Downloading Instructional Torrents

[BJJ in Chicago]

great questions.

I'll be happy to answer honestly, but first let me ask you a couple of questions (not as an argument, just to get an idea of what the perception is on the subject). These questions are open to everyone:

1) How much is a fair amount someone should make for putting out a good DVD? Let's assume that the instructor gives you an hour and a half to two hours worth of valuable material, communicates it well, and organizes it so that it can be learned easily. Let's factor in his costs (whatever you perceive them to be) as a part of the risk he takes, as well as the time it takes to film and either edit or oversee the editing, plus the fact that it is knowledge he gained from years of study and hard work. Let's limit it to only the first year the DVD is on sale, how much should he make from it?

when i think about my coaches (miguel torres and andre leite), i'd consider how much they charge for private lessons. I feel they should make as much off of each dvd sale as they make off of a private, or maybe half as much. My original intention in asking was to see if it was actually a viable source of income or if a reasonable amount was made to support our sport's leaders.

2) What costs do you think are associated with making a quality DVD?

probably a lot as far as just monetary costs (production, stocking, distribution, etc.), but even moreso with the cost of time to make it. time spent brainstorming what will be on it, how to best explain it. especially if we consider how much could be made in that time period giving private lessons or something similar.
3) Do you feel that martial arts should be taught for free?

absolutely not. i feel that it's just like any other art. people should be paid what they are worth.

4) What is the dollar value, to you, of a technique or concept that causes a noticeable improvement in your game?

honestly, i'm not even sure how to approach this. i've been in classes that i've learned more in than seminars so the cost/benefit ratio is much higher for that class. but then again, i've been to a felipe costa seminar that totally revolutionized my game and i credit 99% of my half-guard success to that seminar and my subsequent work on the subject.

Thanks!

like i said, i'm just curious. and i am very sure that it varies a TON person to person. i'm sure you make different money from marcelo garcia from ryan hall from abmar barbosa, etc.

 

[Dubious Dom]

Please define "virtually nothing."

Are you talking about the simple mass duplication of DVDs from a master? Depending on how many you produce and the quality of the packaging and DVD, the price ranges from $1.25-$3 each.

But that is hardly the cost of "making" a DVD.

I was just trying to say that the profit greatly outweighs the cost. Surely you can agree with this.

It would have to, unless Ryan Hall and friends jacked the price up to be mean, and not partially to compensate for the piracy they foresaw. That's only my opinion, by the way.

 

[bagelgod]

They only care they you'd SHARE it allowing others to get it without paying for it.

Then why the hell do you keep bringing up people learning stuff without paying?

That's why they want to make piracy illegal.

*facepalm*

No I did read your first post and it's ludicrous. Oh I see, you're not just pirating, you're also an asshole. You want to withhold knowledge from your training partners, I see Not only is this not a provable metric, but it has nothing to do with whether or not you're taking money money from the DVD makers. I'm not making an analogy, little mister, I'm trying to explain to you why piracy may hurt the original instructor making the DVDs that's all. If you paid for it the DVD then shared the information it STILL may hurt sales because of the nature of the product, I'm not denying that. Just like if I BOUGHT a cd, then endcoded and shared it.

This is really hard to read and doesn't make much sense. I don't think you get humor. My original post was a joke, sarcasm, or in jest. Many people saw that, and made comments about how it was comical. Way to miss the forest for one tree that has a woopee cushion under it.

No What I'm saying is that they MAY have bought the DVD but now don't have to because you've shared it for free. I've explained using game theory, specifically, Prisoner's dilemma why you're not necessarily improving the the community.

I'm still making a joke there. Since you're unable to detect unseriousness, henceforth, any references to bettering the grappling community are jokes.

What if more people bought the DVDs instead of pirating it and he made more money and made an even BETTER site. It's nothing I can prove but also you can't prove your original point. Thats what I was getting at.

I can't prove my point but you can't prove your point. Whoopee. I can tell we've really made progress. (This was also a joke [not this specific statement, that countering my ridiculous, sarcasm filled hypothetical with another possible explanation or outcome is a waste of time and gets us no where {Which it really does, why do you keep trying to come up with alternative hypotheticals to the MGinaction? Does your hypothetical somehow refute mine?} but that my original statement, that pirating helped make MGinaction, was and continues to be, forevermore, a joke])

You don't need to discuss copyright law, I'm not disputing that. In fact I probably understand it better than you do.

What law school did you attend? Did you take copyright law? Have you interned in an IP firm? I'll bet you haven't (hint:I have)

Besides you don't need to understand the specifics of the law to understand the application of the law.

*facepalm*

 

[SmashGyms]

Plain and simple.

 

[andrehbjj]

Thanks, Team Dragonfire! I really appreciate the response.

The margin for an individual DVD, if you compare the cost of duplicating it ($2-$5) compared the price it sells at ($20-$50) is pretty high. But as Cage Films points out, the physical DVD itself isnt expensive for the producer, but you have to not only take into consideration the costs in terms of time (I spent more than 80 hours preparing my two hour video), plus the cost of equipment (lighting, camera, editing), plus design (packaging), and camera person, and a bunch of other small costs that add up to a couple of thousand dollars minimum (actually that's if you exclude the time and just count the monetary cost.

I'm not sure how many DVDs someone like Saulo or Marcelo sells, but the number I sold is much, much smaller than you'd expect, even when you factor in the fact that I'm not a big name competitor by any stretch. I was told by someone who does this for a living that my DVD actually sells very well compared to most others but if I told you how small that number is you would laugh and call me a liar.

In terms of actual profit, I haven't made a penny on the DVD. That isn't necessarily the fault of the people who pirate. There are a lot of reasons, and some of them are solely my fault (wasting some money by not being more efficient in post-production, not promoting it enough, not updating the website, etc), but even in perfect conditions the absolute limit that your average instructor can make putting our a well-reviewed DVD is probably no more than $5000 over the lifetime of the single DVD. That is best case scenario, unless you're a big name like Maia, Saulo, or any other household name in BJJ.

I'm not complaining about my DVD in particular. In fact, I'm overjoyed by the sales and more importantly by the fact that people liked it. That meant a lot to me, and I cant even begrudge the people who downloaded it because Im flattered that they even took the time to do so. But you can bet that it does sting a bit to see people treat something you worked hard on as valueless.

 

[NateTx4112]

if it's not illegal why do people get sued for it when downloading music? I just don't see how you can say it is legal when people have been sued/paid fines etc.

 

[Jinzumkei]

So you're saying it's fine if I make copies so long as I keep them to myself and don't share them with anyone else? That's great. I'm going to go download and watch whatever I want, but turn off seeding. That way I'm making copies but not sharing. This is good, right?

It's neither good nor bad to me. To the distributor even this would be fine, but they'd have a problem with with whoever shared it in the first place. Think of the first napster lawsuits, they only went after the big sharers first, not the downloaders.

Yet you have no clue what piracy is.

Except I do know what it is, and beyond that I understand the application of the laws pertaining to it. It seems like you're the one who doesnt understand it except for what you've read about the origins on copyright law.

So it's fine with you if I illegally download something, and watch it, provided I don't share it with someone else?

Your point is pointless. I can buy a DVD and loan it to a friend. I can trade it to a friend. I can play it in my academy's DVD player. Everyone, exception me, is getting usage without paying. Are you against this?

Also, I thought the "problem" was distrubition?

You keep trying to paint me as someone who is "for" or "against" something. I'm not "for" or "against" piracy. I'm just trying to explain the economics and market theories around the issues of piracy. Why piracy hurts the DVD makers and why it hurts the publishers who yes are distributors.

I hate when people try to boil it down to right or wrong, it's far more complex than that. Is this point really that hard to understand?

No, the problem is you think you know what you're talking about and you think you're right, which is the worst combination in the world.

No I actually do know what I'm talking about, that's your problem. I've already refuted your same pedestrian arguments multiple times. The fact that you can't refute my more academic points is the problem. You consistent HARP on whether something is right or wrong. My argument isnt about right or wrong, it's what i explained above: Piracy hurts the original authors as well as the distributors. To which you're only reply is "I wouldn't have bought it anyway" and I've commented on that.

...except for the fact that the entire notion of piracy (as we use it today, obviously not cannons and high seas action) was created by, defined with, and based upon copyright law.

Look friend, I'm going to boil down piracy to its most basic elements. I'm done arguing with you if you can't understand this.

Copyrighted material is an expression of an idea (BJJ moves) fixed in a tangible medium (in this case, DVD's).

Rights held by the owners of the copyrighted information include but are not limited to making a copy or creating a derivative work of copyrighted material.

Copyright infringement is performing a right held by the copyright owner without a license.

The popular term "piracy" (used in the 1600's) is merely a descriptor of the act of illegally making copies or selling these illegal copies.

"Torrenting", or downloading, is when your computer copies a file from another computer. The file remains on the original computer, but now has a copy on your computer. It's a two way street. The uploader is making a copy of his file on your computer, and the downloader is making a copy of the uploader's file on his computer.

Let's review: By downloading/uploading copyrighted files (which is copying these files) without a license, I am infringing a copyright (the right to reproduce/make derivative works). Not "stealing"/theft/whatever. Copyright infringement.

You see now that it doesn't matter what you "think" piracy is. This is what piracy is. It's defined. If you are complaining about something else, like whatever it is you're on about with learning knowledge without paying, then don't use the word piracy.

If you cannot comprehend what I'm talking about, then I am done with you, as this conversation is above your level of thought.

Ok you keep missing the point and keep trying to explain the difference between "theft" and copyright infringment. I already understand this. maybe others don't but I do. I don't care that you infringing a copy right or if you outright stole it. MY point is that it hurts economically. Please address that.

I assumed you understood that when we mentioned piracy in this thread we we talking about digital piracy, which also falls under the copyright infringement body of law. And under the DMCA what you're doing constitutes as piracy.

 

[akdms]

I'll be happy to answer honestly, but first let me ask you a couple of questions (not as an argument, just to get an idea of what the perception is on the subject). These questions are open to everyone:

1) How much is a fair amount someone should make for putting out a good DVD? Let's assume that the instructor gives you an hour and a half to two hours worth of valuable material, communicates it well, and organizes it so that it can be learned easily. Let's factor in his costs (whatever you perceive them to be) as a part of the risk he takes, as well as the time it takes to film and either edit or oversee the editing, plus the fact that it is knowledge he gained from years of study and hard work. Let's limit it to only the first year the DVD is on sale, how much should he make from it?

2) What costs do you think are associated with making a quality DVD?

3) Do you feel that martial arts should be taught for free?

4) What is the dollar value, to you, of a technique or concept that causes a noticeable improvement in your game?

Thanks!

In response to 1 & 2, here's my "guess". Let's take Ryan Hall as an example.

My opinion is that he should be paid about double his hourly private rate (last I heard it was like $150 an hour). The reason I came up with this is because:

a) Privates are very convenient because he can do them from the comfort of his own gym.

b) He probably pulls around $3k for a 2-3 hour seminar. If we assume, say, 8 hours of travel, he makes around $300 an hour off a seminar.

c) Privates don't require any risk.

d) Privates are usually done for his paying students.

e) Privates are probably vastly more enjoyable and less stressful than producing a DVD.

My guess is to produce a DVD probably requires 20 hours worth of work (planning, travel, shooting, reshooting, editing, administrative work, etc.) per hour of actual DVD. His new DVDs, I believe, around 5 hours each set. So that amounts to around 100 hours worth of effort on Ryan's part. Thus, he should be paid around $30,000 in his first year for each set. Sounds pretty reasonable to me for someone of his caliber, and is about what he would pull in from doing seminars.

Lets assume another $2-3k for production costs, and maybe another couple grand to Seth for his work. He now needs to pull in $35,000. Lets also assume that WMA gets $10 per DVD to cover their costs (making the DVDs, maintaining the site, paying wages, insurance costs, marketing, taxes, etc.) and turn a profit.

Now the question is, how many DVDs does Ryan sell? Obviously, that will vary based on the price, but let's say, I dunno, 1,000 DVDs? So, doing the math he needs $35 per DVD to cover the initial costs, plus another $10 to cover WMA, or $45 per DVD set.

If, because of pirating, he only sells 500 DVDs, he would now need $75 to cover the costs, plus $10 to WMA, or $85 to cover the costs. If he was to still sell at $45 per set, he would only make $17,500 (before taxes), which is what he could pull from only half a dozen seminars.


To answer the 3rd question: No, it shouldn't be. I know my own instructor has said he has spent over $100,000 in his lifetime on martial arts. I'm sure Ryan Hall has spent WAY more than that. To put that in perspective, that's as much as an MBA from a top university (which would allow you to sell your services as a consultant for, say, $300 an hour).


To answer #4... That's tricky. I'd say that it's worth about the same as an hour private with my own instructor ($80 an hour). Even though I wouldn't get a ton of new stuff during the private, which I would from the instructional, a private would refine my existing skill set (I've taken several privates -- I'd say each hour I progressed roughly as much in a specific area as I would in a month of regular training).

BUT.... There's a lot of crap DVDs out there, and there's a lot of sets out there where I only have interest in one or two DVDs out of a 5 disk set. For that reason, I can understand why people would pirate (not that it's good justification).

Also, for that reason I wish more instructors would use the Cagefilm model. That is, allow people to buy and download specific topics, or the rent out the entire set. I plan on buying several of Neil Adams's videos, but I wouldn't buy them in a set because I'm not interested in several of his topics. Plus it gives the instructor immediate feedback into what topics people are most interested in.



Not ask a stupid question... But who is andrehbjj?

 

[fiftysvn]

AndrehBJJ is Andreh Anderson, a black belt under Rey Diogo, from California.

He recently came out with a DVD which is very good imo and great value for the price. You can find a thread on that Sweeps DVD on Sherdog.

Link to the DVD:

Budovideos.com - SWEEEP: Closed Guard Concepts DVD with Andre Anderson

Tim's site, Cagefilms, is awesome. I have bought 4 Braulio vids from him and have received 2 free ones. My only complaint with his videos (and I hope he sees this) is that you can hear the person recording (not sure if it's him) breathing very hard on some videos and I found that VERY distracting. Please Tim if you see this, I hope that problem has been addressed already!

 

[lechien]

.



BUT.... There's a lot of crap DVDs out there, and there's a lot of sets out there where I only have interest in one or two DVDs out of a 5 disk set. For that reason, I can understand why people would pirate (not that it's good justification).

Dude, after all the BS from Yeabee and the greenblender, that just another lame justification as well.

People pirate stuff because they do not want to spend money.

 

[thegreenblender]

Dude, after all the BS from Yeabee and the greenblender, that just another lame justification as well.

People pirate stuff because they do not want to spend money.

Good to see this thread is still going, and people still don't understand the fundamental difference between "do not" and "can not".

 

[lechien]

Good to see this thread is still going, and people still don't understand the fundamental difference between "do not" and "can not".

Dude, just keep training in your garage and download your illegal stuff.

 

[thegreenblender]

Dude, just keep training in your garage and download your illegal stuff.

I will (and it's a basement, thank you very much). I'll also keep posting my opinion.

 

[andrehbjj]

fiftysvn, thank you so much for the kind words and the plug!

akdms, the market for instructional videos is so shockingly small that it almost makes any discussion of it seem pointless...and yet I cant help myself from talking about it. lol

There was a time when someone like Ryan could have made $30,000 from a single production (usually a set, not a single DVD), but I think those days are long gone. Again, I dont have anything near his name recognition (rightfully so), so I cant really use my own sales as an example, but I think any video producer/instructor out there would be overjoyed to sell 1000 units of a title in one year.

I think people look at Avatar or other Hollywood movies and feel that their download is not even a drop in the bucket compared to the money the movie they're downloading generates, and then perhaps they apply that same way of thinking to instructional videos, but the two are vastly different in many, many ways but particularly because each unit sold is a much larger percentage of the total potential sales amount that it simply impacts the producer of instructionals much more when people choose to download.

 

[rnaviaux]

Don't force your morals on fine.

Got to be the quote of the year.

Morals are forced upon people all the time. They are rules arising out of lessons learned from experiences where it was shown that certain actions, or inactions, caused more harm than they helped. These lessons become rules that are enforced on the members of the group to help ensure the survival of the members of that group as well as the group itself.

You gotta love the rationalization that "they" overcharge. Tim has come on here laying out his financial considerations in producing instructionals. I noticed a deathly silence in response to this.

 

[andrehbjj]

Good to see this thread is still going, and people still don't understand the fundamental difference between "do not" and "can not".

Greenblender, if you havent ordered (or downloaded) my video and are interested in seeing it, please send me an IM. I understand the difference between wanting to buy something and simply being truly unable to afford it, and someone who can (even if it requires some penny-pinching) pay for it but simply doesnt want to. I'm sympathetic to the former, but not so much to the latter.

I have been given plenty of free stuff over the years, so I am happy to do so for someone else if they need it.

 

[MUFC]

Greenblender, if you havent ordered (or downloaded) my video and are interested in seeing it, please send me an IM. I understand the difference between wanting to buy something and simply being truly unable to afford it, and someone who can (even if it requires some penny-pinching) pay for it but simply doesnt want to. I'm sympathetic to the former, but not so much to the latter.

I have been given plenty of free stuff over the years, so I am happy to do so for someone else if they need it.

This is why I bought your DVD and will continue to buy any instructional videos you put out.

 

[Jinzumkei]

Then why the hell do you keep bringing up people learning stuff without paying?

*facepalm*

Because in this case the "learning" is the consumption.

This is really hard to read and doesn't make much sense. I don't think you get humor. My original post was a joke, sarcasm, or in jest. Many people saw that, and made comments about how it was comical. Way to miss the forest for one tree that has a woopee cushion under it.

I'm still making a joke there. Since you're unable to detect unseriousness, henceforth, any references to bettering the grappling community are jokes.

Uhm I completely understand, obviously you missed my original reply to your post which was also sarcastic and you also missed the smiley in my previous post. So before you accuse others of missing something maybe you need to go back a read again.

I can't prove my point but you can't prove your point. Whoopee. I can tell we've really made progress. (This was also a joke [not this specific statement, that countering my ridiculous, sarcasm filled hypothetical with another possible explanation or outcome is a waste of time and gets us no where {Which it really does, why do you keep trying to come up with alternative hypotheticals to the MGinaction? Does your hypothetical somehow refute mine?} but that my original statement, that pirating helped make MGinaction, was and continues to be, forevermore, a joke])

Sure, you can call it a joke or whatever, which is why I replied to it in a hypothetical manner instead of trying to argue it in an academic manner. I understand the point about MGinaction didnt really apply to the original argument, I was only replying to something you originally stated.

What law school did you attend? Did you take copyright law? Have you interned in an IP firm? I'll bet you haven't (hint:I have)

Big deal, you got coffee and summarized legal briefs for some one who understands the application of the law (firm name?). I don't claim to be an expert, I just claimed that I have knowledge of the subject which probably surpasses yours, since you're obviously not an expert. And since we're throwing around anecdotal evidence about who has a better understanding. No I didn't go to law school or intern at a law firm. I minored in business law, with a focus on IP law. My best friend is an IP lawyer and worked for Birch, Stewart, Kolasch & Birch, LLP and we've had many discussions about digital piracy. I'm a software architect and I've had to defend and IP of my company under those laws.

*facepalm*

Wow how articulate. What's so hard to understand about this. For example how many people know the details of US - Title 18, Chapter 31 - Section 668 Theft of major artwork?. But they know, just by the title people can figure out that if you steal an artifact you can be prosecuted under this law, and thus understand the application of the law.

DISCLAIMER: I don't think that this law applies here or in any piracy case, I was just using what I believe is a relatively known, and simple law to prove my point.

 

[andrehbjj]

Thank you so much, MUFC. I really appreciate that.

 

[bagelgod]

Jinzumkei, I think you've confused me with YeahBee or thatgreenblender. I re-read your posts in this thread, and some of the things you reference (or arguments I'm supposed to have made) were made by them rather than me.

MY point is that it hurts economically. Please address that.

Anybody with eyeballs will tell you that if even 1 person downloaded it instead of buying it, it hurts economically. I don't think I've said it didn't?

Your game theory response is fine and all, but I must once again re-emphasize that my original post was a joke. I don't REALLY think I'm benefiting any greater good (in terms of the grappling community; I have my own ideals). That was a joke. Leave it be.

I assumed you understood that when we mentioned piracy in this thread we we talking about digital piracy, which also falls under the copyright infringement body of law. And under the DMCA what you're doing constitutes as piracy.

Did I write somewhere in here I was talking about paper print piracy? WTF does this have to do with anything? Yes, I know what constitutes piracy. I've been saying this whole time, while people use words like theft and steal, that it's infringement A.K.A. piracy.

I want to show you something. Something I've noticed is that you aren't ever actually talking about the issue of piracy, only about "consumption".

Well to be fair, it's not that they care that you "possess" a copy, they only care that you "consume" it without paying for it.

it's that you are consuming it without paying for it.

It has nothing to do with whether or not you WOULD have bought the DVD, it's the fact that you may SHARE it and allow other people to CONSUME without paying for it.

Yes I agree you're probably not hurting anyone because you never had the intent of buying it in the first place, so you're not robbing them of any money. BUT how does the publisher know that?

You may or may not have taken money from him you can't be sure because you have already consumed the knowledge on the DVDs.

Not about piracy.

You can consume without paying outside of piracy.

As far as I can tell, this thread is about whether or not piracy is good/bad; I'll agree with you that it is a worthless thing to talk about.

However, you keep going back to this issue of consumption. Whenever anyone says "I wouldn't have bought it anyway", you say "Yea, but you could share that information with others who might have bought it and then they won't buy it!"

This is a really, really weak argument.

Whether or not you mean to, you argue that piracy is unwanted because it leads to consumption without paying by people other than the pirates themselves.

The problem is, there are plenty of legal ways this happens without piracy. I don't see publishers/instructors going on crusades against people showing other people in the gym what they learned from their legally obtained copies, but it still has the same net effect, people who would have purchased the material no longer will.

At least according to your argument. I mean, I'm not sure who's going to want to hear my second hand account of Cyborg's tornado guard rather than hear him explain it. Personally I think you're really stretching with this one.

Piracy is about USAGE not about stealing. You are CONSUMING something you didn't pay for.

This is wrong. Wrong as day. Piracy is about copying, not consumption or whatever the heck "usage" is.

That's what the laws are trying to protect against. You say that you don't rob the artists because you'd never buy it anyway, but I'm sure you've shared what you know with your training buddies who MAY have bought the DVDs, so you may have in fact "robbed" the instructor.

Dude, this is ridiculous. Come on. NO law is trying to protect anyone from you showing moves you learned to your friends. I mean, I know you claim to have a great grasp of the law and all, but jeez.

Some of those people may have bought the DVDs but now no longer need to. That's really what piracy is about: distribution.

Not what piracy is about.

I want to recap, to catch up on what's gone on here.
Someone who wasn't me: Piracy doesn't hurt anybody at all, whatsover

You and I: It hurts, because the people that might have bought it, but downloaded instead, no longer will (even if it's one sale)

Pirate: I wouldn't have bought it anyway, so my personal piracy is ok

You: No, your personal piracy is unnacceptable because you could possibly share that information with someone else, and then they might not buy it

Me: This could happen with anyone, outside of pirates, and is socially acceptable (usually encouraged)