
dealt with philosophical matters.
So one could say that the Europeans began to produce new storytelling techniques
which lead to a decade of decline for American cinema. However, American cinema‟s
capacity for (re)inventing itself strategically prevented a period of more widespread
hegemony of European productions. “Hollywood recovered its bearings in the late
1970s thanks to a run of blockbuster hits: Jaws, Star Wars, and the rest” (Holt, Perren
and Wiley: 2009). In addition to this, new American cinema, with its big productions
and reference figures such as Coppola, Lucas, Scorsese and Spielberg (cinema that
already came armed with very strong marketing strategies), gave rise to the blockbuster
era, a characteristic that contributed to a heightening of the problems of distribution and
consumption of European cinema. “Hollywood films have become more commercial
through product placement, as well as spawning new commodities such as merchandise
and other media products” (Moul: 2005). Moreover, “at the very point that Hollywood
had developed a new action genre, the European and Asian local producers began to
experience a crisis of talent, which closely resembled the American experience of the
early 60s”(Taplin: 2007).
We can see what happened more clearly on a political map (especially for European
countries) as far as extremely high consumption of American cinema is concerned. One
should note that, more than 10 years on, even greater predominance of American-made
films is to be expected, given that the generalized opening of the markets and American
hegemony in cinema will have contributed to that.
US Global Film Exports-Source: UNESCO
A comparative approach
To better understand what we mean when we put forward the idea of European cinema
having its own characteristics, it would be of interest to ask a number of questions that
allow us to distinguish it from other forms of cinema, in particular from American
cinema:
1) When we speak of European cinema, are we speaking of a different way of
producing films?
The answer is clearly yes. From the outset, and from the historical point of view, the
idea that European cinema has been more art-oriented, placing special emphasis on the
actor as a character and recognising in him the essence of the production itself, is a
well-known one. In contrast, American cinema has, for many years, recognisedly been
oriented towards sales and profit. “Although the U.S. film industry may have some
unique characteristics, it is still an industry organized around profit (...) Hollywood
films are made because they are perceived to be profitable or represent low risk” (Moul:
2005). It is therefore possible to say that these are two different forms of cinema, with
the economic aspects taking on particular relevance in the conceptualization and
production of American films and the same economic factors being relegated to a lower
level in the same process of European film production.
2) Is European cinema characterized by a different form of distributing and
viewing films?
The answer to this question would be a double-barrelled one. While, in theory, one
could say that the forms of distribution are the same for all types of cinema, given that
the technological revolution provides the same conditions, it is nevertheless true that the
European forms of film distribution are involuntarily different to those of other types of
cinema, and in particular to American cinema. This is to say that, with the
predominance of so-called traditional distribution (via cinema theatres and, more
recently, with TV) linked with profitable, mass-produced merchandise of American
origin, the main form of consumption of European films is now associated with the new
online file sharing and downloading resources, which is an aspect that constitutes the
topic of this study and will be discussed in greater detail further in the text.
To be clear about this we can point out that, despite the fact that there has been a clearly
higher absolute number of European films in comparison to American films, the data
for the year 2003 show that American films were shown on approximately 35,000
theatre screens, while European films totalled only around 25,000 screens. One can add
to this the fact that European films are those that run for the least time in the theatres
and for this reason should be regarded as a more traditionalist form of distribution in
pronounced decline.
1145
520
870929
1048 1033
611699 673
656
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
EU27 Films US Films produced
Number of feature films produced
Source: World Film Market Trends: Marché du film 2009
Here the analysis takes on particular importance when one notes that the number of
American films has decreased in recent years, in contrast to the trend for European
films, which are being produced in ever greater numbers. These figures allows for the
conclusion that, as there are more and more European films each year, the number that
do not get theatrical release are also growing. In contrast, American films, despite the
recent drop in production figures, accounted for a total of 63.20% of the cinema-related
revenue in Europe in 2008.
Cinema and its circulation in Europe, by country of production
Region 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
European films 24.6% 24.6% 27.9% 28.6% 28.4%
Eur inc/ Us co-productions 5.8% 12.5% 5.5% 6.3% 6.8%
US 67.3% 60.2% 63.4% 63.2% 63.2%
Others 2.3% 2.7% 3.2% 1.8% 1.6%
European films by country of production
FR France 8.6% 9.2% 10.6% 8.4% 12.6%
GB Great Britain 4.5% 3.9% 2.8% 6.1% 2.2%
IT Italy 2.2% 2.9% 3.0% 3.8% 3.6%
DE Germany 4.3% 3.2% 4.8% 3.8% 3.5%
ES Spain 2.4% 2.3% 2.8% 2.1% 1.4%
Other European countries 2.7% 3.1% 3.9% 4.6% 5.0%
Source : Observatoire européen de l’audiovisuel – Base de données LUMIERE
As the data in the tables show, the large majority of films that were released within the
European Union in 2008 came from the USA. Indeed, this is a trend that has been
registered for many years now.
Top 20 most popular films in Europe, during 2008
Ran
k Title
Producing
Country
Production
Year Director
Admissio
ns
1 Mamma Mia! US/ GB inc 2008 Phyllida Lloyd 33.738.21
7
2 Quantum of Solace GB inc/US 2008 Marc Forster 27.486.23
3
3 Indiana Jones and The Kingdom of the
Crystal Skull US 2008 Steven Spielberg
26.515.99
2
4 Madagascar: Escape 2 Africa US 2008 Eric Darnell, Tom McGrath 25.045.77
5
5 The Dark Knight US/ GB inc 2008 Christopher Nolan 24.533.62
7
6 Bienvenue chez les Ch'tis FR 2008 Dany Boon 24.159.48
5
7 Kung Fu Panda US 2008 Mark Osborne, John Stevenson 22.107.54
0
8 Hancock US 2008 Peter Berg 20.597.39
2
9 Wall E US 2008 Andrew Stanton 18.949.77
4
10 Sex and The City US 2008 Michael Patrick King 16.399.74
2
11 High School Musical 3: Senior Year US 2008 Kenny Ortega 13.370.02
4
12 Astérix aux Jeux Olympiques FR/DE/ES/IT 2008 Fréderic Forestier, Thomas
Langmann
13.475.50
3
13 The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian GB inc/ US 2008 Andrew Adamson 13.370.02
4
14 The Mummy. Tomb of the Dragon Emperor US/DE 2008 Rob Cohen 11.556.20
7
15 Iron Man US 2008 Jon Favreau 10.398.97
1
16 Horton Hears a Who! US 2008 Jimmy Hayward, Steve Martino 9.515.049
17 National Treasure: Book of Secrets US 2007 Jon Turteltaub 9.008.476
18 I am Legend US 2007 Francis Lawrence 8.363.365
19 Burn After Reading US/ GB inc 2008 Joel Coen, Ethan Coen 7.715.768
20 What happens in Vegas US 2008 Tom Vaughan 7.638.313
Source : Observatoire européen de l’audiovisuel – Base de données LUMIERE
When one looks at the table of the films that drew the largest audiences in Europe in
2008, we see that the large majority of these are USA productions, and practically all of
those produced in Europe were also co-produced in America.
This trend is also confirmed for 2009 for the five largest cinema-consuming markets in
Europe.
Source : Observatoire européen de l’audiovisuel – Base de données LUMIERE
3) Are we also speaking of a different form of film financing?
Absolutely. Further corroborating the arguments put forward in the historical approach,
the essence of European cinema seems to be characterized by forms of financing that
are different to those practised, for example, in the USA. In America, the film industry
very early on assumed its role as a for-profit business operation. One can emphasize
therefore that European cinema has always been associated with public funding, in
contrast to American cinema, which is clearly a private-interest industry. European
cinema accordingly has a history that cannot be dissociated from a certain degree of
governmental and public interest. The French government, for example, has played a
very active role in profiling the cultural importance of the national film industry. To
quote Ginsburgh and Throsby (2006), “In Europe the market and the arts are often seen
as unhappy bedfellows (...) today much of the cultural elite of Europe finds commercial
culture suspect and argues that subsidies for high culture are essential”. And this is
related, clearly, with the idea that “the market demands purchasing power. Who pays,
joins in. Market forces dumb down expressions of high culture in order to get mass
attention” (Ginsburgh and Throsby: 2006). So, European cinema also means “the
complex processes of independent filmmaking combining small-scale entrepreneurship
and an internationally acclaimed auteur with national funding schemes"”(Elsaesser:
2005).
Let us look at the following data:
Top 10 films in the big 5EU markets January to June 2009
Rank France UK Germany Spain Italy
1 LOL Slumdog Millionaire Angels and Demons Angels and Demons Angels and Demons
2 Gran Torino Monsters vs Aliens Twilight Gran Torino Italians
3 Coco Star Trek Night at the Museum 2 The Curious Case of Benjamin Button Seven Pounds
4 Bolt Night at the Museum 2 The Reader Slumdog Millionaire The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
5 Twilight Angels and Demons The Curious Case of Benjamin Button Seven Pounds Ex
6 Slumdog Millionaire Bolt Slumdog Millionaire Monsters vs Aliens Gran Torino
7 The Curious Case of Benjamin Button Transformers Männersache X-Men Origins: Wolverine Fast and Furious
8 OSS117: Rio ne Répond Plus X-Men Origins: Wolverine Fast and Furious Australia La Matassa
9 Angels and Demons Marley & Me Paul Blart: Mall Cop Fuga de Cerebros Yes Man
10 Safari Terminator: Salvation Transporter 3 Fast and Furious Journey to the center...
Source Ecran Total / OBS CAA Bliclqunkt Films ICAA Cinetel
Evolution of the total volume of public funding to the film and audiovisual sector
in Europe (1998-2004) - (in EUR thousand)
Source: European Audiovisual Observatory / KORDA database
It would seem that the present decade also brought an increase in public funding for the
European film industry, whereby the greater part of that funding is associated with
French, German and Italian cinema. As far as the diverse financing models are
concerned, we would highlight a funding example for a European film production with
80% of the funding coming from State bodies.
Public funding model for a European film
Source: cineuropa/finalreport/12 May 2009
The funding available to European film producers comes from various sources – not just
national sources but also supranational sources with different formats.
In strictly European terms, and in addition to the possibility of the producers and writers
applying for national funding from their own state bodies, this funding generally takes
an indirect form, meaning that the state is considered a co-producer. In the Portuguese
case, the producers/directors/writers have access to a public competition, generally held
on an annual basis, through which, if their project is approved, they can receive up to
30% for the total estimated budget for the film (repayable if the film makes a profit at
the box office). They have to come up with the remaining 70% from other sources
(either own funding or other financial support).
If they belong to a Council of Europe country, the authors may also apply for
Eurimages funding. After studying the applications by all the delegates and the
subsequent vote, Eurimages may also become a financing partner. However, this
funding percentage is not fixed (depends on the projects submitted and approved) and it
also has a formal requirement: it only supports projects that are co-productions between
Council of Europe countries, at least in artistic and technical terms. This goes some way
to explaining why a large part of European films in recent decades have fundamentally
been European co-productions. The Eurimages programme also incentivates theatrical
release in at least the countries involved in each project.
In the case of Portugal and Spain, there is also another funding source available: the
IberMedia Programme, which functions in a similar way to Eurimages but applies to
Ibero-american countries, namely Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia, Colombia, Costa Rica,
Cuba, Chile, Ecuador, Spain, Mexico, Panama, Peru, Portugal, Porto Rico, Dominican
Republic, Uruguay and Venezuela. The financial resources for the fund essentially
come from the contributions of the member states and from repayments of loans already
made.
4) When we speak of European cinema are we speaking of a different way of
telling stories?
Yes. In comparison to the US film industry, European cinema has the reputation of
being more liberal as far as representations of the human body and nudity are
concerned. This is, indeed, a characteristic that has always distinguished it clearly from
American films ever since the early days of Hollywood, where there were great
concerns as to the possibility of the sexual influence and nature of European cinema
influencing the moral norms of the more conservative American society.
Furthermore, European cinema seems to be less tied to the violence-related themes that
recurrently featured in American films about the mafia or “Hollywood genres such as
the classical gangster film and the rape-revenge movie” (Elsaesser: 2005).
In addition to this, European cinema, as Taplin points out, sought to mirror the real
world, “while classical Hollywood film centers on an active, goal-oriented protagonist
who confronts various obstacles in a quest to attain certain objectives. The principal
characters‟ actions and desires drive the story forward through a sequential cause-effect
chain, and their viewpoints are conveyed through standard camera work and editing
techniques” (Holt, Perren and Wiley: 2009).
Equally important is the certainty that European cinema was always one that distanced
itself from the need to attract audiences that has characterized the American film
industry and, also for that reason, is recognised as cinema of a certain erudite nature in
which the connection to music, literature and the fine arts was evident. Examples of this
are the Surrealist movement, where Satie (in music), Cocteau (in literature), Giacometti
(in the fine arts) played leading roles, or Italian Neo-realism, where cinema branched
out into other cultural areas. At heart different from the US film industry, as Jacques
Tati would say, European cinema, be it modern or classical, follows a line that “has
always been recognized as aesthetically and culturally important” (Vincendeau: 1998).
While “America (that is Hollywood) stands for popular entertainment (...) Europe is
synonymous with art cinema” (Dyer and Vincendeau: 1992).
5) Can one say that European cinema is characterized by an economic
dimension that is different to that in the US cinema industry?
In summing up what we have said so far, the answer is clearly yes. “Hollywood studios
have been subsumed by a cartel of global media conglomerates: Time Warner, Viacom,
News corp (20th Century Fox), Sony and GE (...) operations of the American film
industry as a whole demands that we recognize the movie business as precisely that: a
commercial enterprise requiring enormous capital investment, in which the major
corporate powers strive to optimize efficiency and minimize risk” (Holt, Perren and
Wiley: 2009). In Europe, film production with its small-scale entrepreneurship
combined with the importance of national funding schemes make the European cinema
an industry that is less oriented on making a profit as a crucial factor for the production
of films. Accordingly, one can highlight the 65 million dollars profit registered in 2004
by the American film industry, as opposed to 25 million dollars for its European
counterpart. Additionally, the growing number of co-productions between France and
the USA or Germany and the USA, especially as far as big productions are concerned,
is likely to reduce the profits of European films even more, as they will be shared with
the American industry.
European Cinema (-) theatres; (+)P2P
c
Why Peer-to-Peer and Not Any Other Media?
Bearing in mind the aspects already discussed above, it is important to explain in what
way the mathematical model (a theory put forward by Sung Wook Ji: 2006) contributes
to a wider perception of the relationship between Peer-to-Peer and the ways in which
European cinema is watched. The relationship is simple: basically, what we have to
retain first and foremost is the confirmation of the results that give American cinema
growing importance in the cinema theatres in practically the whole world. Then,
considering that the large majority of people tend to pay for and watch a film only once
(an idea defended by Sung Wook Ji), it becomes easier to assert that, given that
American films constitute the type of cinema that is most watched in the traditional
cinema theatres, the other forms of watching films will tend to be favoured by those
who look for other types of films. Here we are referring to, amongst other channels,
Peer-to-Peer and the capacity it has to bring to the people those films that normally do
not feature prominently in the current cinematographic scenario, focused, as it is, on
distributing profitable products that appeal to the masses.
In the final analysis, what is worthwhile pointing out is that, if the great majority of
people tend to watch a film only once and, as far as American films are concerned, that
single viewing tends to be more associated with the cinema theatre, then that means that
in online sharing resources people are likely to look for those films they were never able
to watch, as is the case for European films that are much more inaccessible.
In general terms, the association of the mathematical model to the way in which
different types of cinema are consumed (especially American and European films) can
be explained using the following diagram:
The relationship between cinema and Sung Wook Ji’s mathematical model
The mathematical model
Hollywood Cinema
(+) theatres; (-)P2P
(single viewing)
One could ask: and could the other forms of viewing cinema films at home not likewise
lead to an increase in the number of people viewing European cinema, and not just P2P?
The answer would seem to be no. Let us begin with the DVD: as far as this resource is
concerned, it is said that films released in the cinema can sometimes have a negative
impact (according to the mathematical model theory) and other times a positive impact.
The negative effect has to do with the idea that if a person has already seen a certain
film in the cinema they are not likely to acquire it in DVD format. The positive model
refers to a possible link between the marketing and advertising strategies and the sales
of the DVD. However, Sung Wook Ji argues that the best selling films on DVD tend to
be based on the box office hit lists and more constant discussion in newspapers and on
television programmes. Thus, knowing in advance that European films, due to their
reduced commercial impact, tend to not make the box office hit lists, then a possible
increase in the number of DVDs sold would not make any impact whatsoever on the
profits of European films because such an increase would only be associated with more
profitable, i.e. American, films. In other words:
1) Few European films in cinemas = absence from the box office hit lists = little
feedback = smaller DVD sales = little European cinema watched;
2) Lots of American films in cinemas = they make the box office hit lists = lots of
feedback = larger DVD sales (possible reduction associated with the cinema
mathematical model) = greater prevalence of American films in terms of DVD viewing.
As far as television is concerned, the data clearly indicate a minor predominance of the
broadcasting time allocated to European films by the European television channels,
making television an equally unviable alternative for the few European films watched in
the cinema theatres. Basically, the majority of the film programming on European
television stations would seem to follow the old maxim of broadcasting on the basis of
the film‟s profitability, which, taken together with the decrease in the amount of time
allocated to cinema films on television, brings nothing positive for cinema in general
and European cinema in particular. Ultimately, television is also undergoing change. As
Lotz points out: “Television may not be dying, but changes in its content and how and
where we view have complicated how we think about and understand its role in the
culture”.
Film incidence in TV Schedule (24 hours)
TV Network Country 2002
RTL TV Germany 6,00%
SAT.1 TV Germany 7,90%
ZDF TV Germany 14,70%
TF 1 France 3,70%
M6 France 3,00%
Canal+ France 45,80%
ITV UK 5,80%
Channel 4 UK 12,00%
RUV TV Iceland 18,00%
MediaSet Italy 17,90%
VRT Belgium 7,30%
HRT TV Croatia 11,40%
MTV Hungary 7,10%
RAI Italy 8,40%
SVT Sweden 7,90%
STV Slovak Republic 1,20%
European Audiovisual Observatory, in Gambardo
And is Peer-to-Peer not an economically immoral option that should be strictly
regulated?
Let us begin with the economic issue, which is a crucial factor in giving rise to the
generalized view that P2P is an immoral option that undermines the legitimacy of the
price, property and investment system and brings disorder to the market. According to
Felix Oberholzer (Gee/Harvard University, 2009), the idea that the sharing of files and
(art) works leads to the decline of the music or cinema industry, etc., is fallacious. He
argues that between 2002 and 2007 there was a 66% increase in the number of books
published, the production of new music albums all but doubled and film production
grew by 30%.
“It is clear that millions of files are exchanged daily without compensation to
the artist; however, there is no evidence of that file sharing impacting the profits
obtained in these industries” (Oberholzer: 2009).
Hence, for Oberholzer, a possible cause and effect relationship between file sharing and
reduced profits can only be considered when the drop in profits becomes a factor that
motivates artists to reduce the production of works.
Noam uses the point of critical mass model to explain that, to the left of that point, the
production costs are greater than the sales revenue, which means that the activity only
takes place if someone or some entity bears the costs. However, immediately after the
point of critical mass the business venture becomes self-sustainable. What would appear
to be paradoxal is the notion that the following phase is one of less investment in the
activity. With this argument, the author seeks to justify that the relationship between
P2P file sharing and the traditional business transaction system is not necessarily a
harmful one, given that, for Oberholzer, the benefits multiply with the number of users
through the network effect. Thus, the more P2P users there are, the greater the profits
for European cinema could be and it becomes no longer dependent on the first phase
that comes before the point of critical mass, which, in this case, would be the funding
for the European film industry by the various European governments.
Furthermore, strategies that could complement the use of P2P with possible external
investments would mean that massification of P2P use could, for example, become a
viable means of generating advertising investment that could cover part of the films‟
production costs. Indeed, even here the American industry seems to be ahead, given that
it has already made available, for example through the Hulu platform, recent television
series and films free of charge to domestic users under the presupposition that revenue
would come in through advertising investments.
As the following graph shows, the outcome would appear to have been quite a
considerable rise in the number of users of the platform, allowing for the conclusion that
not only consumption of the series and films in question increase but that also, given the
use of the services, it was possible to increase the advertising revenue. In essence, this
kind of mutual assistance, using a technological platform, enabled more revenue for the
film industry even though it incorporates strategies that, at the outset, could be regarded
as commercial suicide – because the product is made available for free – and it likewise
contributes to satisfying the expectations of those who do not wish to pay for films on
paid distribution channels. In the final analysis, the European film industry has a long
way to go in this area too.
Another possibility can be seen in the strategy used by a number of music groups, such
as Radiohead, which enables the user to download music in exchange for a symbolic
payment. In such cases, the costs of producing the CDs fall way, as do the percentages
paid to the record company. Thus, “fair use that protects the non-commercial
applications/activities may benefit not only the users but also the companies and the
economy. The key work is, therefore, community. The community would be the core of
the system” (Noam: 2008).
As far as the regulation issue is concerned, one should point out that protective
measures such as the presentation of illegal copy accounts or the centralisation of
download registers would be difficult to apply on a global scale. In addition to this, the
Hollywood example shows us that regulation of this type of file sharing would not be
economically favourable, as most of the technologies have proven to be high revenue
sources. Furthermore, file sharing contributes to a reduction in the prices applied, for
example, for CDs, thus achieving price levels that are more likely to increase the
number of buyers. Further to the question of negative points associated with regulation,
one could argue that the attempt to centralize the use of P2P files and platforms or
prevent their use would do nothing more than contribute to a (re)structuring of the
whole file sharing system, leading to new P2P practices that would not need the
previously used platforms. The question is, therefore, not one of prohibition but one of
finding a type of symbiotic convergence similar to the Hulu example in the USA.
“Many copyright owners already see in P2P a new medium that offers new
opportunities for revenue and return” (Noam: 2008).
Ultimately, the problem with P2P lies in the failure to perceive it as a profitable form of
distribution. And why? Because a great number of reservations have derived from the
fact that P2P interfered in the conventional forms of distribution. That is why the
potential benefits resulting from it are underestimated in relation to the economic
stability guaranteed by the traditional distribution channels.
But does P2P not also have negative points?
Of course it does. And those negative aspects derive from a certain conceptualization of
the model. In other words, the major problem with P2P lies in what is conventionally
known as free-riders (Yang, Molina: 2003), i.e. the large numbers of users of these
systems that consume other people‟s resources without providing any of their own
resources, thus being capable of preventing the renewal of files or breaking the
necessary sharing network. This functions as follows:
A B
A + B = Guess Forward(ers)
C = Guess free-rider
C
No return
Sharing
For Tuladher (Bradford University) the alternative will eventually be replacing the
popular forwarding, which is more susceptible to fail, by a model or chain known as
collaborative planning.
Another problem lies in the ease with which new ideas, taking advantage of unique
concepts, could claim for themselves the greater part of the operations carried out on the
Internet. In basic terms, what one is arguing, using facebook as an example, is that,
thanks to the enormous movement of applications associated with it, marked by millions
and millions of uses a day, there has been a remarkable deviation and transfer of
notoriety in a number of platforms related with music and cinema, etc., which could
mean that the P2P platforms might also experience drops in use as a result of new offers
emerging with new themes. Just to have an idea (Koltai: 2009), “there is more
movement in the facebook top 1500 applications than in the music industries top 40…
and certainly more movement than the Mojo´s Movie Blockbuster results”.
Cinema on Multi-screens
In this point it is important to analyze how, depending on the country, there seem to be
specific preferences as to how one consumes films.
In the specific case of the USA, based on an article published by the Motion Picture
Association of America, the scenario is as follows:
Source:MPAA- http://www.mpaa.org/2007-us-theatrical-market-statistics-report.pdf
What one should one should take from this information is that Americans classified as
moviegoers, regardless of the number of technologies they have at their disposal, tend to
show lower figures as far as the downloading of films is concerned. This could mean
that, if a person goes to the cinema that person already has satisfied their prefences and
does not need to look for a film on the Internet.
As far as the European countries are concerned, on the basis of data from an academic
presentation, we can highlight the following ideas:
Italy and German cinema: two different ways of supplying a movie? Italy Germany
I look forward to watching my favourite film and I cannot wait for it to be issued in video form or on the Net 3.43 2.74
In order to pay much less for it, I am ready to wait to watch a film 5.65 5.79
I prefer watching a film at home to going to the cinema 5.65 5.16
I prefer having a DVD/VHS version of the film to be able to watch it whenever i like to going to the cinema 5.91 5.89
Source: http://www.slideshare.net/saverio4zanetti/italian-german-cinema-2-different-way-to-distribute-a-movie-presentation
In a study in which the data from the questionnaire were obtained using a scale that
went from 1 (for strongly disagree) to 9 (for stronglyagree), we find that, on average,
tend to disagree most with the idea that it is preferable to go see a movie in a theatre
than to wait for it to come out on DVD/video or to be downloadable from the net.
Concurrently, the agreement levels rise for the idea that it is preferable to watch a film
at home over going go the cinema.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
PPV/V
OD
DVR
Surro
und
Sound
MP3
Playe
r (Video
)
Dig
ital C
able
DVD R
enta
l Ser
vice
Satellite
TV
Mov
ie D
ownloa
ding
Moviegoers
Moviegoers who ownor subscribe to 5+technologies
Moviegoers who ownor subscribe <5technologies
0
5.000
10.000
15.000
20.000
25.000
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Now let us look in greater detail at the scenario in Portugal.
Here it important to study how the various ways of watching cinema films have evolved
in Portugal. Analysis of the figures for 2006 and 2008 are of particular interest to us, as
they reflect a large prevalence for practices at home using the DVD and figures that
would indicate a certain degree of relevance for forms of watching cinema at home by
acquiring films via P2P.
Let us first look at the trends in the most traditional form of watching cinema, the out-
of-home option of the cinema theatre.
Cinema attendance in Portuguese theatres (thousands)
Source: INE. Culture, Sport and Recreation Statistics up to 2003. Subsequent years: ICA. Published by OberCom
The preceding graph makes it very obvious that the number of viewers in cinema
threatres has declined considerably between 2004 and 2008. But there are four distinct
periods one should note: a first period of strong decline from 2004 to 2005; followed by
a likewise considerable increase from 2005 to 2006; this is followed by a period of
slight decline up to 2007; that downward trend became more pronounced the following
year. In the end analysis, one can conclude that film distribution outside the home
(cinema theatres) has seen better days.
Different ways of watching movies
Source: The Network Society 2008 Percentages are of the total number of persons who answered that they watched cinema films.
Bearing in mind that the numbers of viewers in cinema theatres has dropped
considerably, it is easy to understand the reasons why home practices today constitute
the main option chosen by the Portuguese for watching films. Furthermore, of the 63%
of respondents who stated that they regularly watched films in the Cinema on private,
multiple and personalized screens study from 2006, 60% said that the only option was
watching the films at home only and 39% responded that they watched films both at
home and in cinema theatres. The group was, therefore, primarily preferred home
practices. One explanation put forward for this phenomenon was that it was linked to
the growing privatization of the consumption of cinema contents in Portugal.
The home consumption of cinema content is made up as follows:
Different ways of watching movies at home
Fonte: The Network Society 2008
Seeing that the majority of Portuguese citizens who consume cinema films at home do
so via the television channels, it is of interest to analyze in greater detail the figures
obtained for DVD and the forms of watching films on the computer.
As far as watcing cinema via DVD is concerned, 67.4% choose to rent the DVD, 40.2%
buy, 34.2% share DVDs with other people and 16.4% use copies made from an original.
When we look at the ways of acquiring films watched on the computer, the results are
as follows:
Different ways to watch movies on computer
Source: The Network Society 2008
Of the figures shown, one can highlight the fact that the large percentage of respondents
in the study who stated that they watched films on the computer did so using films
downloaded from the Internet.
When asked about the reasons for opting to view films on the computer, 63.7% said
they used downloading to have access to films that were not released in the cinema
theatres and were not available to rent or buy.
Factors influencing the choice of media in movie consumption
Factors influencing the choice n Agree Disagree
Movies I watch on DVD are those I would not see at a movie theatre (DVD_box office) 816 47.4% 52.6%
Movies I watch on PC are my favourites (PC_ favourite) 264 48.5% 51.5%
Movies I watch on PC are those I can’t find for purchase/ rental (PC_ Stock availability) 275 63.7% 36.3%
Movies I watch on PC are those I would not pay to see at the movie theatre (PC_ Cost) 267 65.5% 34.5%
PC is the appropriate media to watch adult movies (PC_ Privacy) 468 67.6% 32.4%
If we add to this the fact that more American films have theatrical release in Portugal
than European films, then it is easier to arrive at a leitmotif in terms of the relevance of
the study topic, i.e. the relationship between Peer-to-Peer networks and European
cinema.
When one considers that the percentage of American films released in Portuguese
cinemas has increased over the years, meaning that there is less availability and less
capacity for having European films in the theatres, then it becomes a more viable
supposition that Peer-to-Peer will increasingly be the mode used to watch European
cinema.
In closing this point, one should take some time to explain the way in which the
evolution of the typology found for the different types of cinema film consumers (in
Rita Cheta: 2007) was processed. The following is a revision of that typology:
• Traditional consumers: This first group assembles individuals who choose
traditional broadcast television as their exclusive source of cinema contents and,
more broadly, as the main source for entertainment contents.
• Mainstream consumers: The second profile characterizes the mainstream
media generational group. The Portuguese often watch movies at home on DVD
and TV broadcasting and less often by going out to the cinema theatre.
• Innovative consumers (networked culture consumers): The third profile is
still very small and represents the new media generational group. It is
characterized by more intensive weekly habits and watching experiences on
multi-screens and multiple platforms: DVD player plugged to the TV set, cable
TV, cinema theatre, and computer to watch and share movie downloads from the
Internet.
One could, therefore, say that current state in Portugal is a prevalence of traditional and
mainstream consumers, in the sense that the traditional forms of watching films, on TV
and using the DVD, still prevail generally speaking. However, projecting the evolution
of the results for the near future, we think that the trend will be towards an increase in
the number of innovative consumers (today still a small number), given the growing use
of the new media as a vehicle for watching films, in particular those from European
countries.
Returning to the prior analysis of some figures for the US, Germany and Italy, if we
look at the US we see that for moviegoers downloading is still a very insignificant
option, which is the reason why innovative consumers are also not well represented
here.
As for the European countries, one can suppose that in those regions the innovative
consumers will tend towards gaining prevalence in a short space of time. If the Germans
and Italians already agree more in terms of the economic forms of watching a film (such
as waiting for it to be on television), then this phenomenon points to two different
scenarios:
Scenario 1 – they do not go to the cinema because they are not motivated by the offer;
Scenario 2 – They are not motivated by the offer in the theatres and thus tend to look for
other types of films, whereby the search will increasingly be satisfied by the ever-
growing potential that the Internet offers.
Cinema and P2P: Users as Distributors
Cultural production and distribution are, and have been, influenced by technological
development. This is a complex relationship and there are several historical moments
that express that relationship, such as the birth of printing, radio, television and now the
Internet. It is true that the Internet is a new medium, but does have some distinct
characteristics that make it very different from the others. It can be thought as a meta-
medium5, “a set of layered services that make it easy to construct new media with
almost any properties one likes” (Agre, 1998). Furthermore, it is a channel for
multidirectional communication that is insensitive to geographical distances (Noam and
Pupillo, 2008). These features allow reconfigurations in the distribution of cultural
production. Cinema is no exception; its distribution was based on commercial channels
that would, in a mostly unidirectional way, sell the movies to consumers, who paid for
it. Nowadays, Internet operating networks are the support for a new kind of distribution.
“users transformed music commodities into free floating chains of zeroes and
ones that circulated freely from desktop to desktop. In May 1999, music fans
began to abandon the normal channels of capital to log into Napster, download
(or file share or "freeload"), sequence a set of songs, and either discard them,
store them on hard drives, or "burn" them onto compact discs (CDs).” (Doane,
2006: 151).
This is happening over P2P networks.6 A similar process is occurring with films, with
digitalization being the first step. Digital video involves larger data volumes than audio.
But the increase in personal computers‟ storage capabilities and the ever more popular
broadband Internet access facilitate transmission of additional digital content. With the
proliferation of digital movie distribution, on DVDs and Blu-ray Discs, the film
industry has itself unintentionally advanced7 transmission over digital networks. A film,
in any format, is a good that can be consumed several times. But analog tapes wear out
with each usage and every copying process entails a loss of quality for the copy. This
means that proliferation is possible but limited, as it compromises the quality of the end
result. In a digital format, there is virtually no limit to the amount of times a movie can
be watched, copied or spread over the Internet8, given that it is possible to create an
5 “According to Castells, the Internet‟s integration of print, oral, and audiovisual modalities into a single
system promises an impact on society comparable to that of the alphabet, creating new forms of identity
and inequality, submerging power in decentered flows, and establishing new forms of social
organization.” (DiMaggio [et al.], 2001: 309) 6 P2P is a set of different protocols that have one essential characteristic in common: the network nodes
are the users. This does not mean that there is no centralization whatsoever, just that actual support for the
functioning of those networks, or the structural element that inputs the energy to them – content and
resources – are their users. 7 The same happened in music with CDs. These were unprotected, containing unencrypted audio content.
To prevent illegal trades of films, DVDs and Blu-ray Discs are encrypted but those codes have been
cracked and it is now possible for everyone, using free software that‟s available on the Internet, to decrypt
the contents and to store them, share them online or copy them onto another disc. 8 Peter Kollock argues that one needs to understand that the internet is a network of digital information.
This means that it supports content that can be reproduced perfectly in an infinite number of copies.
exact copy of the original. This allows unlimited proliferation, for the copy is as good as
the original and further copies from that copy will also be. New technologies, especially
the ICTs, are allowing new forms of social trade that are detached from the capitalist
economy. In P2P networks, unlike the market economy, sharing is a condition sine qua
non within their trading system. Most are free access networks whose utilization is free,
requiring only client software9 obtainable online at no cost. Therefore, no money is
actually paid to the service providers or exchanged by users. Nevertheless there are
some P2P trading ethics which involve downloaded content facilitation over the
network in order to make it accessible for other users.
Cinema consumption and distribution are changing. New technologies are being
integrated into people‟s habits, such as movie file-sharing, but intellectual property
rights have not yet adapted to those new realities. Subsequently, most file-sharing
activity is either free from such rights or poses a threat to them, in the shape of an
alternative distribution circle to the market. The following is the result of a synchronic
observation of ThePirateBay BitTorrent index site. Users engaged in file-sharing over
BitTorrent “can contribute by making new content available; by contributing bandwidth
while they download a file; or, by contributing bandwidth after they have obtained the
whole file” (Ripeanu [et al.], 2006). In BitTorrent parlance the latter contribution is
named seeding and the users who practice it are registered as seeders. Users who
contribute bandwidth while downloading a particular file are accounted as leechers.
Taken together, they are known as peers, the community of users engaged in sharing a
particular file online.
The movies released in 2007 in Portugal are the corpus of this analysis. They were then
looked up on ThePirateBay to see how many users are downloading or uploading them.
The number of peers was used as an indicator of the movies‟ availability and
distribution over this tracker. To see the differences between theatrical and Peer-to-Peer
distribution of cinema films, the movies were ranked by the following criteria:
1. Number of spectators in national (Portuguese) theatres;
2. The P2P Cinema Distribution Index (PCDI)
The PCDI is calculated through the ratio between the number of uploaders and
downloaders (peers) at the observation time and the number of spectators in theatres10
.
The higher the values the greater the role P2P plays in overall distribution. In 2007, 274
movies were released in Portugal. The following analysis will make comparisons
between the top 20 movies according to these two ranking systems.11
These represent
the movies with most spectators in Portuguese theatres (spectator top 20) and the PCDI
top 20. PCDI is an exploratory indicator, based on a ratio between the national
spectators and the international file sharing peers. Due to its exploratory character, one
Kollock reminds Negroponte when he claims that “the setting is one of bits rather than atoms.” (kollock,
1999: 223). 9 Network client software is a program that is the interface between a user, the computer and the network
in which it operates.
10 x 100
11 Selecting the top 20 films of each rank gives a diversified illustration of the films that take the highest
positions in both rankings. The privileged movies by each distribution channel are analyzed by the two
top 20‟s: theatres in Portugal or ThePirateBay all over the world.
should be careful in interpreting its readings. Furthermore, the number of peers does not
account for the total downloads. Even though the BitTorrent system forces users to
share what they are immediately downloading, they may stop sharing the file once it is
fully downloaded. Since these movies were released a few years ago, the actual number
of times a film was downloaded is probably much higher than the current peer number.
The index accounts for the availability of a movie in the analyzed P2P network in
relation to the number of spectators in theatres, reflecting thus the relative (present)
demand for a certain film in the network.This ranking clearly reflects the domination of
US produced films in theatrical distribution, as table 1 shows. This scenario is common
in many parts of the world (with the known exception of India). Alejandro Pardo notes
that “between 1999 and 2003, US films accounted for an average of 70.4% of the
European market.” (Pardo, 2006: 5). US dominance, based on this extraordinary market
share, is unambiguous: 14 movies out of the spectator top 20 (70%) are entirely
produced by the USA. The remaining six films are divided into (1) four co-productions
between the USA and European countries (20%), of which three are together with the
UK; and (2) no more than two European only productions (10%). It is also important to
note that one of these two is a UK blockbuster, which has many similarities to
Hollywood movies.12
The other is a Portuguese production with particular
characteristics13
that explain this rare example of home-grown film success in the
domestic market. The countries of production represented in the spectator top 20 films
show further evidence of market domination by the US.
Spectator top 20 movies (Portugal) and production countries 2007
Spectators International English Title
Production Countries Main Dialogue Language
Index 1 Index 2
818904 Shrek the Third USA only USA English
664639 Ratatouille USA only USA English
510140 Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End USA only USA English
492658 Mr. Bean's Holiday Europe only UNITED KINGDOM English
479152 Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix
Europe - USA USA / UNITED KINGDOM English
402145 Spider-Man 3 USA only USA English
391440 Bee Movie USA only USA English
346188 The Simpsons Movie USA only USA English
323012 Blood Diamond Europe - USA USA / GERMANY English
300952 Ocean's Thirteen USA only USA English
285510 Transformers USA only USA English
244320 Night at the Museum Europe - USA USA / UNITED KINGDOM English
234430 Norbit USA only USA English
12
“At their best, these European ‘blockbusters’ are able to compete directly with their Hollywood counterparts and earn similar international grosses. Indeed, they compete so well that most audiences are likely unaware of their non-Hollywood provenance.” (Pardo, 2006: 20). 13
This film (Corrupção) is the dramatic adaptation of a book about recent scandals involving the president of a major Portuguese football team.
230753 Live Free or Die Hard USA only USA English
228481 Corrupção Europe only PORTUGAL Portuguese
227904 The Heartbreak Kid USA only USA English
227566 Apocalypto USA only USA Maya
224974 300 USA only USA English
217120 The Golden Compass Europe - USA USA / UNITED KINGDOM English
197757 American Gangster USA only USA English
Source: Self-elaboration from ICA and IMDB (for main language spoken)
Index 1, Spectator top 20 (Portugal) 2007
Geographic area of production
USA only70%
Europe -USA20%
Europe only10%
Source: Self elaboration from ICA
USA productions or co-productions account for 18 of these films (90%). European
productions or co-productions account for merely 30% (six movies) out of this top 20.
14
The sum of frequencies is greater than 20 because of co-productions.
Spectator top 20 (Portugal) per production countries 200714
USAUnited
KingdomGermany Portugal
n 18 4 1 1
0
5
10
15
20
Source: Self-elaboration from ICA
Another important barrier to cultural export is language. When a movie is released
outside its domestic market, it often needs to be dubbed or subtitled. Nevertheless,
cultural affinities between Europe and the USA seem to compensate for these language
borders. The high popularity of American culture and the internationalization of the
English language, which is the main language spoken in 18 of these top 20 movies
(90%), also play a role here. The Maya dialogues are from Mel Gibson‟s Apocalypto
and the single European language represented here is Portuguese, in the only domestic
movie. Unlike some other European countries, dubbing is rare in the Portuguese cinema
tradition, with the exception of children movies. Accordingly, easy and cheap subtitling
has been carried out in most of the 19 non-Portuguese films.
The movies were then ranked according to the PCDI value. And the differences between
these two rankings are clear. In the top 20 movies with higher PCDI (proportion of P2P
distribution), USA only productions are still dominant, accounting for 10 films (50%).
But it is a smaller proportion when compared to the spectator top 20. The Europe-USA
co-productions‟ fraction also decreases to 15% (3 movies). Europe-only productions
now make up six of these movies (30%), a significant share in this top 20. European
countries are involved in the productions of nine (45%) of the PCDI top 20 movies,
whether as Europe only productions (30%) or as co-productions with the USA (15%).
Main languages spoken in the spectator top 20 films 2007
Source: Self-elaboration from ICA and IMDB (for main language spoken)
PCDI top 20 movies (Portugal) and production countries 2007
PCDI International English Title Production Countries Main Dialogue
Language Index 1 Index 2
41,6 Across the Universe USA only USA English
14,9 Tenacious D in The Pick of Destiny
Europe - USA USA / GERMANY English
8,6 Peaceful Warrior Europe - USA USA / GERMANY English
8,3 Hot Fuzz Europe only FRANCE / UNITED KINGDOM English
6,1 The Fountain USA only USA English
5,4 Saawariya Asia only INDIA Hindi
5,2 10 Items or Less USA only USA English
4,3 The Diving Bell and the Butterfly
Europe - USA USA / FRANCE French
4,1 Vitus Europe only SWIZERLAND Swiss German
4,0 Planet Terror USA only USA English
3,6 Sicko USA only USA English
3,5 Fred Claus USA only USA English
3,4 Black Book Europe only GERMANY / NETHERLANDS / BELGIUM / UNITED KINGDOM
Dutch
3,3 The Lookout USA only USA English
3,2 Kirikou and the Wild Beasts
Europe only FRANCE French
3,1 Butterfly: A Grimm Love Story
Europe only GERMANY English
2,9 The Astronaut Farmer USA only USA English
2,9 Taxidermia Europe only FRANCE / AUSTRIA / HUNGARY
Hungarian
2,7 Shortbus USA only USA English
2,7 Factory Girl USA only USA English
Source: Self-elaboration from ICA, ThePirateBay and IMDB (for main language spoken)
Index 1, PCDI top 20 (Portugal) 2007
Geographical Area Production
Source: Self-elaboration from ICA and ThePirateBay
As Figure illustrates, there are 8 European countries represented, a big difference when
compared to the spectator top 20 in which only 3 were present.
Index 2, PCDI top 20 (Portugal) per production country 200715
Source: Self-elaboration from ICA, ThePirateBay and IMDB (for main language spoken)
The differences do not end here. Language barriers are another reason for the lack of
foreign success of European movies. This is an obstacle even between European
countries, which form a European market very different from the US domestic cinema
market. Still, five movies‟ main dialogue language is a European language.
Main languages spoken in the PCDI top 20 films 2007
Source: Self-elaboration from ICA, ThePirateBay and IMDB (for main language spoken)
15
The sum of frequencies is greater than 20 because of co-productions.
Conclusion: P2P Cinema Distribution’s Characteristics and Demand Patterns
The findings in this paper indicate that different distribution circles comprise different
demand patterns. Cinema lovers from all over the world have in P2P networks a
resource where they can search for films they are not likely to find in theatres or DVD,
which is typically the case of European cinema. This technology enables people from all
over the world to get together in movie sharing communities, providing both content
and resources (movies and bandwidth). As John Carey points out “Peer-to-Peer video
file sharing must grow in a context of transmission networks that support video […],
access/storage devices that can accommodate video […], players or software that can
download and display video […], and, for some applications, technology that can
capture or create video […]” (Carey, 2008: 131). These conditions are met: the
transmission speeds provided by broadband Internet access allow P2P users to trade
large volume video content amongst themselves. The generalization of ever increasing
storage space, as internal or external allocation units and optical discs (CD, DVD, Blu-
ray) provide the support for easy digital video storage. DVD players are commonly
available and new multimedia devices are gaining popularity in people‟s homes. Media
centres or multimedia disc drives which connect directly to computers, screens and
audio playback devices are an easy link between newly downloaded video files and the
traditional living room multimedia devices (TV, hi-fi, home cinema, etc.). One could
even claim that the emergence of such new-generation multimedia devices and their
popularity are intrinsically connected to online file sharing. Other technologies, such as
Video-on-Demand, are also growing in popularity. This indicates that it is a time of
change for cinema distribution and consumption forms. Even though “video file sharing
does not replace going to the movie theatre” (Einav, 2008: 158), it does replace DVD
rentals (Einav, 2008; Gavosto [et al.], 2008).
“Films on Digital Versatile Disks (DVD) are also very popular. Here, Peer-to-
Peer acts like a video-on-demand service, and a substitute for rental. When
compared to physically renting a film, the appeal of Peer-to-Peer lies in the fact
of not having to go to the video shop or distributing machine. Compared to VoD
[Video on Demand], Peer-to-Peer’s main appeal is that the films can be kept
once they are downloaded, burned, transferred, and so on.” (Gavosto [et al.],
2008: 275).
Furthermore, Peer-to-Peer in general, and video file sharing in particular, emerge as the
reflection of the idea defended by Mijke Slot (COST 298: 2007): “in the web 2.0 era it
no longer holds to think of users as end users, as they have moved to the heart of the
value chain (...) they have become important actors in virtually all elements of online
services (…) users actively consume content, users also take on distribution roles in
Peer-to-Peer”.
Given the greater, and easier, availability of resources via P2P, and by resources we
mean the films, it becomes logical to think of this chain of value based on using content
and publishing content (Limonard, meeting COST 298) as the likely substitute for rental
DVD. As the end result of this value chain, “every user has the opportunity to both
consume and create content” in terms of what Axel Bruns (2006) called the effect of
“produsage”.
But technological change is not the only important element. Mayer-Schönberger (2008:
253), based on several works, rejects technological determinism, saying that existing
value chains are eliminated or reconfigured in the networked times we live in. Digital
technology facilitated a “specific digital mindset” which “accepts and embraces users‟
ability to acquire, process, and store massive amounts of information at low cost.” It
encourages “information bricolage”, which is not the case, or is so only in a very
limited way, with available video-on-demand services. The emergence of the
cyberworld generates unregulated social spaces. These “gaps” in people‟s cognitive
frameworks often lead to rule innovation, reinterpretation and adaptation. As reality
unfolds new grounds, meta-rules such as the private property right and the democratic
ideal are mobilized in order to structure human action, by giving a meaning to it. Even
though there are companies interested in more online regulations, the nature of the
Internet creates situations where rules have a low degree of effective enforceability.
This brings social solidarity and morality into the equation: normative-cognitive orders
are valued and provide the necessary meta-rules to guide the creation of new rule
systems. Piracy, for instance, is a two-fold phenomenon: the interests of property rights
holders versus the interests of total informational freedom advocates (what has been
called copyleft).
One should also point out possible limitations to the analysis, namely in terms of a
comparison between visits to the cinema and the downloading potential which may or
may not be taken advantage of by the P2P user. Here the main associated weakness is in
the comparison between visits to the domestic cinema network and the real and global
availability of the P2P network.
In any case, what we propose to achieve next is to introduce, for Portugal, the share of
films watched on television, expanding the comparison to include 2007 and 2009 and
incorporating the preferences of the European consumers in the PCDI index. We want
to be able to compare the total number of visits to the cinema and the overall availability
of films. Together with some of our European partners we are going to construct an
online survey on the consumption of films online, on TV and in the cinema for 2009
and extend the research to the universe of Latin American film production through our
partnership with USP and FGV in Brazil.
European cinema might benefit from these emerging alternative distribution systems. In
the case of P2P cinema distribution, problems may arise from its lack of regulation. But
European cinema‟s strong subsidiary character makes this a lesser problem than for its
US counterpart: “In some European countries, public film funding sets the producers in
a position where their movie is largely financed through subsidies even before it is
released” (Rimscha, 2006: 2). Therefore the already existing P2P distribution networks
could be used as a strategy for dissemination of European cinema‟s works in foreign
markets, alongside with more generalized theatrical distribution and a stronger emphasis
on marketing. Whether or not that would mean compromising the contents and very
essence of European cinema, so that it can be watched by the masses and come close to
the American economic model, is another story.
One thing is certain, if we perpetuate the current situation in cinema, which is
unfavourable to the European film in terms of consumption, European cinema could
irretrievably go bust or simply go under in partnerships with stronger counterparts, such
as Hollywood (constituting what is seen as “sleeping with the enemy” as defined by
Pardo).
P2P could function as the main catalyst for the return of European cinema to a leading
position in the global film industry.
References
Agre P. (1998), The Internet and public discourse. First Monday 3. Available at:
http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/581/502. August
2009.
Becker, Howard (1982), Art Worlds, Berkeley, University of California Press.
BigChampagne (2004), Presentation at the Federal Trade Comission, Peer-to-Peer File-
Sharing Technology: Consumer Protection and Competition Issue Public Workshop.
Disponível em: http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/workshops/filesharing/presentations/toll.pdf.
Bourdieu, Pierre (1992), A Economia das Trocas Simbólicas, São Paulo, Editora
Perspectiva.
Bruns, Axel (2006), Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life, and Beyond – From Production to
Produsage, Peter Lang Publishing, New York.
CacheLogic Presentation at DCIA Conference: P2P Media Summit (2006) . Available
at http://www.dcia.info/activities/P2Pmsla2006/CacheLogic.ppt. July 2009
Carey, John (2008), Peer-to-Peer Video File Sharing: What Can We Learn From
Consumer Behavior? in Eli M Noam and Lorenzo Maria Pupillo (eds.), Peer-to-Peer
Video: The Economics, Policy, and Culture of Today’s New Mass Medium. New York,
Springer.
Charles C. Moul (2005), A concise handbook of movie industry economics, New York,
Cambridge University Press.
Cheta, Rita (2007), Cinema em ecrãs privados, múltiplos e personalizados.
Transformação nos consumos cinematográficos, Lisboa, OberCom. Available at:
http://www.obercom.pt/client/?newsId=29&fileName=rr6_2.pdf. August 2009.
Council of Europe – European Cinema Support Fund (Eurimages). Available at:
http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/eurimages/default_en.asp September 2009
DiMaggion, Paul; Eszter Hargittai, W. Russell Neuman,and John P. Robinson (2001),
Social Implications of the Internet, Annual Review of Sociology, 27, pp. 307-336.
Doane, Randal (2006), Digital Desire in the Daydream Machine, Sociological Theory,
24(2), pp. 150-169.
Dyer, Richard and Vincendeau, Ginette, eds, (1992), Popular European Cinema,
London, Routledge.
Elsaesser, Thomas (2005), European Cinema, Face-to-face with Hollywwod,
Amsterdam, Amsterdam University Press.
Ginsburgh, Victor A. ; Throsby, David (2006), Handbooks in economics 25 - Handbook
of the economics of art and culture, North Holland, El Sevier.
Holt, Jennifer; Perren, Alisa (2009), Media Industries - History, Theory and Method,
Wiley-Black Well, John Wiley and sons, Ltd, Publication
Instituto do Cinema e do Audiovisual. Available at: http://www.ica-
ip.pt/pagina.aspx?pagina=325. September 2009
Internet Movie Database (IMDB). Available at: http://www.imdb.com. March 2009.
Internet World Stats, Available at: http://www.Internetworldstats.com. March 2009.
Ipoque Internet Study 2008/2009. Available at:
http://www.ipoque.com/resources/Internet-studies. March 2009.
Ipoque Internet Study 2007. Available at: http://www.ipoque.com/resources/Internet-
studies. March 2009.
Ji, Sung Wook (2006), Theatrical Movie Impacts on the Consumption of Rental Videos,
Michigan State University. Available at:
http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/0/1/3/2/2/p13224_inde
x.html. July 2009.
Kollock, Peter (1999) „The economies of online cooperation: gifts and public goods in
cyberspace‟, in SMITH, Marc A. and KOLLOCK, Peter, Communities in Cyberspace,
London, Routledge.
Kwok, Sai Ho and Christopher C. Yang (2004), Searching the Peer-to-Peer Networks:
The community and Their Queries. Wiley InterScience. Available at:
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/108062377/PDFSTART. March
2009.
Krishnan, Ramayya; Smith, Michael D.; Tang, Zhulei; Telang, Rahul (2004), The
impact of free-riding on Peer-to-Peer networks, 37th
Hawaii International Conference
on System Sciences.
Limonard, Sander, User generated content, Meeting of Cost 298.
http://www.cost298.org/index.php?fl=2&lact=3&bid=9. September 2009.
Lotz, Amanda D. (2007), The television will be revolutionized, New York, New York
University Press.
Mayer-Schönberger, Viktor (2008), Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon: Proxy Battles
over Peer-to-Peer Movie Sharing in Eli M Noam and Lorenzo Maria Pupillo (eds.),
Peer-to-Peer Video: The Economics, Policy, and Culture of Today’s New Mass
Medium. New York, Springer.
Moul, Charles C. (2005), A concise handbook of movie industry economics, New York,
Cambridge University Press.
Noam, Eli M. and Lorenzo Maria Pupillo (eds.) (2008), Introduction in Eli M Noam
and Lorenzo Maria Pupillo (eds.), Peer-to-Peer Video: The Economics, Policy, and
Culture of Today’s New Mass Medium. New York, Springer.
Oberholzer-Gee, Felix; Strumpf, Koleman (2009), File-sharing and copyright, Harvard
business school.
OECD Broadband Portal. Available at: http://www.oecd.org/sti/ict/broadband.
March 2009.
Pardo, Alejandro (2006), The Europe-Hollywood Romance: Sleeping with the Enemy?
New strategies in the economic battle for the local and global film markets. 7th World
Media Economics Conference – Media Industry: Globalization, Diversity and Identity,
Beijing, China.
Paulussen, Steve et al, Doing it together: Citizen participation in the professional news
making process, Meeting of Cost 298.
http://www.cost298.org/index.php?fl=2&lact=3&bid=9. September 2009.
Perceptric Forum. Available at: http://www.perceptric.com/blog, September 2009.
Pouwelse, J.A.; P. Garbacki, D.H.J. Epema and H.J. Sips (2004), A Measurement Study
of the BitTorrent Peer-to-Peer File-Sharing System. Available at:
http://www.pds.twi.tudelft.nl/~pouwelse/bittorrent_measurements.pdf. March 2009.
Programa IBERMEDIA. Available at:
http://www.programaibermedia.com/por/htm/home.htm September 2009.
Rimscha, Bojern von (2006), Movie release strategies across time, space and media.
7th World Media Economics Conference – Media Industry: Globalization, Diversity
and Identity, Beijing, China.
Ripeanu, Matei; Miranda Mowbray, Nazareno Andrade and Aliandro Lima (2006),
Gifting technologies: A BitTorrent case study. First Monday (11). Available at:
http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1412/1330.
September 2009.
Slot, Mijke, Users in the golden age of the information society, Meeting of Cost 298.
http://www.cost298.org/index.php?fl=2&lact=3&bid=9. September 2009.
Taplin, Jonathan (2007), Crouching Tigers: emerging challenges to U.S. Entertainment
Supremacy in the movie business, Observatório (OBS), Vol 1, No 2. Available at:
http://www.obs.obercom.pt/index.php/obs/rt/printerFriendly/71/0, July 2009.
Tuladhar, Bhadra Man et al (2006), Agent Oriented Peer-to-Peer Supply Chain for
Collaborative Planning, Forecasting and Replenishment. Available at:
http://eastwest.inf.brad.ac.uk/document/publication/Bista-IWS06.pdf, August 2009.
ThePirateBay Tracker Geo Statistics. Available at: http://geo.keff.org. March 2009.
TorrentFreak. Available at: http://torrentfreak.com. March 2009.
Vincendeau, Ginette in John Hill and Pamela Gibson (eds) (1998), Issues in European
Cinema, p.440, The Oxford Guide to Film Studies, New York, Oxford University Press.
Werbach, Kevin (2008), The Implications of Video Peer-to-Peer on Network Usage in
Eli M Noam and Lorenzo Maria Pupillo (eds.), Peer-to-Peer Video: The Economics,
Policy, and Culture of Today’s New Mass Medium. New York, Springer.
World Internet Project (2008), The World Internet Project Report 2009 - International
Report Highlights. http://www.digitalcenter.org/WIP2009/WorldInternetProject-
FinalRelease.pdf. September 2009.
Yang, Beverly; Vinograd, Patrick; Hector-Molina, Garcia (2003), Evaluating Guess and
Non-Forwarding Peer-to-Peer Search, Stanford Infolab. Available at:
http://ilpubs.stanford.edu:8090/611/ September 2009.
Yar, Majid (2005), The global „epidemic‟ of movie „piracy‟: crime-wave or social
construction?, Media, Culture & Society, 27(5), pp. 667-696.
