Final 'Star Wars' film leaked to the Internet

Just as Hollywood is increasingly concerned about piracy, the long-awaited film is leaked onto a major file-sharing network.

The story "Final 'Star Wars' film leaked to the Internet" published May 19, 2005 at 8:53 AM is no longer available on CNET News.

Content from Reuters expires after 30 days.

[trashcansdflkhjsdf;lis]

not enough worth downloading

the "leaked" version is a workprint, meaning it could or could NOT be the final version of the movie.

[ledzep75]

Close Enough!

I've watched it! It shows a double take when Obi Won kills Grievous. Also, the aspect ratio (4:3 I think) is off (should be 16:9) where the characters look taller. The color quality is very good, but there is some blockage. The audio was perfect! It was worth the download. As others have stated 1.5GB is definitely not DVD quality. Yes, I am going to buy it when it come out on DVD.

Movie experiences cannot be replicated

While it is probably true the music industry has suffered from music piracy, the movie industry will probably not face a similar situation.

The precedent is that people listen to music in their cars, while riding the bus, taking the subway or in their rooms. Musical peroformances like this are in their original form. Movies, like Star Wars, are as much about the experience as it is for the actual viewing. 50 foot screens, THX certified theaters, digital light projectors, stadium seating and $10 bags on popcorn are what separate this ephemeral experience.

People "go to the movies". People don't "go to music..."

[mortis9]

the man has a point

you're paying for the experience in the theater. with music, you're purchasing a license to you can indulge at your leisure, in any surrounding. i don't think the movie industry will suffer like the music industry has. i don't know about you but if my ipod played movies, i still wouldn't watch them on a 2 inch screen in stereo.

[bob blob]

don't forget

don't forget dvd sales. the movie industry now gets a huge portion of their revenue and earnings from it; some movies make more from dvd sales than from movie tickets. and i believe this is where divx rips will hurt them the most.

and then there are people like me, who mostly shun theaters and just wait for the movie to come out on divx. i think most people will agree with me that there are VERY few films that are absolute must-see-in-theater. i only watch movies like LOTR in theater b/c i believe it's worth the $10+ i'm going to spend there. i don't want to spend that much money to watch any other movie that, from hollywood's reputation and track record, usually turns out to be crappy, disappointing, or at best, mediocre and leaves me feeling bored and numb when i leave the theater.

in addition, the earnings margin on dvd sales is huge. they're just like cds. but people are more willing to pay for them b/c dvds offer more content.

[sanenazok]

Web is full of audiophiles and 30k MP3's

The problem with the mass entertainment industries (games/movies/music) is that everyone and their mother has to buy their products. So even one lost sale is a problem.

The web is full of people who snub anything less than 200kbs music files. And yet you also see a ton of MP3's being traded online most of which are less than 64kbs. So a good number of people will rather watch a 320x200 320kbs version of a movie on a 17 CRT rather than paying to go to the cinemaplex.

So congratulations on your good tastes, but remember they're not exactly endorsed by everyone else, especially the downloaders of this stuff off of bitTorrent.

[jwmc1971]

i dont know about that ...OR maybe i do ...

65" lcd ..7.1 audio surround , dual reclining sofa with cupholders and vibrating seats .phillips dvp 642 ...hmmm , now compared to you show with all the kiddiez and trash and sqishy/package ripping sounds , zit faced ushers comanding authority as well as well as a playground hardend 3rd grader would , the movie critic influenced by repeat episodes of magiver ( the training BIBLE for all critics , with award winnings phraise's as such as " Man , He cant do that !! ..Even I could have done THAT ! This IS total B.S !! , man " , all 20 of them surrounding me like a collection of MOMC wookies with the light color variation ,the phalic nature of th Saber, being whipped back and forth in a frenzie so wildly that even fat people would stay away if they were doing it at a free buffee ,the moms/girlfriends .." whos that guy ??" " why does he talk like that ??" " can he really do that " " she's not that hot !" " look at all these nerds ...OH ..sorry honey , not you " , last but not least ..the hardcore fan , unwashed , unkept so much that he brings stinging tears to his surounders eyes , yelling loudly for you to " shut the hell up " , when you talk quietly about your 401K plan , yelling on about how " you need to convert!the signs are here !!I know , my midichlorian count is WAY up there , BUD!" nah ,i dont think ill miss it and popcorn sucks ;)

[Efrow]

how much money lost?

I'm interested in seeing how devastating this illegal distribution will be to the movie's profits.

[pcLoadLetter]

It will be close to zero

But the MPAA, whose members have more money then they ever could use, love to whine about how they are victims.

The real victims are the people suckered into paying $30+ for a night out at the movies for two.

The debate on Internet Piracy is misguided

Internet piracy has evolved since the days where an individual would place files on a single server, and allow anyone to download it.

Nowadays, piracy exists mainly in p2p communities, where one person provides the file, and members download from one another.
Distributed file sharing has changed piracy forever. Now, the person who uploads the most is not the initial pirate, but the main contributor to the community.

And therein lies the answer to controlling internet piracy.

p2p networks are self-regulated. Nobody in these communities wants to be giving a lot and recieving nothing in return. In some cases, it is regulated by the software (as in the fileDonkey network) in others by tracker admins (bittorrent networks) or by the users themselves (soulseek). BUT TRAFFIC IS REGULATED.

Why not use this?

The basic rule in any of these communities is that you have to give as much as you take. If you don't, you're a 'leech', and sooner or later, you get banned.
It makes it easier to identify active members of these communities. A normal internet user will have medium-to-high traffic comin into his computer, but low traffic going out. A file-sharer will have at the very least a balanced traffic, if not a traffic where the outgoing is higher than the incoming.

Under this assumption, it now becomes easy for ISPs to identify file sharers. But why should we prosecute them? Would it not be better to use the 'regulations' already in place by p2p networks to TAX them?

A normal movie, compressed in DivX format (the standard for video in p2p) is about 700Mb. If the ISP BILLS 1US$ for every 100Mb UPLOADED, you already have the price of the ticket... And since ISPs are all legal, registered companies, it would be easy for any country to implement laws by which:
(a) ISPs bill consumers for their upload amounts
(b) the amount collected from these 'taxes' can be transferred to an organization who will distribute it to movie studios, music producers or other concerned parties.

You can look at it this way: you are treating uploaders as if they were radio stations, and they have to pay for the right to play music or videos from their computers FOR OTHER VIEWERS/LISTENERS.

[Brian Grover]

A Good Idea.......But

You have to remember that not everyone who is uploading data is uploading movies and music. For example, my company uploads just about as much as we download. Now this isn't because we are sharing movies on the Internet, it is because we run a mail server inhouse and have outside sales connect to the corporate network through VPN.

So I guess for your idea to work, it would have to have exemptions such as data that is used by VPN/IPSec connections, VoIP connections, etc. But even then that wouldn't be the best because there are new applications being created constantly. And as a developer I would hate to have to register my application to be exempt from this "tax".

Another would be disputes. How can I prove that the data I uploaded was not copyrighted material. The ISP says that I uploaded 2 gigs worth of movies and music, but how can I prove that 1 gig of that was home videos (not copyrighted) that my mom and dad were downloading directly from me.

Your idea is great on paper, but I am not sure how it would work in the real world.

Thanks for listening

Bzzzt. Wrong. Next Contestent Please.

I upload and download files all day with material that is MINE, that I have produced, that have NOTHING to do with music, film or anything MPAA or RIAA related, and you want ME to start paying THEM for stuff THEY DON'T OWN?

[jmanjohns2]

No, that is not a good idea

Why should I pay my ISP more than the already exhorbitant access fees for their networks. Perhaps I send legal files to my friends, consider that? And if you think hackers couldn't get around your proposistion, you are very wrong.

[jmanjohns2]

They don't quite understand :-(

You know, I'm not saying piracy is right, but most of the people I know who would pirate a movie like that will buy it or see it later, same thing with music. Who wants to buy an album they've never heard, and no I don't have time to go to the music store, its just not that important to me. Surprisingly enough, if it hadn't been for mp3s, I would not listen to music at all, much less buy them. With every bad thing comes something good, its time the industry tries to work around the problem and make it profitable.

[bobb8888]

Not generally the case

I know there are definitely people that follow up stuff they download by buying the ones they like. I think that is pretty rare. I believe that once a person has the music, even thought the intent to follow up is there, they end up blowing it off. As you said "I don't have time to go down to the music store."
It's just a tricky subject. I have a DVR from the cable company. I tape certain shows every time because they are on at the wrong time for me to view. I used to use a VCR and tape everything under the sun.
I think this is the worst type of abuse. Most people that are able to see the movie without paying won't then pay to see the movie although they might by the DVD later on (better quality).
The only DVD's I buy are films that I will watch multiple times.

[hion2000]

There's more to it....

The real damage comes from people who get the movie (either a leaked version or downloaded off the internet) and then subsequently print labels, build boxes and make it look like the real thing, for which they can sell it.

Not only does it prevent hard earned revenue going back to George, these people gain some profit as well.

[mfernandez]

prueba

preuasdf asdf asdf asd f dsf asdf as dfas df sdf asf

info is a little off

i know some1 who has the time stamped version of the movie.. it was actually realeased about 1 -2 days before the inital theater viewing... I was telling people about it and no1 would believe me lol. Anyway just thought id correct you on that...

[jwmc1971]

hmmmm,

this is a great copy , a workprint by def is a copy that is or is close to 100% and "us" folks couldnt tell the diff. watching the movie 4 times today , i'd say in comparison to the theature release , this is 100% , but what do i know ? anyway , this things great ..1.5 gig dvd iso..out of 10 id give it a 8.5 for quality .AND i think the reason bit torrent is check so much for usage is because you can . you dont see the usage of the 100+ millions of peeps using good ol' newsgroups , where a dvd9 only takes a little over an hour depending on your speed .so , for " us" , an hour for a movie .vs sitting behind your wife ******** you out and talking on her phone as your kidz drone on and on ...its totally worth it ;)

[lavacentral]

They still made record ammount of money

This should be a lesson to the MPAA. The movie was released on the internet as soon as it was released in the theatre. And it was a darn good copy too, not some crappy cam version. And yet, they still managed to break all records?????

MPAA, what does that tell you????????? People would stil go to the theatre regardless of the movie being released on Bittorrent.

The people who downloaded are either people who will go see the movie in the Theatre anyway (for the experience) or they will not watch star wars at all. There are people (believe it or not) that will not watch star wars.
There have been movies that I would never watch in theatre or video or even on TV.

MPAA, stop making yourself look like an A$$ by going after file traders. Stop going after little kids and after granies (like the RIAA did). Start working on some system that can provide a legal alternative to downloading. Like Itunes for 99 cents.

I wouldnt mind paying 1.99 for a good file 700mb Divx version of say.. any old movie that and 3-4 bucks for a new release.

Mind you there are services now that offer self destructable copies of the files for around 3 or 4 bucks but I dont want to pay $3.99 for a copy for just 24 hours. As long as the trade is not fair, I/people will look for alternatives/free copies.

[MythicalMe]

This idea is whacked

I can upload almost as much as I download simply by connecting to my own website and adding perfectly legal content. So why should I pay your tax?

Incidentally, I am also a bittorrent user. I can set my upload to download ratio so that my upload stats look ok and still not be considered a "leech" by the "community".

[montgomeryburns]

Fire Molly Wood

Fire Molly Wood