Lonergan and Duco are getting the cold shoulder – sort of

More than 100,000 people are thought to have viewed the fight via Facebook and other internet back doors.

Duco director Dean Lonergan was furious.

He vowed to hunt down those who had illegally downloaded the fight and punish them by whatever means he could, promising to take them to court and pursue thousands of dollars in damages.

He called those who had watched the fight via the internet “lowlifes” and said anyone who refused to pay for the fight legitimately was, in effect, taking food out of the mouths of Parker and his family.

He said illegal downloads take money out of Duco’s revenue stream and the more money the company has, the more money it has to pay the young Kiwi boxer.

Well, no. Not really.

Parker’s prize money was set months ago, so unless he had a profit share included in his contract, it’s unlikely he lost out because of illegal downloading.

And many of those who did watch via the internet wouldn’t have been able to pay to view the fight anyway, so Lonergan can’t look at 100,000 downloads and translate that into 100,000 lost subscribers.

It is the same tired old argument that the music industry used, and that’s why Lonergan is finding little sympathy.  If he had reacted within the scope of realism, then he wouldn’t have overcooked it so badly. 

Most people under 30 will never own a television unless it is simply to use as a monitor. But older people argue streaming is stealing.

What is the difference between illegally downloading the fight and stealing a car or goods from a shop?

And to be fair to those of us born in the 50s and 60s, the young ones must understand that there is a level of immorality to what they’re doing because many of them put their own boundaries on what they will and won’t download.

A lot of young people choose not to illegally stream Kiwi music and movies but overseas works are fair game.

That indicates they understand illegal streaming costs the artists. Or in the Duco case, the event managers.

But when it comes to sharing intellectual property, what about the people who tell me they loved my book? And they shared it with all their friends and they loved it, too.

That’s 20 people reading one book, meaning the booksellers and the author have missed out on 20 prospective sales.

And the people who read magazines while waiting at supermarket checkouts. It costs a lot of money to produce a magazine.

I guarantee there would be very few people who haven’t, when they think about it, stolen somebody’s intellectual property.

Being of the older generation, I can understand Lonergan’s fury.

But Duco, and any others who produce any form of entertainment, will have to work with the new platforms and come up with a new way of doing business.

They have to adapt or die, otherwise they will go the way of the dinosaurs.

I know people who watched the fight via an Internet backdoor that would simply have gone without had the opportunity not been there to do it.  $50 for something that could be over in less than 2 minutes is a lot of money.

And McIvor is on the same page as I am.  No matter the immorality of it, it is a reality.  And Duco will not be able to control it.  Fighting it will simply shift focus away from finding a different model.  The music and movie industries have had a lot of experience with this.  Lonergan should study and learn instead of trying to nail some people with a Sky sub and a cell phone to the nearest tree.

 

– Kerry McIvor, NZ Herald

 


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • Sideshow11

    I remember when band took on napster , Metallica was one of the loudest fighters. They won but lost a good portion of their fans.
    I was put off boxing years ago by the lack of truly paired up bouts .

  • Edward M Blake

    Gabe Newal founder of steam. A very successful platform that sells PC computer games online simply said”The easiest way to stop piracy is not by putting antipiracy technology to work. It’s by giving those people a service that’s better than what they’re receiving from the pirates.”.
    If you weren’t a sky customer and you wanted to watch the fight at your house sky’s answer is “get stuffed”. So the fifty dollars goes back in the pocket and the criminals provide good service.

  • Asian_driver

    $50 for something that could be over in less than 2 minutes is a lot of money.
    Clearly Kerry does not fully understand what prostitutes do for a living.

    I try not to spent too much time thinking about things like this, if t was such a great thing why didnt sky buy the rights , broadcast it on their all to view model and actually reward the people who subscribe to their service.

    Is anything stopping people streaming a sky movie to their mates/facebook friends

  • Grizz30

    To pay per view the fight, you also need to pay for a Sky TV subscription. There is now a huge market that do not have or have ditched their sky tv subscription. I have no idea how many paid the $50 to watch it, but if you charged a $10 flat fee to live stream it over the internet, then I am sure many of those $100,000 would have paid for a higher quality stream. Lonergan’s problem is that he got his numbers wrong. People want to watch the fight, but they do not want so much that they will part $50 for the privilege on top of their monthly sky bill that they may or may not have.

    • pseudonym

      Exactly! All the pubs showing the fight were packed, with no room for even one more. I don’t have a Sky TV subscription, but would have happily paid the $50, but thanks to the promoters deal, I didn’t have that option.

      • SlightlyStrange

        And from what I have read in other places comments on this, there are a LOT of pubs who opted not to because of the price gouging to offer it.

        And yes, as Grizz says. How many non-sky subscribers would actually have happily paid $20 or more to watch the fight if they could do it without having to have sky? I wouldn’t personally because I don’t like boxing, but I have friends who certainly would have.

  • Crowgirl

    Does this mean that every time we go to the library and borrow a book that we’re stealing intellectual property? Every time I record something off the telly?

    • Disinfectant

      Interesting point.

      I remember that about 25 years ago Libraries had signs up about illegal photo-copying. Now you dont see them.

  • Left Right Out

    I believe you can use the argument “it was in the publics interest” to justify watching it “illegally”…… Hell I know of a little weasel that receives stolen information from peoples computers and apparently that argument stacks up well…..

  • Skydog

    Reminds me of the out cry from the music companies when people started to ‘dub’ cassettes with the use of double decks with high speed dubbing. The music world didn’t end, it had to adapt.

    Home entertainment is via the internet, not in the future, because the future has arrived.

  • Miss McGerkinshaw

    I don’t have a TV so unless someone makes it possible for me to view via legal streaming I’ll use the ‘back door’. Not that I would want to watch a fight but as an example I pay for my tennis which doesn’t include Opens so … yeah my halo slips.

    The providers really need to get their act together as I’m sure there are more like me who are happy to pay so give us what we want! Hey I even paid $5.00 for a one day fan pass to watch the Highlanders – although almost wish I hadn’t bothered :-((

  • intelligentes candida diva

    You know I dont care for the man DL can at times be a leech I watched one repeat episode recently of those Ridge women and that young Ridge girl I felt sorry for her The adults didn’t respect her viewpoint about what she wanted to wear or say before she had her fight She was emotionally bullied by all the older people around her including DL by minimising her viewpoint

  • Aucky

    Martin Sneddon was the calm in the eye of the storm yesterday in the course of his one hour interview and talkback with Tony Veitch. He is totally of the view that the situation is a complex one and is one that needs to be resolved. Both Duco and Sky will be commencing a series of discussions with interested parties this week. I respect Sneddon, his professionalism and his experience as CEO of the largest sporting events ever held in NZ.

    I am of the old school that looks on the pirating of the Parker fight as out and out theft and Sneddon confirmed yesterday that those involved in streaming the event would be receiving notification of legal proceedings this week.

  • Nige.

    This lobergan guy….. I really don’t know who he is but he’s put me right off boxing. I’m not interested anymore.

    He makes me want to stream a couple of boxing matches to spite him.

    Someone compared the situation to Metallica’s bad handling of Napster when illegal music streaming first appeared but they worked out a new way of making money and they got ahead.

  • JC

    Sky may be a pain in the butt but for my $90 I get to watch dozens of old favourites whenever I want per month, dozens of rugby matches and tests (my true love).

    I would quite like to watch Joseph Parker as he fights to get free of the pack but he’s not worth $5 a match to me let alone $50 so I happily forgo watching him.

    As for the 100,000 who watched illegally.. how many would have paid $50 for the legit coverage.. very few I suggest.. thats *why* they watched illegally!

    Right now Parker has a true positioning of something like 15th in the division according to Bob Jones.. the rest is hype and Lonergan and co are selling the equivalent of hot air, ie Global Warming.

    JC

52%