Did Ashton Kutcher Pirate His Own Movie?
Say it ain't so!
Actor Ashton Kutcher is currently in hot water for pirating the first 13 minutes of his new comedy movie, Killers. Apparently Kutcher broadcast the film's opening to select fan sites from its Hollywood premiere in Los Angeles on Tuesday night. The problem is that he didn't ask permission first.
Now industry insiders and film experts are lashing out at the actor, accusing Kutcher of promoting piracy based on comments he made to Ellen DeGeneres, and by actually streaming the flick. In fact, critics have gotten so heated up over the issue that they have called on the Motion Picture Association of America to reprimand the actor.
But Kutcher doesn't see what the big deal is all about. He doesn't think he's broken any laws, but was merely promoting his latest work. "The film is good enough to sell itself," he said. "I just wanted to show people that... I think if we show the first 13 minutes of the movie and if people like it, they'll go see it."
Kutcher goes on to retaliate against those who called him out on piracy. "Everybody calls people airing stuff on the web piracy just because they're not making money off of it yet," he added. "If they (executives) can figure out how to make money off of it, they won't call it piracy anymore."
Was this act really piracy? What's the difference between streaming 13 minutes of a movie to various websites and going on a network talk show carrying a hefty clip from the same movie?
"The free preview is a transparent marketing stunt by Lionsgate, the studio behind the film, which has decided to hide the movie from critics and instead put the first few minutes in front of its target audience during the run-up to its release," said Hollywood Reporter's legal aide, Matthew Belloni. "To that end, they've enlisted the movie's co-star, a genuine Internet phenomenon, to help promote that effort."
- Lawyer: Google Wi-Fi Snooping ''Not An Accident''
- VIDEO: Sim Shows BP Oil Spreading up East Coast
- George W. Bush Joins Facebook
- AT&T Sorry for Threatening User with Legal Action
- Dell Streak Available Unlocked in July for $500
- Airline Shows Osama Flying First Class to D.C.
- Is This What Project Natal Will Look Like?
- AT&T Threatens Legal Action for Emailing Its CEO
- Sony: Retrofitting PS3 Games with 3D Challenging
- Facebook: We Do a ''Reasonable Job'' on Privacy
- Japanese Surgeon Uses an iPad in Operation
- The Expensive HD TV Designed for Outdoors
- DIY T-Shirt Printer Won't Break the Bank
- Unofficial Android 2.2 Ready and Rooted
- The Car Powered by Photosynthesis
- Minimalist Digital Watch is a 4cm Square
- Lunette Series: Ultimate Home Theater Attraction
- Apple iPhone 4: All the Official Details and Pictures
- This is How Crysis 2 Will Look and Run on Consoles
It's funny he thinks the movie is good, because he's in it. All reviews about the movie have been below average.
I see this the same as when Lars from Metallica "pirated" Death Magnetic. If anyone has a right to do it it's him.
Lol, this movie is nothing but a rehash of Mr. and mrs. Smith, however I think that streaming the first 13 minutes is a good idea, if only as an experiment. Is it piracy? heck no, if people want to see the movie after watching those 13 minutes, then that's their choice and their money to burn away...
That last paragraph makes perfect sense to be the truth. This is just a marketing stunt. Im 100% sure that after the release of the movie in theaters, we will never hear of this again.
I hate Ashton Kutcher btw, everything he has ever done is crap IMHO
You idiot, that's because piracy is obtaining files for FREE. Paying to download movies wouldn't be call piracy BECAUSE IT ISN'T.
I hate Ashton Kutcher btw, everything he has ever done is crap IMHO
I couldn't agree more.
Who the hell complains about free publicity??? Oh, right....
I don't see the problem with it either. Fair use allows for a certain amount to be shown without permission.
Next up: MPAA sues individuals that viewed pirated Kutcher movie...
"In fact, critics have gotten so heated up over the issue that they have called on the Motion Picture Association of America to take their nit picky lawsuits and complaints and shove it up their rich asses."
Fixed it.
Cant do shet these days without being a pirate. Welcome to the club Ashton
....
Anything that is not explicitly blessed by the studio lawyers is considered piracy regardless of their source and regardless of whether the so-called infringement actually benefits the studios or not. This has never been about piracy and never will be - it's about control. It's about preventing competition, stifling innovation, and sticking to an outdated business model that is no longer relevant in the 21st century. Studios do not sue 12 year-old girls on welfare just to save a few bucks that might have been from lost sales. They sue 12 year-old girls on welfare because they can.
You know, what I'd like to see with America is this:
Someone who actually understands the state that things have become from the consumers' perspective figure out a way to sue absolutely everybody who has pirated a movie all at once for the full amount possible. No class action or anything, just 50 million (or so) lawsuits at once. Clog the courts. Then, everyone who has been sued declare bankruptcy. Imagine 20 percent of the citizens declaring bankruptcy in the US. THEN, the government would finally step in and tell the stupid movie studios to figure out a new way to do business.
the movie studios don't understand the concept of an economy of scale. this is the first problem. Second, it's not like Americans don't spend enough on entertainment. Look at the debt crisis that just happened. Americans are spending absolutely every dollar they can muster up. Obviously, some of this goes to the entertainment industry. They need to realize that it's next to impossible to squeeze the american people for any more money than they already spend.
So here's an idea: create a system that allows us to spend just a little more money than we already do to legally have the rights to view/own even more than we are watching/downloading. this would be a huge compromise that I think most people would settle for. Then, we would be in a little more debt, but the companies wouldn't have to spend so much money on legal costs to fight these people....It's basically a win-win.
Just my 2 cents...
HELLO? Asston? that's what trailer is for!
Someone get Kutcher an eye patch quickly.
I see this the same as when Lars from Metallica "pirated" Death Magnetic. If anyone has a right to do it it's him.
Bad example since Lars is a huge bitch regarding piracy and crusaded against Napster back in the day.
I don't like Ashton Kutcher, but I have to side with him on this. Sounds like he showed what amounted to a Youtube clip. If these industries keep pushing against piracy, pirates are always going to push back harder. It doesn't help that there's a huge hypocrisy going on too with the people fighting against piracy committing piracy themselves.
It's called a "Sneak Preview" people. He did a "sneak preview" without permission. That's not piracy, that's just Ashton being a retard.
If anything, Lionsgate might be able to go after him for not asking permission first, but that's about it.
there hasnt been a single movie yet that hes been in thats been even remotely good. Sorry to say it but he sucks as an actor, and hes not funny, his show sucks( cant even remember what its called)
Cant believe he ever made it as an actor.
Ashton is punking them...lol...had to say it
.
He is right, they have no case against him. It's his damn movie, good or not he is promoting his work. I can't see the problem in that. Plus I think his action are well seen by fans and even could be much more appreciated by the fans, because he did it himself not some publicist who is unknown by the fans.
CRUCIFY HIM.
You idiot, that's because piracy is obtaining files for FREE. Paying to download movies wouldn't be call piracy BECAUSE IT ISN'T.
No, you goof! Piracy isn't about the money. It's about illegal distribution, whether money is involved or not.
It's called a "Sneak Preview" people. He did a "sneak preview" without permission. That's not piracy, that's just Ashton being a retard.If anything, Lionsgate might be able to go after him for not asking permission first, but that's about it.
Apparently not asking for permission is now the new piracy...
I don't understand how anything being copied from an original source is "piracy". It's not actually stealing something, it's merely a copy.
I bet Ashton touches himself in a naughty way when he sees himself on the screen.
You people (and I include the article author in this) are such self-serving, rationalizing infantile idiots. What's the difference between an unauthorized clip broadcast and showing the same clip on a talk show? The difference is PERMISSION. The owners of the movie decide what gets shown and where...that's what the concept of ownership means.
What's the difference between you lending someone your car, and their just taking it for a spin? What sort of brainless twit even needs to ask?
Seriously, the illogical contortions you clowns will go through to justify your piracy would be amusing, were it not so sad. Get a grip.
I would reprimand him if it is stated in the contract, with probably is, in BIG red letters even, to not broadcast it with out permission. Fine him and go home.
i no longer care what movies come out of hollywood.it does not matter because i will not be giving my money to that bloated greedy industry again.
i have gone almost a year now buying only used films and no cinema.to bad mpaaa you lose not me.i just cost you probably over a thousand bucks i might of spent but not........NOT FOR YOU !!!
I heard the movie was crap anyway ...
Before Comcast bought out all of the smaller cable providers my cable provider (Paragon) allowed customers to watch the first 5 minutes of any pay per view movie. If you didn't call them over the phone to order the movie then playback would automatically stop after 5 minutes. I don't see how what Ashton Kutcher did is any different.
I may catch the movie at the penny theatre, but no way in hell I'm paying $15/person to see it tat a bigger cinema.