Rental vs pirates - who owes whom?

Some time ago, I noticed that the usual sluggish rhetoric of the media regarding the “bad guys - kinopirat” clearly goes to a new, more rigid level. The experience of 37 years of living in Russia hints that harsh, ineffective and, most likely, idiotic repression of the state will soon follow. A recent meeting of GDP with representatives of the most important of the arts only confirms this. Although the GDP gently tried to hint to them that how much do not subsidize and do not tighten the screws, but if the film is crap, the viewer will not pay. However, film papies heard in this speech only the phrase "tighten the screws." As a result, K.G. Shakhnazarov proposed to ban the free circulation of audio and video products altogether, while N.S. Mikhalkov liberally proposed only introducing a tax on the turnover of audio and video products, naturally in his own favor. The main argument of these respected people is that very few doughs can be drunk from the viewers' cattle , which does not allow them to live like Lucas and Spielberg to develop domestic cinema. Given these trends, I decided to check out some of their theses with bills in my hands.

The main argument of distributors is that prolific torrent trackers and DVD stalls deprive them of a larger and better share of profits. However, in accordance with the law on the protection of consumer rights, the seller is obliged to sell the product (provide service) fully complying with the sample or description. Thus, if “The Best Movie” is sold to me, and I discovered that I was sold shit , then the seller is obliged to replace the defective product or refund the cost of the unproven services. Based on this, I built a method of assessment - who, nevertheless, to whom he should.
The technique is simple:

1. We take a list of 9 most grossing films last weekend. From there we take the total amount of fees in Russia and the number of viewers who watched the movie in the cinema.
2. Take a movie viewer rating
3. We analyze the number of downloads of the movie on torrents.ru and extrapolate this value to all the trackers of Russia, multiplying it by 2 (other proposals are accepted).
   
4. Estimate the amount of "pirated" distribution of the film through other channels.
5. We calculate the profits not received by distributors because of the pirated distribution of the film on the forum: Fees / Viewers * (Downloads + Others)
6. We calculate the amount to be reimbursed by the distributor for the shit parked instead of the movie. You can calculate in two ways:
   1. Easy way - according to the formula Fees * (10-Rating) / 10
   2. Advanced method: we presume that due to the diversity of opinions, the true range of rating values ​​is not different from 0 to 10, but somewhat different. We rate the highest rating rating (corresponding to a fully satisfied viewer) as the lowest rating of Top250 films (8.1), and the lowest rating rating as an estimate of the worst film of 2008 (2.9). Further, the amount to be reimbursed is estimated by the formula Fees * (8.1 - Rating) / (8.1 - 2.9).
7. We calculate the balance and write a claim for damages.

Some of the results are summarized in the table:

findings

1. At the very least, for showing three of the nine films, the distributors were left with money to the viewers.
2. Two of these three films are a miscarriage of the domestic film industry.
3. The total rental balance is not in favor of distributors, that is, despite the piracy activity, they remained to viewers from 8 to 36 million rubles.
4. Methods remained unaccounted for distributor costs for compensation for moral damages from viewing parted shit.
5. If gentlemen filmmakers need money for the development of domestic cinema, then let them go to the bank. I (the viewer) is not a bank, and I do not give in debt.