Something that's been bugging me about the piracy debate is that no one ever mentions porn. Having some (totally academic) experience with the p2p networks I estimate that roughly 50% of all file sharing is pron.
Yet! The porn producers don't seem to complain. The porn industry seems to be blossoming. You don't see any pron stars wailing about lost profits on TV.

Two answers occur to me:
a) The business is doing well enough anyway and the producers don't want to rock the boat.
b) Everyone just assumes porn producers are total sleazebags and don't deserve more money.

Your thoughts?

SAVE THE FLUFFERS!!!

Philo? Is that really you?

Why wouldn't it be?

I'm thinking of making "SAVE THE FLUFFERS" into a t-shirt.

Somehow I never associated Microsoft with Pron Fluffers. Silly me.

It's almost like Philo is an ...gasp... individual.

BTW Microsoft sucks and therefore so does Philo.

Which is why we need

MORE FLUFFERS!!!!

>a) The business is doing well enough anyway and the
>producers don't want to rock the boat.
>b) Everyone just assumes porn producers are total
>sleazebags and don't deserve more money.

The answer is b. Porn sites are subject to a lot of abuse for this reason. I think they also make use of p2p too (it has some benefits that the music industry don't let on about, e.g. free advertising).

They're often subject to DDOS attacks, with accompanying ransom demands and they often pay up. They have some legal protection, but less than the average corporation.

Another trick is played on them by the credit card corps (VISA, mastercard, etc.), who have at times (and perhaps still do, not sure), charged absolutely extortionate rates for credit card transactions.

Of course, they're not doing it to 'punish' the porn sites for delivering foul content, they're simply doing it because they can.

Most porn isn't profit sharing, actors are paid on a per-scene basis - they don't care what happens to any given scene once they've been paid.

PS - what's a fluffer?

A fluffer is someone with the thankless task of propping up the woodpile.

Not this (due diligence is key) -

http://www.fluffers.ca/

porn _actors_ don't make any money anyway. the dudes are just there because they um... love the work. the women get paid on a per film basis. typically $800-$5000 per film depending on the girl and what's going on.

Besides the reasons mentioned above, I think that they're not as concerned as Hollywood because they don't have that much invested in each film. A Spielberg movie is $100 million and took 10 months to make, while "ButtPluggers VII" cost $100 thousand, and was made in a few weeks.

... And because they get paid on a per-scene basis.

Hollywood actors get paid no matter who pirates their films, so they're in the same boat (very few get a cut of the profits) - nobody is arguing that hollywood actors aren't getting paid the same way they're arguing musicians aren't getting paid.

Porn producers & distributers have just wised up and view P2P as an advertising vehicle. They're not going to sue anybody, so they just take the most realistic tack they can - how can I turn this to my advantage.

>>ButtPluggers VII" cost $100 thousand
Oh yeah right. 100 grand for a porno? WTF you thinking of, 'Lord of the Cock Rings'? Sheeit.

The actual demand for porn is not going to diminish even if it is populated with men in unlikely moustaches and shirt collars large enough to be treated as undeveloped land.

That this is also true for music hasn't penetrated the heads of those that count beans for Sony et al.

I just heard that movie theater revenue was down 5% last year due to alternate entertainment sources, including home theaters.

I heard it was down 5% due to dirty pirates.

Just because spending months at sea means you're less likely to have access to fresh water doesn't mean they're dirty.