No, it was important to us not to repeat familiar themes but to create something new and progress the campaign to a new level. After all, we are connected with the cinema and entertainment industry. Therefore in addition to our central role in raising awareness, the entertainment value of the campaign is an important factor for its success. That’s why, we decided to emphasise the humorous aspect.

Legal offers - such as those of the music industry - of films are also available, as evidenced in the growing video-on-demand segment. Legal offers – such as those found in the music industry – are also found in the film industry, as is evident in the growing market for video-on-demand; i.e. arcor.de, one4movies.de or madome.de These days, there are also offers for more long-term downloading – the so-called Download-to-own-platforms i.e. in2movies.de.

Up to now, the MPA has confined its lawsuits to the USA. We will not initiate mass lawsuits, but there will be large-scale investigation of the mass market for bootleg films, e.g. online auction sites, file-sharing sites, flea markets, etc.

The promotion was a big success. In the summer months of 2004 we toured through seven German cities and were able to have deep and extremely positive dialog on location with our target group. In every city, over 100 people came to try it out, sometimes with waiting periods up to an hour. Lots of people used the information desk to get information and to talk about the legal and illegal use of movies. Our presence at the Games Convention and the IFA in 2005 was also very successful, that’s why we plan to have the cell at both locations again in 2006.

Direct contact with the consumer is extremely important; unfortunately, again and again we find that the average citizen is still not sufficiently aware of copyright laws. That’s why this promotion is making such a valuable contribution to the cause of informing the people and thereby pushing along the shift in awareness.

As we have mentioned, we use dramatic, provocative motifs to call attention to the subject of copyright theft. But the fact is, the law prescribes penalties of up to five years in particularly serious offences. And in Germany, many such sentences have already been handed down. Just last August, two cases which the GVU helped to investigate ended in sentences of two years and one year, respectively. Here are the GVU-figures from 2005:

	Introduction of at least 2,549 new cases
	In 78.70% of all cases, works of film were the subject matter
	470,790 data carriers were taken into possession, 63.9% of those carried movie data.
	In 2005, 1,842 cases were successfully closed.

Unfortunately, it is a fact that we suffer great damage due to the illegal copying and consumption of films; the figure was more than one billion euros for 2004 alone. Our primary interest is not maximising profits but making profits in the first place. And our interest is not entirely a selfish one: after all, thousands of jobs depend on the commercial success of the film industry.

This is not about the criminalisation of great swathes of the population. The exaggerated-but-humorous style of the commercials and print motifs is intended to make movie thieves aware that what they are doing is a crime and invite them to rethink and change their behaviour. We show them the consequences of organised copyright theft and make the following clear: what you are really doing is stealing copyrighted material, which is a crime. We know that the motifs are sure to raise a stir. But that is a good thing, because the illegal consumption of films must be discussed more intensively and controversially.

We do not want to criminalise the general populace. The commercials and print ads illustrate the threat of legal punishment for commercial piracy. This does not and should not include the "normal" consumer of illegally copied films. We must make a sharp distinction. For us, there are
a) consumers of legal film offers, i.e. individuals who visit the cinema regularly, buy or rent DVDs, etc.

b) consumers of illegal film offers, e.g. online file-sharing sites, bootlegged DVDs, etc.

c) and the movie thieves themselves, i.e. criminally organised people or groups who engage in copyright piracy for profit.

We would like to emphasise once again: the word "criminals" is being used here in its colloquial sense, and not in the legal way defined in the German penal code.

The unmistakable tone of the campaign was a conscious choice. Up to now, campaigns seeking understanding have not been effective. Therefore, we had to raise our voice and speak a little louder in order to raise awareness and promote a public discussion of the topic of illegal copying of films.

Security has increased in all stages of the film industry value chain. For example, on behalf of the German Federal Film Board, the Fraunhofer Institute for Integrated Publication and Information Systems has developed an optimised process for determining the original source for bootleg copies. New technology will make it easier to identify movie thieves.

Good films will be successful. But the question is: will they also make a profit? It`s a fact that illegal consumption of films is costing the film industry. Many people will simply never go to see a film in the cinema once they have seen a bootleg copy. And most will not buy or rent a DVD if they can get a bootleg copy of a film. This is the greatest threat to the very foundations of the film industry.

Unfortunately not. The statistics clearly show: the chances for profit of all productions are under a fundamental threat. Both major blockbusters and small productions suffer from copyright theft. The case of "Terminator 3" shows: approximately one million people owned a copy of the film one month before it was released in cinemas; there were about 770,000 copies of "Good Bye, Lenin!" in circulation before the DVD went on sale.

There is one. The German Federation against Copyright Theft (GVU) co-operates closely and very successfully with the police and justice officials to pursue and prosecute movie thieves. The associations are also active in pursuing commercial movie thieves in particular, e.g. with civil suits or by scanning flea markets for bootleg copies.

We don`t assume our campaign will reach organised movie thieves. The police, with the support of the GVU, will take care of them. They cannot be reached by awareness campaigns; only punishment will deter them. However, the campaign can succeed in causing end-consumers to realise that they are accomplices to a crime, and that they should reconsider and change their behaviour.

It would be nice if illegal downloading and copying of films could be considered trifling. But the reality is that organised criminal gangs have long since discovered that copyright theft is a lucrative business. There are even professional production facilities here and abroad that develop ingenious distribution strategies.

The campaign is just one part of a comprehensive strategy. We are devising a whole package of measures to combat organised copyright theft and the illegal consumption of films. Among these measures are increased security on all stages of the film value chain, education efforts, and civil and criminal court cases.

Criminal and civil prosecution of copyright violations is always the final step. But we hope our campaign will continue to wake people up and instigate a public discussion.

Crystal clear: our activities remain within the confines of the law. Complying with these rules and regulations is very important to us. But within this framework, we will take advantage of every possibility to take action against the illegal consumption of films.


The problem is: people who illegally copy films are not uncovering any security leaks. They are not approaching the studios or distributors and pointing out security leaks. Rather, they simply upload their offers onto the World Wide Web or sell and distribute them offline.

The damages are calculations based on the study of CD copying practices conducted on behalf of the German Federal Film Board.

It`s not always true that the people who produced the film are the people making money on its merchandising articles. Those profits go to the license owners. Thus it`s necessary to evaluate on a case-by-case basis whether or not a film production was profitable for those who financed it.

The campaign quotes the penalties applicable for major infractions of copyright law. Of course, we are well aware that the adults and young people addressed by the campaign are not all affected by these penalties. It is not our intention to criminalise these target groups, but to change their behaviour when it comes to material protected by copyright. Thus, we are not threatening them, but attempting with this initial step to awaken them.

Copyright owners have the exclusive rights to the use of their work. The law puts certain limitations on these exclusive rights. However, these limitations may not infringe upon the regular commercialisation of a film. The fact that illegal copies of films are being produced on a large scale shows that copyright theft unfortunately infringes upon copyrights and breaks the law.

That is correct, but not the right to information free of charge. Otherwise everyone would have the right to visit a cinema free of charge, or steal a newspaper, a music CD or a book.

Film-making is a process with a clear division of labour. The production begins with a script and ends with a completed film. There are many stages along the way, including dubbing studios, dubbing artists, processing laboratories, transportation operators, cinemas with cashiers, etc. Often, thousands of people live for and make a living from a single film - at least for a while. Therefore, it`s not enough just to pay actors less. On the contrary: the actors are often the guarantee for international success and make it possible to employ all the others. By the way, many actors have recently begun to forego a fixed salary in favour of a certain percentage of profits.

They are also broadcast on television, after all. But even when music videos receive a lot of air time on MTV and VIVA, it`s not allowed to download them from the Internet. Because watching television is a legal form of consumption that is remunerated by the broadcasters, so all concerned (artists, lighting technicians, screenplay authors, engineers, etc.) also get paid (generally through GEMA, the German equivalent of ASCAP or the Performing Right Society). But if their work is downloaded, the artists receive nothing. The fact is, there is no legal justification for the use of online file-sharing sites (with the exception of up-and-coming young groups who make their songs available free of charge).

The fact that a series is not available on DVD unfortunately does not mean it`s allowed to download it from the Internet. The situation is a little different when the TV series is offered legally - officially, by the proper copyright owners. Here`s a simple rule of thumb for distinguishing between legal and illegal offers: always ask yourself whether the copyright owner gave his or her permission for offering this film or music on the Internet.

DVDs offer special high-quality home entertainment. They make it possible not only to watch films or series, but offer a multitude of extras such as choice of soundtrack language, "Making of" reports, take-outs, etc. So, you are getting additional material for your money. Also, one must not only calculate the costs of production, but must also consider that marketing costs are also incurred for the DVD. After all, DVDs also have to be worthwhile for distributors. While videos lose quality after being viewed around 200 times, and have to be replaced, there is no such depreciation with DVDs. This in turn means fewer DVDs than videos are sold, which is reflected somewhat in the purchase price. And: a DVD now costs only 13.99 euros on average - a price that is totally reasonable, in our opinion.