Film piracy has a very little impact on box office results in the U.S. but likely cuts into studio profits overseas depending on the time lag between a film’s American debut and rollout overseas. Those are the surprising conclusions of an extensive study titled “Reel Piracy: The Effect of Online Film Piracy on International Box Office Sales,” spearheaded by Brett Danaher of Wellesley College and Joel Waldfogel at the University of Minnesota and the National Bureau of Economic Research.
While researchers in the study acknowledge an increase in piracy — especially for genres such as science fiction and action films — U.S. audiences still prefer the theatrical experience. The study found that Americans are heading to theaters in about the same numbers they would have otherwise in the absence of piracy, suggesting that perhaps people opt to see a film in a theater despite an initial pass online, or word of mouth from a pirated copy of a film may push others to the multiplex.
The study also concludes that since the advent of piracy software BitTorrent in 2003, the longer the lag time between a film’s release abroad compared to its U.S. opening, the greater the depression in box office receipts. Generally, the study found international returns were 7% lower in the sample set than they would have been had piracy not existed. Hollywood films normally bow in the U.S. before heading abroad, with opening dates varying by country; countries like Denmark, Finland, Italy, Poland, and Turkey generally have longer lag times than the UK, Switzerland and Australia.
Researchers found that in 2003-2004 a movie released overseas eight weeks after its U.S. premiere had lower returns by about 22% in a given country. That figure shot up to nearly 40% in 2005-2006 as each additional week of lag time decreased returns for science fiction and action titles by an extra 1.3% compared with other genres.
For more estimates listed by title, see box office results here...


In a related story: Making Shitty Movies has a Negative Effect on U.S. Box Office.
LOL
Yeah, that’s what Michael Bay told me.
When a film hits theaters there are only shoddy camera quality versions on the net, so if people want to see a particular film most will pay to see it on the big screen (though some will watch crappy quality versions regardless).
Piracy has a real impact on DVD/Blu-ray sales. When a DVD version of a film hits the net (sometimes 3 weeks before it is supposed to be released) it spreads like wildfire and people are less inclined to buy the DVD/Blu-ray if they can watch a good quality version for free online. That’s why studios have to embrace online streaming/downloads and stop playing around with delayed rentals. Studios can’t compete with free, so they have to make their content more accessible to those who want it.
Piracy is a service problem.
That is true.
However, when most of the DVDs and Blurays are manufactured in Mexico or other countries, what would you expect. If the DVDs and blurays were manufactured in any given US state, Translation, SOPA, PIPA, ACTA, and anything else that is designed to censor our rights, should not even be introduced in congress. Instead, we need laws that keep manufacturing in the United States. This law would affect only things that can be made here, meaning that we should have a huge tariff for anything that is imported except for some oil, bananas, rice, and other things that we can’t produce on our own.
Take an econ class.
First of all.. LMAO @Burkiss, secondly, do they really attribute cost of prints as the biggest contributing factor to holding back a release in a foreign country? Seriously? This is why economics professors shouldn’t try to study this industry.
@ Jen – maybe that’s exactly why research conducted by economics professors is beneficial to the industry. The messaging and common knowledge passed among the community is way too insulated and doesn’t reflect the needs or considerations of the audience.
I hope that the studios will listen, stop their stupid ACTA plan and begin to release movies at the same time world wide.
Joe and Fuzhi, the problem is that, in many cases, the additional costs of worldwide simultaneous release far exceeds the potential loss from piracy. The international distribution model, and the different release windows (rentals, pay per view, DVDs, etc) are complex and not easy to change overnight, without affecting tens of thousands of jobs worldwide. As much as piracy covers a gap in the market, the studios are not dragging their feet because of lack of vision (they’ve been talking about changing the model of distribution for many years before piracy became such a widespread problem in the film industry), but because it is such a complex business model to change.
The additional cost for simultaneous release are much less because of digital cinimas than it used to be. Also you have to calculate how much the studios can save in advertising by having a movie open everywhere at the same time. I live in Denmark and at least 60% of the movie adds and reviews I see are from the U.S. When I see advertisting for a movie I wanna see I often discover it wont be out in Denmark for another 6 months. When the movie is finally released I have often forgotten everything about it or already imported it on Blu-ray. And plenty of people who aint as patient as me will already have pirated it.
This study shows what everyone has pretty much already known AGAIN. Will the studios listen and abandon their dinosaur ways with regards to windows? There is little to no reason to stagger releases worldwide anymore. You’ll really take a bite out of piracy with simultaneous legit worldwide availability. Though I don’t know why I’m wasting my breath as I’m sure the studios reaction to this will just be…”It’s not true!!! Everybody is stealing from us! We’re losing millions every day! You must go after the infringers! We can’t do it ourselves! You must do it for us! And if you have to shut down the internet, then DO IT!”
Haha, thanks for the laugh.
This reminds me of the Harvard study that cost millions and came back with the result that men and women are different.
And the study that thoroughly investigated why prisoners try to escape prison. The conclusion: they didn’t like being there.
What about the influence on DVD sales and pay downloads?
I know this isn’t a new idea, but I think theaters should really consider selling tickets the same way they do for a stage play. When you buy a ticket, you pick a seat. Better seats cost more, worse seats cost less. I live in NYC, and I can’t help but think if people could go to the movies for less than $14, more people might go. I, for one, would pay for good seats and mosey into the theater just in time for previews, rather than having to show up 45 min before showtime even though I bought tickets hours before. Just a thought.
We have a few theaters like that here in Vancouver. They’re called AVX theaters. They have extra-comfy seats, a deluxe sound system and reserved seating. All seats in these theaters cost $2 or $3 more per seat, I can’t remember which.
And yes, you have anticipated the best thing about them: You can skip all the commercials and then just stroll in and still get a good seat.
As a foreigner I have to say finally someone is showing some sense. Yes the researchers are right, and not just about the movies. It applies to TV too.
And if you delay either, movies or TV series, you will slow down the media effect too. No one will read about the stars or the movies if they don’t know them. And Hollywood today does not exist without the media.
I don’t think it’s as much about the immediate negative effects of piracy but an overall culture that could eventually adopt a more widespread attitude of entitlement and outrage at actually having to pay for entertainment. This notion that everyone in the business is rich and therefore doesn’t deserve to be paid seems to be a sentiment that grows each year. The studios perpetuate that myth whenever it’s time to negotiate with the unions. Therefore, the studios, by so blatantly disrespecting and robbing creatives themselves, can’t really take the high road on this issue.
It’s almost like making good movies and not keeping them from people makes the audience *gasp!* want to pay for the experience of viewing them in an actual theatre!
It may be worth noting that Joel Waldfogel (one of the co-authors of the study) has remarked on the site Digitopoly.org that:
“…we have been surprised at blog posts saying that researchers find that piracy doesn’t depress movie sales. We think our marquee result is the opposite: we do find evidence that piracy depresses international sales. ”
This is the sort of complicated matter that doesn’t lend itself to any particular instant and over-reaching judgement.
It seems like this study happens every other year, and always comes back with the same answer: “Online piracy has negligible influence.” But Hollywood moguls keep up with the crazy talk: “THEY’RE SENDING US TO THE POOR HOUSE!” cry, cry, cry, “SHUT DOWN THE INTERNETZ!!”
The limited real piracy problem has nothing to do with the internet. It is physical discs sold on street corners by big volume operators.
Not surprising at all. We all know the only way ANYONE is going to watch Gili is if it is free.
that’s, Gigli – #2003referencesforthewin
Ghostrider 2 is reason enough to download. Hollywood owes me 3 films for making me pay 20 for a 3d film, and wasting my evening.
“In short, we do not see much evidence that piracy displaces US box office sales in our data, although this result should be taken cautiously as the “experiment” for examining US piracy is less clean than that for international piracy”
This is a massive understatement: their methodology for US piracy is so bad that it never should have been included. They assume that if piracy is prevalent in the United States, the revenue curve for films will steepen after BitTorrents. Here’s the massive, glaring problem: if potential viewers don’t go to the opening weekend of a film because they expect that they will pirate it in future weeks, this lost revenue not only gets ignored by their model, but it actually attenuates any effect that might exist.
I can’t think of a way to accurately estimate this effect, but my response is to not estimate it. As tempting as it is to produce an estimate that everyone is interested in, it detracts from researchers’ legitimate results to include total BS.
Having HOLLYWOOD cry foul about piracy, is like the Mafia saying they didn’t like Marlon Brando’s performance in The Godfather!
The big media owners are the reel, real pirates -and always have been. How many times have the studios been sued over residual payments and profit participation? How many times have writers and producers sued over the studios stealing their ideas? How many times have studios through their creative bookeeping practices, cheated shareholders and the IRS?
And how many times has big media acted as a propaganda machine for the banksters. How many times have they sold the lies, the treason and all the wars? Just look at Rupert Murdoch -now theres a pirate!
Yeah, most of us already knew this.
They based the industry crippling strikes on “piracy” “new media taking over” notion. Again, another one of their “theories” goes up in smoke.
The next one going down is the whole “make every film heavily political and audiences will still buy it,” aspect with the horrible DVD numbers. Change does finally come in Hollywood. It just takes so long to counter the BS.
“Piracy software Bittorrent”? Really?
Bittorrent is merely the first truly efficient way to transmit data many-to-many, the first protocol to properly increase speed for everyone as more people get involved. The traditional model of downloading a file from a single location does the opposite, the more who use that service the slower it is for everybody – which is why Bittorrent technology is found in many applications, including transmitting patches to World of Warcraft players. It’s simply leaps and bounds more efficient than anything else.
Calling it “piracy software” is massively inaccurate. It is very useful for people who want to transfer data effectively to many people – the fact that a large number of them happen to be transmitting material that isn’t ok to transmit according to copyright law doesn’t make it “piracy software”.
I agree with the report. Harry Potter made over a billion dollars and Dark Knight. It just shows that if people like your movie, they will watch. Even ridiculous movies like twilight makes up to 700million dollars. So unless your film is a mess and you don’t have fans before your a total fail. They also have to do something about the international release. Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol has not been released in my country yet and I see pirated copies everywhere. Very tempting. I would have watched it already if not I like watching only clear copies of action movies.
When I go to the movies I never go alone, always taking someone with me so that per ticket, $8.50 each and with popcorn $5.50, soda $3.75 my average cost minimum is $30.00′s. I used megavideo to preview new movies in order to decide on which one I would go to beforehand. I never watched an entire new movie only the first ten minutes and if it grabbed me I went. I ended up going to more movies than I normally would because I was able to avoid losing money on terrible Hollywood crap, which unlike any other service in America, you cannot get your money back after seeing it. Hollywood sucks.
Don’t call it “piracy software BitTorrent”. BitTorrent has many legitimate uses in a number of industries.
Interesting report.
Actual industry stats report a $3.5 billion dollar loss on old and new product (domestic and foreign) per year.
This loss is recouped by “special” charges worked into:
Higher boxoffice prices
Higher prices for cable and satellite services
Pre-recorded (DVD and CD) and blank recording media
Electronic equipment (recorders, computers and phoneware)
Yes, there is an inflation factor that enters into all of the above. However, the higher costs also contain recovery of monies due to piracy in the forms of illegal duplication of product, illegal exhibition of product and illegal distribution of product (whether for profit or free).
If individuals who conducted these unethical activities would cease, your high admission to a film, which is heading to the $15 to $17 dollar range, would stabilize at a lower price and increase only by the abnormal flow of inflation.
Psychologically, after having communicated with many a former pirate, the reason for their activity was not so much the money, but being the first to have a product on or before its release in theatre or home media. So this indicated a condition of having power and a need for admiration. Both of these mental perspectives indicated a shallow individual that was emotionally deprived in their formative years. Of course, this is another issue that can be debated among the so-called “professionals.”