Leak Star Wars, Go To Jail

Shea O'Brien Foley, a former production assistant at LucasFilm, has been arrested on 13 counts of theft of Star Wars material from LucasFilm worth $450,000. The police investigation was launched after an early Attack of the Clones cut was leaked to and reviewed by Aint It Cool News in March, two months before it hit theaters. Other than the fact that Ain't It Cool News and Harry Knowles aren't being charged with anything, police aren't saying much. Apparently, Jedi mind tricks didn't work on the arresting officers. Update: 10/14 23:51 GMT by T : Michael Singer points to an article on internet.com with more depth.

Comments

The Force...

[Anonymous Coward]

..was not with him...

Re:The Force...

[Elkobim]

I don't force my children to eat stuff.

Jedi Mind Tricks

[scrote-ma-hote]

Of course they didn't work. The guy's not a JEDI! You can't just pull something like that off, without years and years of training. Sheesh.

Re:Jedi Mind Tricks

[BollocksToThis]

But he put it on his census form!

Re:Jedi Mind Tricks

[lefthand50]

Isn't this actually how many medichlorians you have? A six year old could pull this off...

Re:Jedi Mind Tricks

[bmajik]

Actually, it does't require years of training, hard work, vitamins, or anything else.

See, thanks to EP1, it turns out that the force was all along a system of genetic advantage backed class superiority. Gone is the happy message of "work hard, do the right thing, and you will be honored".

Now, it's "hope you had the right parents, dirtbag"

Re:Jedi Mind Tricks

[ackthpt]

"This IS the droid we're looking for!"

"D'oh!"

Re:Jedi Mind Tricks

[Anonymous Coward]

I suppose that when he attempted to use the Jedi mind tricks, the arresting officer said," I am a tridarian, mind tricks won't work on me... only money... "
BTW, that what they all say in Mexico when you get arrested.

Re:Jedi Mind Tricks

[kcbrown]

Yeah, but EP2 showed that the people who have the most of that genetic advantage aren't allowed to reproduce, at least on the Light Side.

So I guess that means that the Sith are going to kick the Jedis' ass simply due to sheer numbers...except that they limit their own numbers to two in the entire galaxy (a master an an apprentice. Guess that means they go out of their way to kill anyone else who has aspirations of becoming a Sith), unless the Jedi are simply deluding themselves about the Sith to make themselves feel better...

Looks to me like all these Force wielders are idiots. No wonder they've all but disappeared by the time of EP6...

Re:Jedi Mind Tricks

[carlfish]

This misconception annoys me.

Yes, the prequels sucked. Yes, the "midichlorian" thing was annoying because it replaces something that was comfortingly mystical: "I can feel the Force is strong in this one" with trek-like technobabble. "Oooh, his midichlorian count is off the scale!"

However, the idea that sensitivity to the Force ran in your family was pretty apparent throughout the first series. Even in the first Star Wars, you're left with the idea that Luke gets his ability in the Force from his father. It gets clearer towards the end of the trilogy. Think of Yoda's last words - "There is another Skywalker", or Luke talking to Leia in ROTJ: "The Force is strong in my family." All TPM did was take an idea that was already there (Force sensitivity runs in bloodlines) and over-explains it until it becomes dull.

Charles Miller

Re:Jedi Mind Tricks

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course it didn't work, the police were flying Jews.

Re:Jedi Mind Tricks

[Decimal]

Of course they didn't work. The guy's not a JEDI! You can't just pull something like that off, without years and years of training. Sheesh.

Either that, or he didn't have enough Midichlorines in his blood. Poor guy, now he'll never be able to finish his C3PO robot...

Re:Jedi Mind Tricks

[hype7]

Now, it's "hope you had the right parents, dirtbag"

and if Anakin's anything to go by, the fewer the better :)

-- james

Re:Jedi Mind Tricks

[beowulfcluster]

When did anyone say the Sith limit themselves to two in the entire galaxy? I took it to mean that they just like to hang out in pairs, that where you find one, you'll find another. Not that there always ONLY two of them. Of course, I'm not a Star Wars geek (*COUGH* no really, your honor!) so I might have missed something.

Re:Jedi Mind Tricks

[(trb001)]

Now, it's "hope you had the right parents, dirtbag"

Anyone notice that Shmi Skywalker had NO force capabilities? Qui-gon mentions that Anakin was conceived by the force, sure, but obviously there is a way in which midichlorians become a part of a person's structure. This is close to being as genetic as the chance you have to get green eyes. You may have them even though your parents don't. Granted, they have to carry the gene SOMEWHERE for it, but the midichlorians add that extra element of randomness, likened to making it possible for a middle-eastern man to end up with green eyes even though his parents didn't have that gene.

And for God's sake, it's Star Wars, stop making it so goddam political and elitist sounding!

--trb

Movie pirates

[dattaway]

And the movie industry keeps pushing for copy protection on video cameras just in case of the remote chance someone should shoot the screen and steal a movie. But an insider got the original and leaked it. Imagine that.

Re:Movie pirates

[garcia]

they need to send "screener" copies to many people so that they can give good reviews on the movies. I would say that these copies are the ones that are most generally leaked to the Internet.

See TMD's copy of My Big Fat Greek Wedding (which had a counter running in the top corner of the screen the entire movie), or Signs which had a red line moving from top left to bottom right every so often. Other movies I have seen that were found on the Internet have long scrolling messages from the MPAA about reporting if you have purchased or found this release anywhere except an offical source...

I absolutely *refuse* to watch CAM versions of movies that have been put on the net. I would rather wait for the DiVX copy of the DVD or the screener.

Most of the problems occur internally, not at the theater. They are just being annoying.

Re:Movie pirates

[scott1853]

That's why Lucas wants all the actors to be computerized.

After he achieves that, he'll start working on making all production assistants robotic.

Re:Movie pirates

[Anonymous Coward]

umm explain how this is a Troll. He has very valid points.

There isn't any reason for money to be spent (and passed on to the consumer) to ban devices that really aren't causing the problems.

Re:Movie pirates

[csnydermvpsoft]

After he achieves that, he'll start working on making all production assistants robotic.

He'd better be careful going that far, however - if he's not careful, he'll make himself obselete?

No more movies like The Matrix - too much slandering of the computers!

Re:Movie pirates

[csnydermvpsoft]

And yes, I realize that LucasFilm did not produce The Matrix.

Re:Movie pirates

[Quirk]

I know a few people in the film industry and Production Assistants ( especially 3rds ) are usually people who have film degrees but have failed in every aspect of the business. Maybe the guy was in his 30s, knew he wasn't going any where and decided to deploy his own 'golden parachute'

Re:Movie pirates

[sharkey]

...Lucas wants all the actors to be computerized.

As opposed to wooden, like in AotC?

Re:Movie pirates

[Anonymous Coward]

you STEAL movies? *gasp*

well so do I. i do not feel bad about it one bit, because most new movies that i have downloaded, are not that great of quality. but it lets me see the damn thing without dropping 8-10 bucks on it. i cant even count the times ive gone to the theater and came out wanting the 2 hours of my life back, and rarely would i just say "this sucks im leaving" because it cost $8-10. but when i saw the movies before going to the theater, i only wasted some time, because if it is horrible, it can get deleted half way through.

the movie theater/studios are losing a bit of money from me, because i dont go to movies that suck. but i still go to the ones i liked, and get the ultra high quality sound/video and movie experience.

Re:Movie pirates

[shine-shine]

See TMD's copy of My Big Fat Greek Wedding (which had a counter running in the top corner of the screen the entire movie), or Signs which had a red line moving from top left to bottom right every so often.

I absolutely *refuse* to watch CAM versions of movies that have been put on the net.

Sounds like you've been watching more than you'd like to admit.

Re:Movie pirates

[0xdeadbeef]

I absolutely *refuse* to watch CAM versions of movies that have been put on the net. I would rather wait for the DiVX copy of the DVD or the screener.

Be ye steadfast in yar principles, video pirate. I tip me hat to ye, arr..

Re:Movie pirates

[John Whitley]

After he achieves that, he'll start working on making all production assistants robotic.

Ob. Jedi quip: "These are not the production droids you're looking for."

Re:Movie pirates

[TheGeneration]

Not to mention that the technology to stop video cameras from recording movies is going to have to be put into every camera, or into every copy of the film, or into every projector.

Guess who is going to have pay the patent fees for this technology? That's right, you and I. If they put it in every camcorder we're going to have to pay the fee everytime we buy a camcorder. If they put it in the films we'll have to pay the fee everytime in movie ticket purchases. And if they put into projectors, same thing.

Re:Movie pirates

[The Turd Report]

He better switch that golden parachute for a golden chasity belt, so he won't get ass raped while in the slammer. :)

Re:Movie pirates

[susano_otter]

Have you seen his last two movies? He's obsolete already!

Re:Movie pirates

[Monkelectric]

I've worked in alot of different workplaces where there was theft ... and here's a few rules I've developed:

Normally honest people will steal when they think there is 0 chance of being caught.

People will steal the *stupidest* things just because they can.

People develop a sense of entitlement to what they are stealing.

The risk is almost never worth the item stolen.

I've seen people risk graduate degrees to steal reams of paper, risk a 200k job to steal 10k worth of stuff ...

Re:Movie pirates

[PhxBlue]

Right, but if he wants glowing reviews after the last Star Wars movie, he's going to have to make robotic film reviewers, too.

Re:Movie pirates

[BryanL]

Of course if he keeps the law suits up he may need a CGI audience as well.

Re:Movie pirates

[Quirk]

"The risk is almost never worth the item stolen."

This one generally will keep me honest if my conscience should waffle. I took too many semesters of stats, risk analysis to see any sense in stealing, especially when you factor in the radical shifts in life style and the layers of lies necessary to cover the crime. I think for alot of crime there has to be chemical triggers.

Re:Movie pirates

[Quirk]

"What the hell ever happened to someone just being a "crook"?

He had the tapes erased and he was President so they let him go.

Re:Movie pirates

[s.fontinalis]

What a cop out! What the hell ever happened to someone just being a "crook"?

Chemical Triggers don't particularly preclude someone being a crook - "crooks" are probably much more likely to be susceptible to these triggers.

Conceiving of things in other than moral terms allows one to look for other solutions, such as pharmacological solutions to these "triggers" that will work better than historical crime prevention.

Re:Movie pirates

[dachshund]

I've seen people risk graduate degrees to steal reams of paper, risk a 200k job to steal 10k worth of stuff ...

Quite frankly, any company that can afford to pay $200,000 but won't pony up for office supplies needs to seriously rethink its priorities.

If you're that valuable, the company should be going out of its way to insure that you get all the paper you need rather than classifying it as "theft".

Re:Movie pirates

[ObitMan]

The fear of "Federal Pound Me in The Ass Prison" keeps me on the straight and narrow.

Re:Movie pirates

[Xaoswolf]

It was also discovered by authorities that Foley had hoarded additional stolen materials in his Petaluma, California townhouse belonging to other Star Wars movies

What were the other items he had. It doesn't look like it's just a piracy case, but that its also someone that was taking peices of wardrobe, or other props home.

Re:Movie pirates

[Monkelectric]

If you're that valuable, the company should be going out of its way to insure that you get all the paper you need rather than classifying it as "theft".

You missed the point of my post entirely ... People will steal because they *CAN* not because they need to. We were paying our guys a good wage (30-40k /year and FREE HOUSING) and they would steal reams of paper instead of pay 3.50$ for them down at office depot. They would steal cables from computers ... Things got so bad after loosing a case of paper in 48 hours (our normal burn rate for a case of paper would be a month or two), that we had to lock the paper up ... it was stupid

My point is that humans have infinite wan't

Well, it's only lawful

[dwaggie]

Who cares how much hype there is, illegal is illegal. He stole what would be a viable product being engineered (and not finished) by a company. Outside of breaking contract, and just poor ethical judgement, he also just plain stole material before it was released.

I have no beef with after its release. People are going to see a movie for the effect whether they get a pirated version or not, in almost every case I know of (as far as) movie piracy.

We don't need no water ...

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[Anonymous Coward]

im only 5 years old and read yor post and the guy is studid and should steal a light saber insted.

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[Henry V .009]

He didn't steal something--stealing is depriving someone of a good that they own. No one was deprived, however he did violate copyright law and contract law.

This is illegal, of course. But how much damage did he do? The $450,000 figure is probably silly. I'd imagine that no money was actually lost. Anyone hard up enough to acquire the pirated good before release certainly went to watch it in theatre.

illegal is illegal

Hardly. There are levels of crimes. We don't punish traffic code violators like we do murderers. With no real damage, this is on the level of petty misdemeanor.

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[s1r_m1xalot]

Who cares how much hype there is, illegal is illegal....

I have no beef with after its release. People are going to see a movie for the effect whether they get a pirated version or not, in almost every case I know of (as far as) movie piracy.

Not to be a troll, but you do notice you contradict yourself, right?

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[vasold]

Most people that download movies, download them to either see them before other people, or to see if they're worth spending the $8+ to see it. Alot of movies are not worth the price it costs to see it. This is the same for pc games, console games, and music. Whenever I've downloaded a movie that I've liked, I always go to see it in the theater. Most stuff I do download, there's no way in hell I'd go see anyway(star wars, lord of the rings). But after seeing them on my 19" monitor, with subtitles in japanese and horrible sound..I go see them at a theater!

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[dwaggie]

No, I don't. I make a valid distinction between public release and private development. Much like someone working on a program at work, I believe that they should have time to work on it to its fruition before it's torn to pieces. Same with a movie, or a book, or music. The person(s) doing it should be able to work up to the point they wish to release it, and then it can be done with whatever. I don't believe a work of art (as a movie is technically meant to be, not as a work of merchandise as it has become) should be held to the sacred trust of 'those who pay money' ... after all, tons of people see it for free if they're with the press...

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[ProtonMotiveForce]

Are you daft? How do you know he didn't steal the actual physical film or digital media with the film on it? Are you some kind of "super-insider" on the case - maybe you should start a little newsletter. Got any inside dirt on the Maryland sniper??

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[dwaggie]

Stealing, to me, is not depriving someone of a good that they own, but depriving someone of the ideal of safety. In Intellectual Thought Property, this becomes really ephemeral, because there's no hard lines on what is and isn't a product.

As far as I stand, the movie isn't in totality until its release, and then it's a viable product of ownership that he (in using LucasArts as an entity) allows others the limited viewing privileges based on a monetary compensation form. Now, to steal it before it's completed is, imho, a bad thing not only because of possible poor quality, but because the artist/visionary/programmer/whatever you want to call him just isn't done doing it..

I agree, the 450k seems like a puffed up number, but he did steal more than just that movie. They were saying materials and other associated things within the project. Who knows, might've been computer equipment and digital editing software with high licensing value. He knowingly did it, and should at the least lose his job.

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[Stonehand]

From an article with actual substance rather than a big graphic of the reporter:

Among the stolen items that were recovered, according to the affidavit:

? Nineteen CD-ROM discs containing the entire restricted library of sound effects
created during the past 25 years for use in the "Star Wars" films, with an
estimated "collectible value" of $95,000.

? More than 2,000 high-quality digital images from "Episode II," valued at
$125,000.

? Hundreds of video files of "Episode II," from concept shots to final clips,
valued at $100,000.

? About 113 storyboard images - or sketches outlining scenes from the film - with
handwritten notes by Lucas, valued at more than $100,000.

and

When threatened with dismissal, Foley admitted that he had taken photo images,
storyboards and a script for "Star Wars Episode I: Phantom Menace," but "nothing
big," according to the court document. He specifically denied having a copy of
"Episode II."

Foley said he was an "avid fan" and had taken the items for his "souvenir
collection" at his Petaluma home, according to the court document.

Foley agreed to allow Webb to look through the items at his home and when they
arrived at his Lakeville Circle townhouse the investigator saw "tons of 'Star
Wars' items," Webb said in the affidavit. Foley turned over numerous items,
including 25 CDs with images of the film, three videotapes of "Episode I"
voice-over tests, 115 storyboard image strips and a hard disk drive with
downloaded photo images.

He (or his mother, who lives in the Irvine residence cited below) also, perhaps, attempted to destroy evidence:

Authorities served a search warrant at the Irvine residence the next day, the
court document said, and found "Star Wars" production photos in a trash can, as
well as shredded documents that appeared to be "Star Wars" sketches.

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[Meowharishi]

I personally don't even think this is a CRIME, however the offender should certainly be held liable for punitive civil damages.

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[Henry V .009]

Well I don't know about ideals of safety or such stuff, but I do know how society makes laws. Things that damage society a lot generally get punished more than things that damage society a little. Murder vs. stealing, what not.

The damage to society done by stealing is easy enough to estimate. You steal a car, and you've stolen the value of the car from that person.

Now, is copyright infringement stealing? No, because the damage is on a fundamentally different order. If you copy a copyrighted work, and what is the damage? It's the amount of money that the copyright holder would have otherwise got if the violation had not taken place. This can be more than the cost of an individual copy, less, or even negative. Simply calling all copyright infringement stealing completely ducks the issue and creates a draconian legal system.

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[InnovATIONS]

Sorry, but if you read the other articles he stole quite a number of things besides the movie itself. The fact that he showed what he had stolen to the review site was just how he used some of the stolen material.

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[Henry V .009]

19 CD-ROM disks -- value $9.00 at Best Buy

2,000 high-quality digital images -- value $0.00 they're just bytes

Hundreds of video files of "Episode II," from concept shots to final clips, valued at $100,000 -- value $0.00, they are talking about computer files, right?

About 113 storyboard images - or sketches outlining scenes from the film - with handwritten notes by Lucas, valued at more than $100,000 -- now this is hard to value. Were they digital or dead tree? Were these the only copies? Given the inflated claims for the other items, I'd be skeptical.

Total: $9.00

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[Anonymous Coward]

Didn't steal anything???

Didn't deprive Lucas of anything???

He deprived Lucas the control over its own work. Control over its distribution, over who could see it, over what they could do with it, etc.

He deprived Lucas the ability to use the time between his theft and actual release for promoting the film. Perhaps Lucas wanted to come up with a marketing campaign that lead up to some "big secret" to be revealed at the first showing.

If he didn't "steal" anything, why were people lining up to watch the thing at the theatres?

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[eaolson]

Nineteen CD-ROM discs containing the entire restricted library of sound effects created during the past 25 years for use in the "Star Wars" films, with an estimated "collectible value" of $95,000.

This seems a bit unreasonable, doesn't it? Not only do you have the plaintiff estimating the value of the item (although it doesn't say whether these were stolen CDs or his own CDs with pirated sound files on them), but they get to use the "collectible" value. I figure a napkin used by Lucas has a value to some fanatic Star Wars collector considerably inflated over its actual intrinsic value.

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[Anonymous Coward]

So IOW, you lie: He didn't steal something

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[Anonymous Coward]

With this logic, I should go steal the Mona Lisa, since it's only a few dollars of canvas, oil, and pigments.

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[Anonymous Coward]

Let me rephrase so that the troll lawyers don't get me: He didn't commit grand theft as has been alleged.

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[_Sprocket_]

With this logic, I should go steal the Mona Lisa, since it's only a few dollars of canvas, oil, and pigments.

You've missed the point.

A closer analogy would be taking a picture of the Mona Lisa and being charged with the theft of the physical painting. Fear of damaging the portrait with constant exposure to flash photography aside... is making a copy of an item akin to actually stealing the item?

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[DaytonCIM]

Now, is copyright infringement stealing? No, because the damage is on a fundamentally different order. If you copy a copyrighted work, and what is the damage? It's the amount of money that the copyright holder would have otherwise got if the violation had not taken place. This can be more than the cost of an individual copy, less, or even negative. Simply calling all copyright infringement stealing completely ducks the issue and creates a draconian legal system.

Huh? We're modding this as Funny, right?

The damage to society done by stealing is easy enough to estimate. You steal a car, and you've stolen the value of the car from that person.

If you copy a copyrighted work, and what is the damage? It's the amount of money that the copyright holder would have otherwise got if the violation had not taken place.

Yes, it is easy to value an automobile and then assess damage as necessary. However, how do you value a person's lost time from work? Or time it takes to replace the car? Or the salary of the insurance company employee who processes the claim? Etc...
Are those "costs" valid? Or are they on a "fundamentally different order"?

Simply calling all copyright infringement stealing completely ducks the issue and creates a draconian legal system.

Ok, I'll bite... what issue?

I think most people would agree that stealing is stealing. Whether you take a .50cent piece of candy or stick up a liquer store for $500 or embezzle $5million, it's all theft and it's all wrong.
Punishment is a completely different story. Did this person steal $450,000 worth of materials? The court will decide.

I think a much juicier question is: did the website, which ran the early review, generate income from this "inside information"? If they did, isn't fair to say that they owe Mr Lucas a substantial portion of that income, considering it was Mr. Lucas' creative product that generated their income?

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[_Sprocket_]

Stealing, to me, is not depriving someone of a good that they own, but depriving someone of the ideal of safety.

I find this to be an amazing concept. Tell me - how often are you a victom of theft? When the neighborhood thug looks at you a little too long - did he just steal from you? Are you affraid your employer may have to lay you off due to economic pressure... and thus steal your livelihood? Is the increase in political violence direct theft on your person?

Think you could get any form of law enforcement to make a case of these examples of theft?

I don't.

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[_Sprocket_]

If he didn't "steal" anything, why were people lining up to watch the thing at the theatres?

If he did, in fact, cause so much damage to this project... why were people lining up to watch the thing at the theatres?

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[nyseal]

Collectables or not....that's a lot of material to be jiving from the Star Wars history. I guess my Luke Skywalker, Han Solo, Stormtrooper and Hammerhead figurines don't mean much anymore; hell, I can have the original sound effects and retire! Who thought?

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[Techi]

so they are saying the movie is worth $75 bucks a copy??? god..I didn't think it was that good....

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[Anonymous Coward]

The point I was making is that its wrong to reduce the value of an object to its raw materials. A car is worth a lot more than the price of the metal, and a CD full of unreleased material is worth a lot more than the price of the blank CD.

Cutting away all the fluff, the facts here are that Lucasfilm invested a considerable amount of capital into developing the materials in question, that they were in a postion to profit from their investment, both in the film and the behind the scenes material that could fill years worth of special features and making ofs, and that the individual in question obtained and released the material with neither Lucasfilm's knowledge nor permission. Maybe you can, but I can't twist that around in my mind sufficiently to make it not look like plain, simple theft.

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[mindstrm]

Let's say you are at work. Your company compiles a database of information about something. This is how they make their money.

Then you make a copy of it, and give it away. Have you stolen from the company?

You better believe it.

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[monthos]

Becouse true fans will not watch a crippled internet copy, they want teh real thing, and i do believe there was a significant monetary loss, as much as they claim, i am and noone on slashdot is in a position to know for sure, but face it, he leaked a movie to the internet, and you KNOW people downloaded it, and many of them didnt see it in theaters, its purely speculation to say they would have gone to a theatre had it not been on the internet, but noone is at a position to say one way or another.

As far as theft goes, he did steal, he stole a copy of the movie, and he stole many physical items from the company.

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[Evil Adrian]

So if you produce a movie on your computer with the intent to market and release it, and someone copies it and distributes it, you think you wouldn't lose money from that?

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[Henry V .009]

I think most people would agree that stealing is stealing.

I guess that my above post must not have made my point at all. You don't see the difference between stealing a book (hence depriving someone of a physical good) and xeroxing that same book? One causes damage to an individual, and the other does not--provided that you would not have bought a copy anyway.

Copyright infringement is called stealing, but it is a different order of property crime.

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[Henry V .009]

Exactly my point, costs need to be based on actual damage to the copyright holder, not upon supposed value of the copies.

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[hype7]

as
well as shredded documents that appeared to be "Star Wars" sketches.

sounds like he's in for a transfer to the audit department.

-- james

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[_Sprocket_]

The point I was making is that its wrong to reduce the value of an object to its raw materials. A car is worth a lot more than the price of the metal, and a CD full of unreleased material is worth a lot more than the price of the blank CD.

Sure. And I could agree with the point if what was taken was origional, unique objects. It is not clear whether this is the case.

Sure. Data has value - if it didn't, people wouldn't pay for it. But just because data has this value to it, does not neccisarily mean it equates to physical objects.

Cutting away all the fluff, the facts here are that Lucasfilm invested a considerable amount of capital into developing the materials in question, that they were in a postion to profit from their investment, both in the film and the behind the scenes material that could fill years worth of special features and making ofs, and that the individual in question obtained and released the material with neither Lucasfilm's knowledge nor permission.

If this individual took origional copies of the material, thus depriving Lucasfilm of access to it... sure. But again, did he? Or did he make a copy. If it was a copy, then the issue is... what damage did he do with the material in question? Is Lucasfilm now facing an evaporating market for all these special features and behind-the-scenes material?

I suspect these questions will show up in the guy's court case.

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[_Sprocket_]

As far as theft goes, he did steal, he stole a copy of the movie, and he stole many physical items from the company.

Did he steal a copy? Or did he make an illegal copy? Was it theft, or was it violation of copyright?

On the issue of physical items (if they were physical items - this doesn't seem to be clear), sure. If he stole physical items, then he stole. Of course - what has me curious on this point is whether he actually stole something of "value". Does Lucasfilm archive all these items? Or are they routinely shredded and this guy, fanboi that he is, took them home rather than destroy Star Wars memorabilia? Consider that the vast majority of cells for classic Disney films were destroyed (although sometimes they were given away to friends) - much the way one would handle old documents at your local office. It wasn't until far later that collectors began searching out the rare, surviving cells and (in many cases) restoring them.

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[squaretorus]

This is where art and business collide, and peoples expectations differ. Should I have to buy an official licenced postcard of the Mona Lisa? Or should I be able to buy a cheapo version? The official one may be better quality...

Some Directors go over budget to produce the right movie, some try and kill anyone that leaks a bit of script. You can pretty much tell a movie with some integrity by its lack of hype surrounding the leaking of footage / script / plot info.

Those aiming to be 'the biggest grossing movie ever' tend to be far more uptight about these things, and far WORSE films. Massive generalisation. But hey!

Artists want to speak to the world, so should applaud the pirates so long as they don't steal the bread from their table - and no one is suggesting that Lucas needs the money are they!

Re:Well, it's only lawful

[Anonymous Coward]

"Hardly. There are levels of crimes. We don't punish traffic code violators like we do murderers."

Maybe we should.

Punish the lawbreakers!

[Anonymous Coward]

He should be put into jail. He broke the law!

I need an mp3 copy of Black Sabbath Paranoid. Could you send me a copy?

thanks

Re:Punish the lawbreakers!

[stud9920]

Could you send me a copy?

Me too !

Re:Punish the lawbreakers!

[macdaddy357]

The song or the whole cd?

Re:Punish the lawbreakers!

[sconeu]

You forgot the tags!

spoiler!

[Anonymous Coward]

Luke is Vader's son!

Re:spoiler!

[Nahor]

At my local BlockBuster, I've seen DVD and tapes of Episode 4,5 and 6 while Episode 3 hasn't even been released yet. Should I tell the Lucas?

Re:spoiler!

[FuzzyMan45]

"spoiler? Who wants a spoiler?..."
"no, i don't"
"ok, here's the spoiler....

you will die.....


...ALONE"

Is there an issue here?

[perrin5]

This hardly seems like news to me. Assuming of course, that this fellow had to sign an NDA to come to work every day (are there any industry people who know about this stuff present?), he did a BAD thing.

If there wasn't, there are still some fairly blatant theft issues here.

Re:Is there an issue here?

[timeOday]

There is no "issue," it's just an interesting story related to Star Wars.

13 accounts?

[Jonny Ringo]

man, how many star wars movies aren't out yet?

I wonder if he leaked the DVD also.....

[xjerky]

....It was realeased on the warez scene back in August, yet the movie isn't due out until November. And it was the real DVD, not some badly-made bootleg (though slighty downsampled to fit on a DVD-R, you can barely tell the difference).

Re:I wonder if he leaked the DVD also.....

[jhouserizer]

How COULD you tell the difference, if the real DVD isn't available yet?

Re:I wonder if he leaked the DVD also.....

[ceejayoz]

It's pretty easy to distinguish between a DVD rip and a crappy cam shot.

Re:I wonder if he leaked the DVD also.....

[xjerky]

I mean it used the real DVD menus (I don't think geeks are THAT crafty to come up with a menu system as good as the one that the Phantom Menace had, which this one does). As far as quality, you barely see any artifacts, even though its downsampled. Plus it's got 5.1 sound, and no camn-in-theater production is going to give you that.

Re:I wonder if he leaked the DVD also.....

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually it's a screener, these are pre-made digital copies sent to theaters, corporations and so on. Sometimes they are shown to the public too. That's what the crap down below says on most of then "This is a screener, call X studio", "This is not for public viewing, call MPAA".. etc. They are DVD quality and end up on the divx scene ;)

Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

I am so fucking sick of people telling me that Star Wars (one of the most overrated films EVER) is the be all, end all of science fiction. Yeah it had good FX for the time but that's it. The story was stolen right from Arthurian Legend and just set in a science fiction world, the dialog was garbage and the acting at it's best points was adequate.

Why does everyone love Star Wars so damn much? Honestly, WHY? The film is devoid of characterization, virtually empty on emotion and over-raught on everything else. Hell, like I said the plot is just knights of old set in another world. When other, lesser, films do that it's called plagiarism but I guess since Lucas did it that is not the case here, huh? I mean I am getting sick of seeing any film that even remotely resembles Star Wars being called a rip-off or derivative of it. Lucas did NOT come up with this story nor does he have hold over it.

One friend of mine tried to tell me Star Wars holds up not because of the story or the characters or the FX but because it was the first science fiction film to attempt a multi-movie story. Uh, Planet Of The Apes did a 5 movie story (first mind you) and the Ape films are a HELL of alot more thought provoking and well made than the Wars movies.

I just saw "The Dark Redemption" and that is the movie Lucas SHOULD have been making instead of that 2 hour plus, excuse to gouge his audience (I mean really, did Phantom Menace have a plot? NO. Did it tell a cohesive story? Hell NO. Was it an excuse for FX and to further line Lucas' pockets? Bloody hell yes).

"The Dark Redemption" is a 20 minute short film that was made (without Lucas' knowledge or consent) after hours while Crapisode 1 was filing. It uses real costumes, sets and FX from the movie and tells the story of Episode 3.8 (it ends just before "A New Hope") and despite the terrible acting, it was SO much better than Episode 1. It can only be found in bootleg form and if Lucas has his way in court even that will be rare.

Okay back to Lucas and his lack of talent. If you look at all his films you will see that none of them have any substance really. The man is a hack just this side of Tim Burton. I mean look at the "best" Star Wars film "The Empire Strikes Back". I bet most of you don't even realize Lucas did NOT direct it, nor did he write it (to be fair he wrote the "outline" but the script was written by someone else entirely). He DID write (if that is called writing) A New Hope, Phantom Menace and Return Of The Jedi (but he didn't direct Jedi either) and I find it funny that the one most people consider the "best" of the series he only had passing influence in.

So to close I just want to say that Star Wars is not great science fiction nor is it adequate science fiction and Lucas is not the guru he is being heralded as.

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's hosted on theforce.net

Fan films are encouraged on the net now.

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

What kind of blind retard are you to like that pathetic dork fan playacting caught on tape?
That thing has no redeaming qualities.

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

Save your breath, dude. This is slashdot. They are idiots.

Re:Why?

[Keighvin]

Oh, you mean this Dark Redemption, the freely available on the net fanfilm that was entirely independently created (not using Lucasfilm sets no matter what you've heard), on the virtual shelf right next to several other good entries on TheForce.Net.

The fanfilm scene is alive and well - don't anybody remember Duality?

Re:Why?

[Anonymous Coward]

So to close I just want to say that Star Wars is not great science fiction nor is it adequate science fiction and Lucas is not the guru he is being heralded as.

tell us something we DON'T know...

Little sympathy

[Drawkcab]

Well, this was very poor judgement on his part, but he knew he was taking a risk when he did it. This would be a very different story if it were some kid who uploaded a divx of the movie on a file sharing network, but this was an insider who was entrusted with that material and chose to violate that trust, so I have little sympathy for him. If copyright infringement is stealing, then this is embezzlement, and thats a far greater ethical lapse because the only reason its possible to embezzle is that you were entrusted not to.

Re:Little sympathy

[Sodium Attack]

If copyright infringement is stealing, then this is embezzlement,

It's worse than that, even. The person is accused not of making a copy of the movie, but of actually stealing physical material. Regardless of the varying views of intellectual property law found here, I think most /.ers still agree that taking physical items without permission is theft.

Re:Little sympathy

[Anonymous Coward]

I think most /.ers still agree that taking physical items without permission is theft.

I think a lot of slashdotters might have a question about how the physical items were stored.

If they are in the dumpster in the parking lot, or
on a table in a break room, or locked in a safe
in the office makes a big difference.

Re:Little sympathy

[InnovATIONS]

It might make a difference if they were in a dumpster in a parking lot, but whether they were on a table in a break room or in a vault it is still theft.

How do you calculate the damage?

[jukal]

was arrested last week and charged with 13 counts of felony for the theft of an estimated $450,000 worth of "Star Wars"-related material from his ex-employer

Is it a certain a percentage of the revenues? I mean, if the movie had proved to be a complete flop and would have generated negative revenue for Lucas Film. Say minus $420 million dollars, should Lucas Film actually pay the ex-employer for stealing it :))

Re:How do you calculate the damage?

[Em Emalb]

"Is it a certain a percentage of the revenues? "

Nah, It was RLGN. Random Lawyer Generated Numbers. They take a number three times higher than the average guy not named Lucas can make in 4 years and go with that. Thought this was common knowledge? :)

Re:How do you calculate the damage?

[gl4ss]

or more likely, how much can they say that it really even cost 'em? With all the publicity and stuff like that.

and face it; it's not like it was hard to guess what episode 2 would include after episode 1. (sure the yoda's sabre fight was a bit of a w00t, but otherwise it was just plain dull, i mean, wtf did that factory scene do in it?? and the special effects look actually duller than in 4,5,6, because they got this dirty real look in 'em models.)

Re:How do you calculate the damage?

[InnovATIONS]

The internet news article said that the 450K was the actual cost of the items found in his appartment, and that the potential lost revenue from the early review was incalculable. Apparently this guy had stolen a lot of stuff.

Re:How do you calculate the damage?

[davinciII]

From a related article:

Among the stolen items that were recovered, according to the affidavit:

Nineteen CD-ROM discs containing the entire restricted library of sound effects created during the past 25 years for use in the "Star Wars" films, with an estimated "collectible value" of $95,000.

More than 2,000 high-quality digital images from "Episode II," valued at $125,000.

Hundreds of video files of "Episode II," from concept shots to final clips, valued at $100,000.

About 113 storyboard images - or sketches outlining scenes from the film - with handwritten notes by Lucas, valued at more than $100,000.

Re:How do you calculate the damage?

[Anonymous Coward]

# Nineteen CD-ROM discs containing the entire restricted library of sound effects created during the past 25 years for use in the "Star Wars" films, with an estimated "collectible value" of $95,000.

Ok so he was hooked up with some cool Windows start-up sounds. Big deal! $5K cds... sheesh!

# More than 2,000 high-quality digital images from "Episode II," valued at $125,000.
# Hundreds of video files of "Episode II," from concept shots to final clips, valued at $100,000.

Ep II is a done deal... who cares!

# About 113 storyboard images - or sketches outlining scenes from the film - with handwritten notes by Lucas, valued at more than $100,000.

Now this is unique stuff. But only if they're for Ep III.

Re:How do you calculate the damage?

[Anonymous Coward]

# Nineteen CD-ROM discs containing the entire restricted library of sound effects created during the past 25 years for use in the "Star Wars" films, with an estimated "collectible value" of $95,000.
# More than 2,000 high-quality digital images from "Episode II," valued at $125,000.
# Hundreds of video files of "Episode II," from concept shots to final clips, valued at $100,000.
# About 113 storyboard images - or sketches outlining scenes from the film - with handwritten notes by Lucas, valued at more than $100,000.

Taking it up the tailpipe because you're a idiotic Star Wars nerd...priceless.

Why is this bad?

[Wakko Warner]

He stole intellectual property that wasn't his and gave it to others. This seems like a pretty open-and-shut case.

- A.P.

Damages?

[timeOday]

Assumably the punishment will be base on the value of the "thing" stolen. How is that caclulated? Or will the guy go up on a more generic charge like breech of contract?

Re:Damages?

[Thurn und Taxis]

This is an excellent point. IANAL, but I think they can only base the cost of the theft on (1) the market value of the items stolen, or (2) actual (not potential) loss of revenue resulting from the theft. It sounds like they wouldn't have much of a case with (2), so they're going with (1) and arguing that most of the items have a high collectible value. If they could argue potential losses, the guy would probably be charged with millions in theft....

Re:Damages?

[Sodium Attack]

IANAL, but my understanding is that breach of contract is a civil matter, not criminal, so there could not be a "charge" associated with breach of contract.

Now, if the employee signed an NDA, he could potentially be up against both criminal charges for theft and a civil suit for breach of contract, but only the former would involve the police & prosecuting attorneys.

Re:Damages?

[_ph1ux_]

you may not be able to determine how much money the movie may generate - but you can definitely determine how much it cost to produce.

and you can certainly argue that the earnings potential for the movie could be reduced in such events - as a bad review might deter people from seeing the shitty movies that Lucas is releasing under the Star Wars name these days.

Re:Damages?

[InnovATIONS]

The Internet News article said that the 450K was the actual cost of the items stolen. They guy apparently had quite a horde of stolen stuff from all of the films that he had worked on.

No, this will not be prosecuted as a breach-of-contract. It will most likely be prosecuted as plain and simple grand theft. Lucasfilm will most likely not try to sue this guy for financial damages because this guy hardly has the money to be worth the suit.

What is more important to Lucasfilm is a publicized case to make folks think twice about lifting stuff from a film set (as happened very recently from the set of The Cat in the Hat film).

Re:Damages?

[Rogerborg]

The 19 CD's worth of Star Wars sounds are quoted as being worth $95,000. Now, given that I'm sure that if he took the only copies of these, then somebody would have noticed sooner, I think we can assume that these are clones (heh).

Wow, if I manage to get copies of them, can I sell them for $95,000 too? Every set of copies I make? Wait, what if the people that I sell them to have the same idea? We can all make $95,000 for each copy we sell? Cool!

What's on trial here is the idea that the artificial scarcity of information should be protected by law. I think that's pretty much an inversion of the intent of copyright law, and that this guy should face criminal charges for the actual value of what he took, i.e. 20 cents a CD. Lucasart can bring civil charges for breach of copyright for the rest, but I'm damned if I want my tax money to pay for this guy to live behind bars.

YMM, of course, V.

And in a bitter fit of irony...

[Ted V]

... This post is simultaneously more interesting, insightful, and funny than most of the score 5 posts in this thread.

Trolling for Dollars

[Anonymous Coward]

Since when was it that our country was put under a police state by the Lucas Film Corp? It's our right to be able to listen to free music, watch free pr0n, trade free movies and ESPECIALLY get all the inside scoop on the Star Wars franchise. This kind of thing has to stop and it has to stop NOW!! I say , that we form a band of merry geeks with a ton of weapons and march right up to Lucas and put him to death. The force is strong within him, but it's also of the dark side. We can take him men! Join me! And together we will rule the galaxy! We already rule the internet, so why not?

How'd I do Adolph Hitroll?

This exists in the retail biz, too

[Illuminati Member]

Being a former retail shop owner (video game store that also sold movies), I can tell you stories about how sometimes you get video tapes of movies weeks before they are supposed to be released. If you accidentally put it on the shelf a day before its released. You got a nice hefty fine to pay.

The movie biz is something not to mess with.

Re:This exists in the retail biz, too

[LighthouseJ]

I had a friend that worked at an Electronics Boutique near my house. He told me about video games and trading cards that had that same arrangement, "don't shelf until this date or pay lots of money". He said it was to make the published release dates in advertisements coincide with the sale of the item.

I also saw on the news way back when the third latest Harry Potter book came out, a month before the book to be released, a local Wal-Mart (to me) put the book on the shelf and sold it.

It just goes to show you, video games are more important than books.

Re:This exists in the retail biz, too

[anonymous cupboard]

There is one major super market chain in Germany that regularly puts videos and DVDs out early. It seems to happen in more than one store so I guess it is policy.

What drama!

[splattertrousers]

I wonder if the defendant's jail cell is next to a garbage chute that has an exit near his ship?

And after he's found guilty, I wonder if he'll be thrown in some sort of pit containing some sort of monster and from which he couldn't possibly escape.

Waddaminute!

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you trying to tell me that the actors in the last two StarWars films were REAL?!?!

Re:Waddaminute!

[Anonymous Coward]

First, define actor.

Re:Waddaminute!

[copec]

ahahahaha

thats funny.

Re:Waddaminute!

[goon america]

And I thought they were wax dummies!

How is this figure determined?

[CodeWheeney]

Can anyone with any knowledge of this kind of crime determine how the value was attached? $450K seems kind of steep. I'd say cost of materials, cost of lost revenue (maybe 20 people saw it and wouldn't pay $8 a pop in the theatres)?

$450K seems kind of punative, IMHO.

Re:How is this figure determined?

[Anonymous Coward]

He stole a film that cost over $100 million to produce and released it on the internet weeks before it was supposed to be, $450k seems kindof light to me.

Re:How is this figure determined?

[CodeWheeney]

But did he cause $450K in damages, or did he steal $450K in goods (or some combination of such)? Someone somewhere assigned this value to the theft of some company property (according to the article) and some intellectual property. Does LucasFilm feel that they would have had $450K more in ticket sales if this hadn't leaked? That'd be an interesting argument to back up with numbers. I understand the review was good (the link was slow for me), so it might even have done some good.

Re:How is this figure determined?

[Theom]

Not THE film, a copy of the film...

Re:How is this figure determined?

[FuddChuckles]

Several types of damages:

1. Contractual: you signed a contract saying you wouldn't disclose confidential information and agree to forfeit some predetermined fine if caught. Powerful companies like LucasFilms can convince wannabe production assistants to sign practically anything.

2. Lost revenue - did releasing the preview to aintitcool, a very popular site among earth-bound Jedi, have the *foreseeable* effect of hurting potential revenues? Potential revenues is purely mathmatical, but somewhat arbitrary. Multiply X% of aintitcool users who would be turned off by a mediocre review by the per ticket revenue for LucasFilms. In a civil trial, X is determined by a jury, generally.

3. Lost Property - Consider how much just one of those still shots with Lucas' comments would go for on eBay. Multiply.

-FC

DMV Cops?

[shoppa]

Foley, 30, moved back to his native Southern California earlier this year to work at NBC. He was arrested at his Burbank workplace at 10:10 a.m. yesterday by officers with the Department of Motor Vehicles' computer forensics and investigations office.

The DMV cops? How do they figure in?

Maybe the real cops and the FBI didn't think there was a case to pursue?

Re:DMV Cops?

[llamalicious]

That's because it was a moving picture violation.

*ducks*

Related News

[Shadow Wrought]

In related news, the Marin County Sheriff's Office is vigorously denying rumours of violating the civil rights of criminal suspects by locking them in a room with a Wookie...

8F10

[Anonymous Coward]

Homer: Wow, what an ending! Who would have thought Darth Vader was Luke Skywalker's father!

Crowd: [waiting in line to see the movie] Oh, thank you, Mister Blow-the-picture-for-me. [etc]

Never Mind Star Wars! Babs is a /. editor!

[teamhasnoi]

The amazing story of Barbra Streisand working for /. as an editor is right under the Star Wars story.

George Lucas

[Gizzmonic]

he seems to be the focus of a lot of geek hatred since the phantom menace. slashdot has run a lot of stuff showcasing his ugly side, whether it's his prissy creator's attitude towards fanfic or now having this fellow arrested.

i don't know whether that was exactly the right call, but i bet the guy doesn't serve much jail time. his name in hollywood is mud, so he'll probably go back to debuque or wherever and start a new career making indie films about black lesbians rediscovering the joy of lyme disease.

oh and another thing. i predict matt groening to be the next target of geek betrayal and disgust. we've all known and loved him for the simpsons, but when the movies come out, they are gonna suck, and no one will remember him fondly anymore, and they will invent their own simpsons mythos that makes more sense.

then george lucas and matt groening will have a beard staring contest, and the loser will have to shave it off on PBS during fund drive week. at least that's what i heard.

Re:George Lucas

[reflector]

oh and another thing. i predict matt groening to be the next target of geek betrayal and disgust. we've all known and loved him for the simpsons, but when the movies come out, they are gonna suck, and no one will remember him fondly anymore, and they will invent their own simpsons mythos that makes more sense.

i disagree. i've been a groening fan since before the simpsons. his 'life in hell' comic strip totally rocked, and if you read it i think you'll get a feel for him and his world-view, and get an idea as to why he won't be a sell-out. matt groening has too much integrity to turn the simpsons into some cash-making scheme that's not true to the original feel of the simpsons.

Re:George Lucas

[Anonymous Coward]

matt groening has too much integrity to turn the simpsons into some cash-making scheme that's not true to the original feel of the simpsons.

most of his pre-simpsons fans (like myself) will tell you that the simpsons is groening selling out. the early versions incarnations of the simpsons (that he wrote) were nothing more than punch and judy with some swearing. the only reason the show stayed on was because of the controversy it generated (remember how people were so upset about bart simpson saying 'hell'?).

luckily for the show, it got conan o'brien, and a couple of good years and great episodes.

the entire rest of the show's run is COASTING. the characters have turned into parodies of themselves, homer getting dumber, burns getting greedier, etc. they even do episodes with bart standing up against stuff like animal cruelty and racism. what kind of pandering bullshit is that? a far cry from life in hell, i'll tell you that much.

people have started to pick up on how much the last few seasons have sucked, and when the movies come out, mr. groening's cover will be blown. and I for one am glad.

Re:George Lucas

[reflector]

it's true that later simpsons are not as good, but i mostly attribute that to the fact that it's hard to keep a show fresh and with new ideas after THIRTEEN(!) seasons.

i expect great things of the simpsons movies.

Pretty justifiable

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm all for p2p and the like, but this guy clearly crossed the line. However he did not deserve this harsh punishment. Instead he should have just gotten fired. These days corporations are not only using their legal teams to attack their competition and gain favorable laws, they also go after employees who have parted on bad terms. This abuse of the legal system must be stopped, perhaps with reforms in the justice system to eliminate immense wealth from the justice equation.

Erm,

[Schnapple]

am I missing something here? This guy did Lucasfilm a favor. The geeks of the world were perturbed by The Phantom Menace and a few probably vowed to never see another prequel. However, Harry "LOTR OWNZ ME" Knowles says, "nah, this is good..." and the geeks regain faith. I mean, you can't buy that kind of publicity.

Of course, at $300 million, Attack of the Clones didn't pull in nearly as much money as The Phantom Menace, nor did it do as well as Spider-Man, itself a $450 million film, but consider this: TPM was more for children (not surprising in the long run, given that the lead character was a child), so kids went to go see it en masse, dragging parents along, for multiple showings. Box office gold. AOTC, what with its violence (Boba Fett picking up Jango's helmet and with the head falling out probably didn't make parents happy), lack of Jar-Jar (kids these days don't know who Yoda is), and love story, didn't make the kids want to go see it over and over again. Spider-Man, however, did. No surprise there. Plus don't forget that Spider-Man had the bizarre "luck" of being a movie about a superhero saving NYC in a post-9/11 world. The USA decided they liked that idea quite a bit (especially with the New Yorkers bonding on the bridge against the bad guy towards the end).

I personally think the reason AOTC didn't do as well as TPM was because it was the middle film. I walked out of there thinking "great - now I want to see the ending" (episode 3). My test of this theory will be how The Two Towers fares...

Re:Erm,

[Stonehand]

Or, maybe, they saw "TPM", asked "what the hell is Lucas is on -- or what were WE on to think he might produce a good SW movie", and avoided AotC. Pre-TPM, all many of the fans would have had is childhood memories of the earlier movies, and children may be far easier to wow with flash... adults have higher standards with regards to, oh, plot and acting, one might suspect.

Re:Erm,

[Anonymous Coward]

hold on I thought that jango's head stayed in his helmet... oddly defying gravity in the process. could any-one clear things ups for me... perhaps with a gnuttela file? .... oops gotta run, DMCA stormt^H^H^H^H^H^Henforcers & the DMV are after me... AAAAAAAAHHHHH!!

Re:Erm,

[hiei]

With the head falling out? Which version of the movie did you see?

Re:Erm,

[Anonymous Coward]

I've never been disappointed by Sam Ramie whereas I've felt cheated by George Lucas. Sam Ramie is cool and can laugh at himself when he does something cheesy; George Lucas points his finger at the fans and blames our perceptions for negative press. Spiderman was fun; TPM sucked (can't comment on latest one cause I'm not giving Lucas any more of my money).

In other words, I doubt it had anything to do with one being a childrens' movie or the "middle film" since Empire Strikes Back was the best of the three. It has to do with Geoge Lucas pushing crap on the fans then getting pissed when we don't come back for more and in his denial blames it on some poor smuck who decided to lift some momentos.

Oh, but they CAN (Was Re:Jedi Mind Tricks)

[danish]

What are you talking about? Jedi mind tricks can and do work on arresting officers, even without years of training.

Re:Oh, but they CAN (Was Re:Jedi Mind Tricks)

[KUHurdler]

Only if your name is SHAFT

Re:Oh, but they CAN (Was Re:Jedi Mind Tricks)

[Anonymous Coward]

Good one Chris!!!

Re:Oh, but they CAN (Was Re:Jedi Mind Tricks)

[Elkobim]

I totally agree!

Let's get this straight....

[VivianC]

From the Marin Newspaper:

Foley agreed to allow Webb to look through the items at his home and when they arrived at his Lakeville Circle townhouse the investigator saw "tons of 'Star Wars' items," Webb said in the affidavit. Foley turned over numerous items, including 25 CDs with images of the film, three videotapes of "Episode I" voice-over tests, 115 storyboard image strips and a hard disk drive with downloaded photo images.

Someone send a copy of this story to the RIAA and MPAA. THIS is stealing. Someone has been deprived of property! Throw the book at this clown.

Gotta run and see if maybe he put some of these sound effects on GNUtella before he got busted. I need a clean light-sabre .WAV file.

Re:Let's get this straight....

[drinkypoo]

Well I agree that if he actually stole this stuff then he's a thief and not just in violation of copyright law. However he could have made copies of the CDs, made copies of the videotapes, run off copies of the storyboard strips (or gotten them out of trash cans, which is arguably stealing I guess, but is not depriving anyone of anything in and of itself... And the 'hard disk drive with downloaded photo images' ... uh, *I* could have a hard disk drive with downloaded photo images of the movie if they were leaked onto the 'net, so that in itself wouldn't prove anything.

So, has he copied material he has no rights to? Looks like. But has he deprived anyone of anything? I don't think so. A good enough lawyer could possibly build a defense with this. You can't sue someone if you haven't lost anything. If he hasn't reduced the value of your product by taking these things (In reality the additional publicity can only enhance its value) then you aren't losing anything.

I realize you were speaking (at least mostly) in jest, but you also do raise a valid point, and I felt a need to raise the counter point :P

Keep Your Mouth Shut

[portege00]

This guy got busted because he went in a chat room and ran his mouth. I guess he wasn't a h4x0r or he didn't read enough text files. f00! Fux0r3d!

Seriously, what kind of socially-deprived moron would blow a job with Lucasarts by bragging about it on IRC? I hope he has Jedi mind powers to block out the force he will feel on his backside at Leavenworth.

If Lucas and RIAA types had it their way.....

[SniffleBear]

They'll charge you everytime you humm a song or recall a scene in your head.

Re:If Lucas and RIAA types had it their way.....

[doce]

there's a big difference between being sued and being charged.

Maybe if you read the article...

[rebelcool]

You even quoted it ...'related material'. I read about this a few days ago in a more in depth piece. He stole many things, the movie being only one of them. He also stole assorted props and other things. The cops raided his mom's basement where he was living (no, really) and found it chock full of star wars goods.

Harry, was Re:Erm,

[cmpalmer]

The funny thing about this was that everyone on AICN was *sure* that Lucasfilm deliberately "leaked" the Clones preview to Harry to stir up good buzz.

Even worse

[Anonymous Coward]

He stole Fizzy-lifting drinks! Now the room must be washed and scrubbed. He wins nothing! Good day to you sir! I said Good day!

Re:Even worse

[sconeu]

And then the Oompah-Loompahs need to be washed and scrubbed. He can start at 8AM tomorrow!

no one noticed the best part...

[Orgasmatron]

He was arrested by the Computer Forensics and Investigations office of, wait for it, the Department of Motor Vehicles.

Anyone care to tell me why the DMV has an office for computer forensics and investigations?

Re:no one noticed the best part...

[Anonymous Coward]

Umm... Cars have computers and DMV works having been using computers for years. Its a natural fit...

Re:no one noticed the best part...

[Anonymous Coward]

The DMV officers are State Police. It makes sense to use this department if you want to promote a criminal case into State jurisdiction.

Jango's head

[Anonymous Coward]

>Boba Fett picking up Jango's helmet and with the
>head falling out probably didn't make parents
>happy

His head most certainly did not fall out of the helmet - I was extremely disappointed. I would've peed my pants laughing if I'd seen that.

-Dan.

Re:Jango's head

[Schnapple]

His head most certainly did not fall out of the helmet - I was extremely disappointed

Well according to starwars.com, it did. I'm not sure if they made this non-obvious on purpose or if it was just inevitable that the shadow could be missed, but I didn't notice it on the theater either.

The other possibility, but I don't have a link to back it up, is that the shadows were only in some versions of the film. I read somewhere that Lucas continued to tinker with the film after its release and that, depending on when the date that the particular piece of celluloid was made, the film was that version. For example, if a theater got theirs a few months into the run or had to get a new version of the film, they got the "latest" version. This is why no one can agree on the exclusive scene for the digital version (the scene was included since there's less lead time on manufacturing - it was included in later celluloid prints, whatever it was) and part of the reason Lucas wanted the film to be a digitial exclusive - so he could issue "patches". We already know that the version of AOTC playing in hotel rooms has some differences (a few longer scenes) and given that the rumor is that there's been 50 slightly different versions of the film in theaters, it'll be interesting to see which one makes it to DVD.

Ouch!

[nightsweat]

If he's going to jail, I bet he wishes he'd leaked a better movie...

This is old news.

[Anonymous Coward]

This has been on the SW newsgroups, for, like, two weeks now. Slashdot, always quick off the mark!

Testify, brotha!

[Anonymous Coward]

That is exactly how I feel about SW. I mean, OK, the films are a perfectly fine way to waste a day or two. But I don't think it warrants being lauded such a fucking great deal. I've seen all of the SW films but ROTJ, and quite frankly the only one worth spit is ESB. All of the others have wooden acting and crappy scripts. In fact, I think I'm gonna go gouge out Lucas' eyes right now. Back in a sec.

Actually they did work

[giminy]

Or didn't you ever watch Mallrats? Silent Bob, erm, figured out the Jedi Mind Trick (at least manipulating objects). I'm sure that, since it's been a few years since Mallrats, he has figured out the Jedi Move Along trick...

Re:Actually they did work

[PhxBlue]

He did a lot more than that in Jay and Silent Bob Stike Back. Silent Bob is a Jedi, methinks, in a way a few thousand Aussies will never be. :)

Harry kari

[Anonymous Coward]

Other than the fact that Ain't It Cool News and Harry Knowles aren't being charged with anything, police aren't saying much.

As if they'd want another butt-pirate in the pokey...

Clear violation of 1st Ammendment Rights

[Anonymous Coward]

He has the freedom of speech to tell about that story if he wants to.

OH HELL NO.

[unicron]

You've done it now. Don't you know that all of us at Slashdot can justify ANY type of action with ANY type of media? Lemme whip out my magic 8 ball of "why I pirated this movie"..(SHAKING)..ahh, haven't seen that one in a while: "I wasn't going to pay to see it in the theatre anyways, so I can download it because Lucas isn't losing money either way"..any oldie but goody. Maybe next time you'll think twice before you bring your "laws" in here. I mean honestly, I didn't like the last Star Wars movie, so I have to be entitled to download burn this one to divx for compensation, right? It's only fair.

Re:OH HELL NO.

[DaytonCIM]

LOL!

I mean honestly, I didn't like the last Star Wars movie, so I have to be entitled to download burn this one to divx for compensation, right? It's only fair.

You nailed it, my friend. 99% of the movie, music, software pirates justify their actions with the "I deserve it" excuse.

"I have been a fan of Star Wars since I was 9, so I deserve to 'own' a copy before anyone else."

"I deserve lower prices at the box office, so I'll just download an illegal copy."

"I wasn't going to pay to see it in the theatre anyways, so I can download it because Lucas isn't losing money either way"

It burns me that some in the /. community can jump up and down and scream when Microsoft begins to charge for something they think should be free.

Shout the praises of Linus when he releases something new for free.

And support people that pirate a movie like Star Wars... a movie funded SOLELY by George Lucas.

Review:
It's ok to pirate Microsoft, 'cause they're bad.
It's not ok to pirate Linux, 'cause they're good.
It's ok to pirate Star Wars, 'cause Mr. Lucas has enough money already (forget that he employs nearly 2000 people).

I love /. community logic.

Re:OH HELL NO.

[unicron]

Damn, I thought I was alone. Don't let it get you down, though. In the world technology and computing, /. is a joke. No one takes this site seriously anymore, and it's dismissed as a haven of wanna-be hackers and software pirates. What's funny is, watch how the posts die down during weekends. My bet is it's because /. is generally "tolerable-browsing" in the workplace, so you'll notice higher numbers during weekdays.

Re:OH HELL NO.

[Anonymous Coward]

If I had any mod points, you'd get them, if for nothing more than to counter-act all these modding-down you'll get from these thieving fucktards with pathetic justifications.

Re:OH HELL NO.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's ok to pirate Microsoft, 'cause they're bad. It's not ok to pirate Linux, 'cause they're good. It's ok to pirate Star Wars, 'cause Mr. Lucas has enough money already (forget that he employs nearly 2000 people).

...and?

You'd have to have the mind of a lawyer not to have an intuitive sense of this in the first place. It's called natural justice. I'm not required to obey the rules of the system in my heart. They're just rules. Not moral precepts.

Re:OH HELL NO.

[Anonymous Coward]

"What's funny is, watch how the posts die down during weekends. My bet is it's because /. is generally "tolerable-browsing" in the workplace, so you'll notice higher numbers during weekdays."

Gosh, I would have sworn that it had something to do with some of us actually having lives (and consequently, other things to do on occasion). Feh; what do I know?

Re:OH HELL NO.

[PhxBlue]

It's not ok to pirate Linux, 'cause they're good.

Pirate Linux? Wha. . ?? It's already free!

Re:OH HELL NO.

[unicron]

Your moral compass holds no weight in a court room. While I wonder if "I'm letting my conscious be my guide" has worked for you before, remember it doesn't mean jack shit in the world of actual laws.

Re:OH HELL NO.

[Anonymous Coward]

Ok, so what about my right to watch my Lucas DVD's on my linux laptop? that's illegal.

and how about my media server so I can listen to my CD collection that I ripped to mp3's so I can play them easily in my home while the CD's are safely stored in locked media drawers... that is also illegal.

and finally... I make backup copies of all my software CD's... breaking any encryption and copy prevention so that I may make that copy and keep the origionals in a safe place. that also is illegal.

is what I am doing immoral? am I depriving anyone of anything? and is there one person on this planet that isn't a immature 3 year old that would not agree with me that I am doing nothing wrong.

HEY! I'M a LAWBREAKER!!!! and proud of it!

until the immature children that run the corperations of this country grow up and stop scting like spoiled 3 year old brats... I support any and all intellectual property theft.

They want to screw with me... I'll vocally support anyone that screws them.

I'm tired of it all, and if the only way to get to them is to take an anarchist attitude, then that's what I'm doing.

Re:OH HELL NO.

[dwaggie]

Huh.. no, all I said was that I felt it was wrong that he did it, and should be put away. That a guy's right to produce something privately should be held until he publicly releases it and that everything should be a matter of public retrieval. This had nothing to do with Linux, Microsoft or money.

Re:OH HELL NO.

[Anonymous Coward]

Believe it or not, it's possible to disagree with those laws & STILL not infringe on anyone's copyrights. I also don't agree that "copyright infringement" == "theft" (and, BTW, if you RTFA, this guy *did* steal stuff) but that doesn't make me a theif.

Oh yeah; /. doesn't all speak with one voice. There may be some hypocrites, but I'm not sure that all the people here are--at different times, different people express different oppinions. That doesn't make them hypocrites. Please keep track of who says what if you want to accuse anyone of hypocracy.

There just isn't one monolithic /. viewpoint...

Re:OH HELL NO.

[Anonymous Coward]

i love it when fucktards like you broadly paint an entire community.

you are posting here are you not?

well then you are part of this community too, dick wad!

and i see plenty of people posting in no uncertain terms that the starwars event was theft.

so why don't you take that broad brush you are painting everyone with and shove it up your arse.

i see plenty of diversity here.

your just a dumb fucker who don't deserve your mod points.

Re:OH HELL NO.

[Anonymous Coward]

"No one takes this site seriously anymore,"

this implies you used to take it seriously.

egads, i think i have found the problem.

you ARE A TOTAL TARD!!!!

if you don't know how to filter what you are reading, and extract good information from the volumes of crap out on the net...i feel sorry for you.

why don't you pick some sites for us and post them so we can review what you consider high quality reading.

it would be enlightening.

""What's funny is, watch how the posts die down during weekends. My bet is it's because /. is generally "tolerable-browsing" in the workplace,""

man...you ARE a mental giant.

did you come up with that on your own?

please.

give it a rest.

Re:OH HELL NO.

[unicron]

My point is this site wouldn't get half as much traffic that it does if it security cracked down on it more.

Re:OH HELL NO.

[BlueBlade]

I just have to reply to this. I've noticed your handle several times on slashdot... in spite of your complaint about how "slashdot isn't to be taken seriously anymore", you sure do post a lot. Your posts are usually more intelligent than this one though. Seeing this angered me enough to reply,and I *don't* post a lot.

Anyway, to the point. I frequently download movies over the internet. I occasionnally go to the cinema, maybe once every six weeks (8 to 10 times a year I guess). I'm by no means an avid cinema fan, but I like to go from times to times with friends or gf. Now, I've had this pattern for years. The fact that I'm downloading and watching movies didn't change the number of times I'm going to the cinema. Nor did it change the number of movies I rent at the local video club. Am I stealing? I sure get to watch more movies than I did previously. I mean, I'm not rich, and I couldn't afford to go to the cinema for every movie I download.

But I'm still giving what I can afford to the movie industry. Maybe I'm not "entitled" to view these extra movies, but they sure make me somewhat happier, as I'm being entertained more. Isn't all that matters? When I can afford more, I'm going to pay for more. In the meantime, I don't feel like I'm stealing anything.

I'm canadian, not american though. So maybe the more... socialist point of view shocks you. But believe it or not, here, we don't treat people only by the money they carry. No one here pays for health care. Basic things like water aren't metered, we just pay a global tax and we can use as much as we want. Sure, the guy next door with a swimming pool consumes more than I, but it's *water*. It should be available to everyone, and everyone should support the water infrastructure equally.

Poor people here are allowed on the bus, if they don't have enough to pay (as long as they don't make an habit out of it). But *surely* they are stealing service?! Well, someone who can't afford the bus would have had to walk, maybe for several hours. That person wouldn't have paid anyway, and the bus was already there. Is she stealing? No. When she gets better financially, then she can pay. No problem.

Do you get my point? Sure, I believe that someone making large-scale copies of movies and selling them is in the wrong. But aunt Lucy downloading a copy of "A Beautiful Mind"? Come on.

I wonder how many people browsing slashdot are going to find this "shocking", the fact that you could willingly support a certain number of freeloaders. I guess most of America has become too individualistic for views like that to be shared by many. It's sad, if you ask me.

Re:OH HELL NO.

[swankypimp]

I think he's talking about non-free Linux programs, like VMWare or WineX. Either that, or he's using the term "pirate" loosely, and is discussing the hardcore Linux people who urge you to buy two hundred dollar boxed copies of RedHat or pre-installed Linux laptops as a message to developers that Linux is popular/profitable enough.

Re:OH HELL NO.

[unicron]

First of all, thank you for the comment about my posts being usually more intelligent. I was getting modded down for making serious anti-piracy posts, so I made a humorous one, and it got modded up. Big suprise.

As for your comments, this is exactly what I'm talking about. I, myself, commit piracy. Not on any grand scale, but maybe a program here or there, and a song if I heard it on the radio and liked it. The thing that seperates me from the majority of /. users is the fact that I don't attempt to justify it to myself using shallow logic. It is NOT your decision which laws you are going to obey(and please don't bring up people like Ghandi or Martin Luther King Jr., you're stealing movies, not fighting for the rights of a race of people). "I'm happy, isn't that enough?" I honestly cannot believe you said that. No, it's not enough. That movie, and all it's rights belong to someone. You pay for the privalige of watching it. If you don't like the price, or can't afford it, tough. Watching a movie is not something you need to live, it's a privalige.

Re:OH HELL NO.

[rtechie]

The thing that seperates me from the majority of /. users is the fact that I don't attempt to justify it to myself using shallow logic. It is NOT your decision which laws you are going to obey(and please don't bring up people like Ghandi or Martin Luther King Jr., you're stealing movies, not fighting for the rights of a race of people).

Actually, what you're doing is ridiculing the concept of natural justice, as another poster pointed out.

Simple question: Is it wrong to hurt evil people?

A real life example: When I was a punk rocker me and my other punk friends made a point that whenever we saw a Nazi skinhead (called boneheads) alone on the street, and we thought we could get away with it, we would beat the shit out of him. Why? Because he was a Nazi, he was giving the rest of us a bad name and, frankly, he deserved it. Vigilantism? Definitely. MORALLY WRONG? Absolutely not.

I consider the major media conglomerates who control about 90% of media in the USA to be evil. Perhaps not as evil as the Nazis, but still evil. Therefore I see nothing wrong with stealing from them. Or beating up their senior executives on the street for that matter.

What's the worse case piracy scenario? Piracy becomes so rampant that eventually they are forced out of business. In my mind this is a GOOD thing.

I asked Harry Knowles about this...

[joshsisk]

I emailed Harry Knowles and Moriarty, the Ain't It cool News guys several days ago, and submitted this story, as well. Both maintained they had MORE than one source, AND that this guy was not one of those aforementioned sources. Here are the responses I got :

"If they charged him, he was stealing stuff, but I've never heard nor met that guy." - Harry

"We've never heard of him." - Moriarty

If they are to believed, then this guy is unrelated to them. The fact that LucasFilm has not pressed charges only backs up that fact.

Oh, and by the way:

2002-10-09 19:48:17 Steal from George, go to jail (articles,starwars) (rejected)

What about leaking on....

[Anonymous Coward]

Attack of the clowns or any other star wars movie.

live long and prosper.

Such hypocracy

[Anonymous Coward]

I was an assitant production manager for the "Dude, Where's My Car?" project and I got a bonus of $450k for leaking copies to the public.

Re:Is there an issue here? I think so.

[srelan]

Dude is probably going to spend more time in jail than most rapists. That doesn't seem right. He should be fired but I seriously doubt the 'value' of the lost items to LucasFilms....

Stolen by Shea O'Brien Foley

[geigertube]

Pirates, nothing, the movie industry needs to keep an eye on the Irish.

Hmm. Reversing this, Im suddenly seeing the those Lucky Charms commercials as an analogy for the MPAA vs video pirates. :)

Re:Stolen by Shea O'Brien Foley

[Anonymous Coward]

But the CD's the MPAA has come out with lately sure don't seem to be "magically delicious" ...

Don't you mean 'Steal, go to jail'?

[verch]

If you need to read /. to realize stealing is illegal...

The only somewhat interesting question here is if the AIC news folks gave the guy up, which would have some interesting freedom of the press/protecting your source issues. (And you thought protecting the source was Linus' job)

Opinion: Lock Harry Knowles up as well......

[Samurai Lobster]

The charges? 13 counts of receiving stolen goods.

Anything that gets kid of Harry Knowles and his gigantic fleshy jowls is okay in my book. Unfortunately, there aren't enough poison doughnuts in the world that we could cram down the expansive gullet of the horrible beast known as Harry Knowles.

Erm... (Was: Re:Erm,)

[cardshark2001]

Might it have something to do with the fact that The Phantom Menace was absolutely horrible? I could crap on celluloid and record cats having sex for the soundtrack and come up with a better film.

I almost didn't see AOTC, just because TPM was so bad, but I'm glad I did.

On the plus side...

[unicorn]

Given the crappy jobs outlook in the Bay Area lately. At least there's one less person that you'll EVER have to worry about competing again, for a job. Any job.

I sure as hell wouldn't trust this bozo behind a register at McD's after all.

More details...

[Robotech_Master]

...can be found here. Good ol' news.google.com. :)

*Sigh*

[unicorn]

Make that "wont EVER" or NEVER as you see fit.

if this guy is smart...

[happyclam]

If this guy is smart, he'll get a good lawyer and sue his (former) employer LucasFilm for not warning him that taking home company items could be a crime. What with being arrested AND having to give the stuff back, the pain & suffering damages could be astronomical.

Remember, if you're a burglar and you fall through a skylight or electrocute yourself disarming the burglar alarm, you can get a big settlement!

Re:if this guy is smart...

[NeoSkandranon]

Oh, yeah, next time i get caught shoplifting remind me to sue the store for not informing me that taking items home could be a crime.

Re:if this guy is smart...

[happyclam]

you have to be careful only to steal from stores that don't already have signs stating that shoplifting is a crime.

The Cost of Collecting

[DaytonCIM]

I do hope that the remaining portion of his "vast" memorabilia collection is able to support his defense fund and maybe pay down some of the expected criminal fines and civil judgements.

Stealing is stealing.

I don't think Mr. Foley should spend any amount of time in a cell, however, probation, counseling, and LOTS of community service is definitely in order.

Waitaminute! There was a 5th movie?

[Anonymous Coward]

Lots of Ewoks and Jar Jar stuff, I guess?

But in this case, malum in se

[werdna]

He didn't steal something--stealing is depriving someone of a good that they own. No one was deprived, however he did violate copyright law and contract law.

Are you proffering a legal or linguistic argument here? Either way, you lose. Per Webster's Third New International, "to steal" denotes many types of conduct, including many kinds of theft, including:

Steal 1b:

to appropriate (as another's conception or invention) and use as one's own

"To steal" might well denote the conduct complained of by a dictionary, but probably also denotes the conduct asserted under California law. Virtually every state's definition of theft incorporates (directly or by separate statute) criminal penalties for theft of trade secrets, for example, often denominated as theft.

In this case, as understood from an article snarfted from Google, he was charged with plural counts of computer crime and grand theft.

Hardly. There are levels of crimes. We don't punish traffic code violators like we do murderers.

True. So what?

With no real damage, this is on the level of petty misdemeanor.

This guy, however, is facing thirteen felony counts, with penalties that can lead to incarceration over seven years.

Re:But in this case, malum in se

[Henry V .009]

This guy, however, is facing thirteen felony counts, with penalties that can lead to incarceration over seven years.

And hence the injustice.

Where is the level of harm to individuals and society that would warrent this?

Re:But in this case, malum in se

[werdna]

And hence the injustice.

If you say so. But at least we understand now the source of your concerns. It isn't the language definition of "theft," which you do not dispute here -- nor is it the legal definition, which you acknowledge here -- it is merely that you disagree with the result.

Fair enough, but that wasn't what you wrote -- you wrote that the crimes with which he was charged were not serious crimes, but merely petty misdemeanors. That, of course, was false. He was charged with thirteen felonies -- serious crimes.

Whether he is guilty of them or note remains to be seen, and quite frankly, i for one will wait until i see the verdict before calling this an injustice.

Re:But in this case, malum in se

[Henry V .009]

You are having trouble reading. I wrote that the crimes that he committed were on the order of petty misdemeanors.

He was charged with grand theft.

I will write this very slowly, so that I now get my point across to you. If someone commits a crime that is small in degree, but is charged with a crime that is large in degree, there is injustice. Look up the definition of draconian.

Re:But in this case, malum in se

[werdna]

You are having trouble reading. I wrote that the crimes that he committed were on the order of petty misdemeanors.

He was charged with grand theft.

I am pleased that you agree that to assert either the linguistic or criminal argument that the conduct was not theft is incorrect. I am further pleased that you acknowledge that he was, in fact, charged with thirteen major crimes for his conduct. It is reasonable to assert that you think grand theft of this kind should be a misdemeanor and not seriously penalized -- though it is likewise reasonable to disagree. I concur that arguments what "should" be the crime are a different thing altogether.

Judging from the several responses posted here, I was not the only one who took your original message to be making broader and different arguments than this current one.

Still, even given the backpedaling construction of your posting that you now hold, I disagree:

Here's the neat thing about this -- the legislature gets together after getting themselves elected, and they decide what constitutes various crimes, and the punishments for them. Another politician, the governor, then gets to decide whether or not the law goes to far, and either signs it or lets it pass into law without signature. I'd be willing to bet the laws passed in this case passed virtually without controversy.

You can like it or lump it -- and indeed, you can think that things are criminal (or, as in this case, quite highly criminal) that are not.

But you know, at the end of the day, you don't get to decide for yourself what is and is not permitted, and what is the punishment that will be lodged against you for violating the law.

This man was charged with thirteen felony crimes. You don't think that what he did was all that bad. But if the elements of those crimes are proved, he committed the crimes. This isn't injustice -- this is the way the system is supposed to work -- indeed, precisely to keep people from engaging in unbridled and uncontrolled exercises of authority. If you think that the standard for grand theft is too low, by all means, speak to your legislators. Indeed, if you are correct, and he didn't do the deeds, or the deeds he did were not the crimes with which he is charged, then he will have an easy time defending himself. But please, for gosh sake, stop whining.

Re:But in this case, malum in se

[Henry V .009]

you think grand theft of this kind

Good God! I can't get through, can I? I'll repeat myself one last time: He was charged with grand theft, but committed no crimes on the order of grand theft.

I don't know why this is such a hard concept to get across. Maybe you live in a foreign country where everyone charged with a crime is assumed to be guilty. In my country, America, just because someone is charged with a certain crime, doesn't mean that he guilty. We assume that person is innocent. We even allow him to defend himself with the proposition that he may not have committed the alledged crimes at all.

This man was charged with thirteen felony crimes. You don't think that what he did was all that bad. But if the elements of those crimes are proved, he committed the crimes.

Your residence in a far off land obviously keeps you from any real understanding of the justice system. There are any number of prosecutors who "bend" the definition of a statute to serve their purposes. The acts alledged don't always fit the statute. So just because he was proven to commit the alledged acts, does not mean he has actually committed grand theft under the definition of the statute.

Hell, according the the newspaper accounts the only physical items that that the police claimed he had were 19 CD-ROMS. We don't know that he stole the CD-ROMS, or simply brought some from home and burned him. Anyway, $9.00 worth of CD-ROMS is not grand theft under the statute.

The rest is copyright infringement, which is handled under different statutes.

Re:But in this case, malum in se

[werdna]

Good God! I can't get through, can I? I'll repeat myself one last time: He was charged with grand theft, but committed no crimes on the order of grand theft.

Had you read my messages as carefully as you insist I should read yours, you would see that I directly confronted that position -- your response, not on the merits but mere gainsay -- does not lead me to forget the points I made.

Whether he had committed crime on the order of grand theft or felony computer crimes remains to be seen, and certainly time will tell. But the elements appear to be satisfied by the allegations, and though YOU don't think terribly highly of the state charging someone with this crime, as I noted in particular, YOU don't get to make the decision, either normatively or legally.

I don't know why this is such a hard concept to get across. Maybe you live in a foreign country where everyone charged with a crime is assumed to be guilty. In my country, America, just because someone is charged with a certain crime, doesn't mean that he guilty. We assume that person is innocent. We even allow him to defend himself with the proposition that he may not have committed the alledged crimes at all.

Let me get this straight. He was charged with a crime. You say that he must be presumed innocent. Hence, you conclude that an injustice has occurred.

The presumption of innocence does not preclude charging someone with a crime, or the discussion whether the facts, if they occurred, would give rise to the crime. You aren't disputing the facts -- you are asserting that the facts, if true, would not be criminal at the level charged. I am disagreeing with THAT point, not asserting that he is guilty because he was charged.

Your residence in a far off land obviously keeps you from any real understanding of the justice system. There are any number of prosecutors who "bend" the definition of a statute to serve their purposes. The acts alledged don't always fit the statute. So just because he was proven to commit the alledged acts, does not mean he has actually committed grand theft under the definition of the statute.

Personal attacks on me make no difference. After all, I am a lawyer. :-) Seriously, you have it all wrong. The prosecutors have a far better case on the merits than your credit it. the value of personal property is not limited to the price of the media stored on it, and the case books are filled with criminal grand theft involving unpublished works and intellectual property -- primarily trade secrets. Such cases have been heavily appealed on similar grounds (Taborsky being one of them), and the defendants have lost.

My suggestion -- don't whine about injustice. Do something about it by changing the law -- if you think you can make the argument stick. But in this case, this charge doesn't seem to raise too many meaningful legal hackles.

I *DO* expect the defense attorneys to try to win on the ground that the property isn't valued grand theft. They may not do so well on that theory, but hey, its worth a shot. Time will tell which of us was right.

Hell, according the the newspaper accounts the only physical items that that the police claimed he had were 19 CD-ROMS. We don't know that he stole the CD-ROMS, or simply brought some from home and burned him. Anyway, $9.00 worth of CD-ROMS is not grand theft under the statute.

So you say. Who knows? Maybe you are right. On the other hand, a prosecutor probably thinks he has a pretty good case to file such an information. Let's see what the judge and jury say later on.

The rest is copyright infringement, which is handled under different statutes.

No, he was accused of computer crimes as well as grand theft? I understand that he is innocent until crucified, but that doesn't make your statement less false.

I read several articles, but saw none that made any reference to criminal copyright infringement (which would be brought only by a USA, and not by a state attorney; I agree that infringement is malum prohibitum, by the way). Were you just guessing, or did you see otherwise?

See, we here in the United States live under the laws promulgated by the legislature, prosecuted by the Executive in the Judiciary. We, as individuals, don't get to make it up as we go along -- the laws are the laws, and the penalties are the penalties. As I said, this is the system working as it should.

Re:But in this case, malum in se

[Henry V .009]

Maybe you live in a foreign country

After all, I am a lawyer. :-)

Good God Damn. I include Florida, to be sure. Anyways, it's rather impossible to argue with someone who in turn only argues with what he would like you to have said, rather than what has actually been said.

Let me get this straight. He was charged with a crime. You say that he must be presumed innocent. Hence, you conclude that an injustice has occurred.

Why do I bother? No, that is complete mischaracterization of what I wrote earlier--like most of your statements concerning what I have said. Is there some point to that sort of thing? It's a cheap debating trick that only works with an audience. And as far as I can tell, we're the only two participating. Again, I'll say it very simply: I argued that injustice occured because he was charged with the crime of grand theft, when his alledged actions do not fit the definition of grand theft. The presumption of innocence comment was a reply to your earlier comment which states: "It is reasonable to assert that you think grand theft of this kind should be a misdemeanor and not seriously penalized." All you did here was again mischaracterize my original point and further contradict me in a roundabout way with no supporting arugument. Beautiful piece of cheap rhetoric.

The presumption of innocence does not preclude charging someone with a crime, or the discussion whether the facts, if they occurred, would give rise to the crime. You aren't disputing the facts -- you are asserting that the facts, if true, would not be criminal at the level charged. I am disagreeing with THAT point, not asserting that he is guilty because he was charged.

Finally. It took you this long to disagree with it in a direct manner. Now that you have finally stated the real argument without mischaracterization of any kind, make your point.

the value of personal property is not limited to the price of the media stored on it, and the case books are filled with criminal grand theft involving unpublished works and intellectual property -- primarily trade secrets. Such cases have been heavily appealed on similar grounds (Taborsky being one of them), and the defendants have lost.

You prove my point. It's the amount of damage done, not the street value of the copyrighted material that is the issue. Stealing the only copy of an original manuscript is quite different from copying an expensive software program or electronic book. Again Taborsky is another case where the damage is important and not the items (the notebooks), but the invention (kitty litter, wasn't it?). What if he had merely xeroxed the notebooks, as more or less (apparently) occurred in this Star Wars case? Quite a different thing (assuming it was the university that got the patents). Suddenly you have much smaller real damages, and if I recall, grand theft statutes usually have a damage minimum in cases of non-violent theft--that is if we are talking about damage done, and not price of files stored on the media.

My suggestion -- don't whine about injustice. Do something about it by changing the law

Wow. What an incredible statement. I don't suppose you could give one example of a single law in all of history that wasn't changed by people 'whining about injustice?' (Please don't include examples of dictators or the powerful making the laws more unjust.)

The rest is copyright infringement, which is handled under different statutes.

No, he was accused of computer crimes as well as grand theft?

In that context I was only speaking about the grand theft charges. He should be held liable for the computer crimes. Of course, even for those computer crimes, the issue of actual damage remains important, I would assume.

I read several articles, but saw none that made any reference to criminal copyright infringement (which would be brought only by a USA, and not by a state attorney; I agree that infringement is malum prohibitum, by the way).

Exactly, which makes me feel that he is being charged under the wrong statutes.

We, as individuals, don't get to make it up as we go along -- the laws are the laws, and the penalties are the penalties.

Yes, but certain people called prosecutors will often try to bend the wording of a statute (more often the spirit) in order to land a big case.

And finally I apologize for the personal attacks. Rather, I was trying to colorfully say that the quality of your argument up to this point, was that of a foreigner who misunderstands both law and the English language.

Re:But in this case, malum in se

[werdna]

I don't see any point in addressing your allegations that I was not being responsive -- it is apparent that as between us, we will have to agree to disagree whether or not you must confront the arguments I made. I will leave that to our gracious colleagues to decide for themselves how they feel about all of that.

You prove my point. It's the amount of damage done, not the street value of the copyrighted material that is the issue. Stealing the only copy of an original manuscript is quite different from copying an expensive software program or electronic book.

If you say so. The law, I am here to tell you -- at least in the areas in which I practice, is quite different. The theft of content is actionable in fact. Computer Fraud and Abuse, and comparable state laws operate on similar principles.

Again Taborsky is another case where the damage is important and not the items (the notebooks), but the invention

You are mistaken (except that it was about a material that can be used as a form of kitty litter). Petr Taborsky was convicted, among other things, for theft of trade secrets. Indeed, the reason he served time on the chain gang had to do, in part, with his disclosure of those secrets by filing a patent application based upon the subject matter of the lab notes.

What if he had merely xeroxed the notebooks, as more or less (apparently) occurred in this Star Wars case?

Same result on these counts at least.

Quite a different thing (assuming it was the university that got the patents).

Ultimately they did. Among other restitutionary relief, a patent was assigned to the U.

Suddenly you have much smaller real damages, and if I recall, grand theft statutes usually have a damage minimum in cases of non-violent theft--that is if we are talking about damage done, and not price of files stored on the media.

The fundamental difference between grand theft and petit theft is precisely the amount of damages -- not of the consequences after restitution, but assuming that the theft was non-recoverable.

Look, there is no point on going on with this -- I'm done responding here. You seem to think you know a great deal more about the law than do I, and I seem to think I know a great deal more about it than you. I do not know the facts of this case in any detail, nor can I predict the result. But assuming the facts are as we assumed here, I believe it is quite clear that you would lose.vvMoreover, the theft claims aside, the computer abuse counts aren't even close to dispute.

So, let's part friends or enemies as you prefer, let's see what happens. You bet he will go free on these facts, and I would bet he would be convicted, which conviction would survive appeals. So what? This isn't the forum in which that will be decided.

I agree to disagree -- this is my last posting on this thread.

Re:But in this case, malum in se

[Henry V .009]

You are mistaken (except that it was about a material that can be used as a form of kitty litter). Petr Taborsky was convicted, among other things, for theft of trade secrets. Indeed, the reason he served time on the chain gang had to do, in part, with his disclosure of those secrets by filing a patent application based upon the subject matter of the lab notes.

Again changing the subject. This would have been a lot shorter if you had just argued with what I said instead of what you would have liked for me to have said. Taborsky was convicted of grand theft of research materials and theft of trade secrets. The trade secrets charge was not under discussion. The reason he was convicted of grand theft, was because that was the only copy that he stole. The school was deprived of access to his research. Xeroxing them would have been an entirely different issue. You can look up the ruling if you'd like. The patent filing which got him sent to the chain gang was a probation violation.

The theft of content is actionable in fact. Computer Fraud and Abuse, and comparable state laws operate on similar principles.

Hate to bring you back to the subject, but we were talking about the grand theft statute, not other codes.

You bet he will go free on these facts, and I would bet he would be convicted, which conviction would survive appeals.

Now when the hell did I say that? He's going away unless he can afford a good attorney.

I agree to disagree -- this is my last posting on this thread.

Next time try arguing with the other party rather than points you dream up yourself. It's less aggravating all around.

Damn, but I had fun, though.

Get a Good Lawyer

[Anonymous Coward]

If they actually charged him with theft, then with a good lawyer he could probably get those counts dismissed.

When will people get it through their thick skulls that copyright violations are not the same thing as theft? Of course, I would imagine that most purveyors of IP would rather the public not understand the difference between the two.

"These items were priceless because the film had not been released and the early release of these items would adversely impact the income of Lucasfilm," Webb told Bettin, according to the affidavit. "This is based on 'hold back' agreements that Lucasfilm had with several other companies."

Hell, it could be more easily argued that early release of the items actually increased Lucasfilm's income. Good luck proving damage.

libertarian view qjkx

[Anonymous Coward]

You have to have some sort of contract, and this was a violation. But anybody who distributed it is not a part of the contract and has no liability at all.

Re:libertarian view qjkx

[the eric conspiracy]

But anybody who distributed it is not a part of the contract and has no liability at all.

Except for copyright and trademark infringement.

Legally Binding

[Darthbert]

I think Lucas Arts should violate this guy in the most uncomfortable of body cavities to the fullest extent of the law. He went against the non-disclosure agreement, he deserves everything that he gets. The problem with most internet related crimes is that nobody does anything about it. Lucas Arts and the judicial system need to make an example of this asshole and show him that despite the laughability of the non-disclosure agreement, it's still legally binding. George needs to go sith on this guy's ass.

E2!

[Anonymous Coward]

Monkey! Bat! Robot hat!

Shea Foley's web site

[zfalcon]

http://www.sheafoley.com

He sells some, well, interesting material.

CNN thinks you're funny...

[DanMan]

Looks like "chrisd"'s comment about Jedi mind tricks was funny enough to be broadcast on CNN. They quoted it in a reference to the story about 2 minutes ago.

Re:CNN thinks you're funny...

[Anonymous Coward]

I submitted it anonymously and wrote that line... although I didn't consider it especially funny. I just knew I needed a catchy closing line. So, they stole my line, not his!

Such a lovely legal system

[interstellar_donkey]

Take a copy of a movie and show it to other people while not making any money, go to jail.

Make millions as a CEO through deception and fraud destroying the financial lives of thousands and contributing to the collapse of the economy as a whole... you can go free.

Sell a relitivly harmless plant to someone to help them releave stress, go to jail.

Make billions by putting out drugs at prices that bankrupt people less they die... you can go free. ... there examples a pleanty. But the moral of the story is, in America's justice system it's only really wrong if you don't make a fortune.

Re:Such a lovely legal system

[nytmare]

Are you saying then that drug use and piracy are ok if you're poor?

Re:Such a lovely legal system

[JWhiton]

I dunno, some of them folks who are at the top of groups that sell said plants and similar items are pretty rich, from what I understand. But then again, they don't have a lot of positive clout with the folks in DC.

Re:Such a lovely legal system

[Anonymous Coward]

Why is this a troll? The point is relevant and valid, if pedantic.

Serves him right

[Anonymous Coward]

He released copyrighted information to the Internet when he was the owner. If you say that he didn't do anything wrong, then how can you say that others who do the same thing are? And vice versa. If you think he's wrong, and should be taken to court for this, then how can you say the others who do the same thing shouldn't be?

The most glaring example of this I've seen is where people will say that stealing songs is wrong, but then they'll defend someone who stole the CoS stuff. I've no clue why people will defend one person, and then reject another when they're doing the same thing.

(Posting anonymously, cause I'm a coward)

Re:Serves him right

[Anonymous Coward]

Oops, lots of spelling/grammers errors in that one. Anyways, I think I got the point across. If you say this guy was wrong, then you damn well better say everyone who does something like this is wrong too. And the other way around too..

Re:Is there an issue here? I think so.

[enneff]

It is interesting that we see people going to jail for 5+ years for 'computer crime', whilst the average sentence for violent crime in the USA is 2 years.

How much did it cost?

[NSupremo]

For aint it cool news to get their copy?

That guy is capable of two things : watching movies and eating.

I know this guy

[L0rdJedi]

I lined up with him for Ep1 and Ep2. He's a pretty nice guy. Yes, he made a stupid mistake and he should pay for it. I love Star Wars as much as the next fan, but I would think having a picture of you in your Boba Fett costume with George Lucas would be enough for any huge fan of Star Wars. I guess that wasn't the case. Heck, now that I think about it, that's probably why he didn't get credited in the movie (we were looking for his name in the credits after the movie ended on opening night). It looks like he won't be coming with us to see the Two Towers premiere in December. And now he probably won't be able to line up with us for Episode 3 either. That's a real shame. It was going to be our best line up, especially since it's the last Star Wars movie ever. Oh well, if you're going to break the law, you best be prepared to deal with the consequences.

what did he do?

[tx_mgm]

in leaking the movie, did he deprive lucas of any revinue from the movie? didnt the movie make something like 300 MILLION in the box office alone?!?? i mean, this didnt exactly cause the movie to do horribly...so what is the harm? i see none at all. yes, the guy did something he wasnt supposed to, but going to jail?!?! you can get probation for violent crime, but if you leak a movie to the media (a movie that goes on to gross around 15th highest all time) should you really be punished so harshly?

Re:what did he do?

[Stonehand]

He broke his contracts and betrayed his employer. Not content to be merely dishonorable, he also proved to be mind-bogglingly stupid by posting messages on a forum about that, using the handle "Shay" (which rather strongly suggests his own name... a problem considering that it undoubtably helped narrow the list of suspects rather sharply).

The movie revenue is irrelevant with respect to the morality of the man's actions. Mr. Lucas could have served up two hours of Jar-Jar making pornographic hand-shadow gestures and there still would have been a ridiculous amount of buzz about the movie, and probably profit... but that would have justified harsh criticism and dismal sales, not breach of contract and leaking of material.

Horrible

[Anonymous Coward]

This guy was crazy to think he could get away with all of that material. Why anyone would want to collect that much sci-fi junk is beyond me.

Did he get any nude photos of Natalie Portman?

"Intellectual Property"

[Simon Garlick]

I am reminded of the theme introduced in Stephenson's "Snow Crash" -- of corporations desiring control over the information which their employees possess IN THEIR HEADS in virtue of their work.

I wonder how long it will be before we see "LucasFilm employee Joe Bloggs was today charged with 11 counts of Grand Theft as a result of leaving the company without submitting to a LucasFilm-endorsed memory-erasure program. A LucasFilm representative was quoted as saying 'Bloggs was personally exposed to many different pre-release versions of our latest movie and to early script revisions -- the information he has illegally reproduced in his memory may be worth up to ten squillion dollars!"

My dog can write better dialogue than Lucas.

[Kyrn]

I hate sand. It is rough. But you are soft. I love you.

*groan*

Funny ? You mean pathetic. Dweeb.

[Anonymous Coward]

aha. aha. ha.

famous slashdot

[ananke]

the 'jedi mind tricks didn't work' quote made it to cnn headlines :)

[i came home after work, turned on cnn headlines, and the first thing i hear is: 'and according to slashdot website, jedi mind tricks didn't work' ]

Unfounded allegations.

[Performer Guy]

This is complete bullshit. There's nothing here that suggests he stole the film, he didn't even have a copy.

The guy has a few copies of starwars production images and some audio effects on CDROM and they accuse him of theft. He's a production assistant, are you telling me this isn't commonplace? They all have this kind of stuff lying around. As for the storyboards, look at the memerobelia that regularly surfaces after years, that would otherwise have been thrown in the trash if some grip hadn't grabbed it. Not only do they have the gall to charge him with theft mind you, but grand theft! The guy's an ex-employee and has some images on a CDROM he didn't use and it's "grand" theft. He didn't deprive Lucasfilm of their use and he didn't use them illegally, they were just lying on his disk.

Lucasfilm you hypocrites, look at your own hard disks and 'souvenir' collections and then examine your conscience, if you have any.

Let this be a lesson to the reader, DON'T work for Lucasfilm, DON'T have anything to do with the assholes.

A fishing expedition fails to catch what they're looking for so they charge the guy for something many of them do.

Punishment...

[davew2040]

... in the "corporatized" American justice system sure doesn't seem to fit the crime. These days it seems that if you work for a major company, the mere act of coming in late could lay grounds for the claim that you've cost the company $100,000. It's gotten particularly ridiculous in the digital age, where some lawyers seem to excel in arguing that intellectual property whose distribution is virtually victimless is magnitudes worse than the outright stealing of material properties. Sure, selling your company's product's codebase to the competitor is a crime, but claims like this one are far murkier.

In case anyone hasn't been paying attention over the past decade, the moral of the story for employees of the world is to watch your step. Because in huge industries where billions of dollars get thrown around in the production of what is essentially a single finished product, it's apparently reasonable to assert that your misstep as an employee has caused irreparable though quantifiable damages. These damages, though a negligible drop in the bucket for such an employer, can be easily enough to ruin the average wage-earning employee.

And no, I'm not saying that this guy did the right thing...

Hype and the Marketing Machine...

[OneFix]

Ok, lets look at this from LucasFilm's perspective...

Regardless of what you think about the new trilogy, you must agree that at least 50% of the NEW Star Wars is Hype and gimmick...

The only technical advancement in EP2 (all digital process for live action) is being done by lesser movies...this isn't exactly a better way, but it is certainly cheaper...but to hear it from LucasFilm you'd think it was all their idea....and everyone realized that EP1 was simply a huge commercial for all of the merchandise.

So, if you go by this theory, then LucasFilm has a lot of change invested in this hype...For example, I'm sure they would prefer to give pre-screenings to critics more likely to give favorable reviews...and at the very least don't want ppl releasing reviews based on "unfinished" material...

So, why shouldn't this guy be charged? This is just as bad as the leaked betas of UT2k3. This guy is actually getting off pretty easy for under 1/2 mil...If you were the one fronting all of the $$$ for production, marketing, SFX, etc you'd probably be pissed too...

Foley?

[Caraig]

I wonder if he's any relation to the famous Jack Foley, of whome 'foley stages' and 'foley artists' get their name?

Re:Foley?

[Anonymous Coward]

Or to famous wrestler/robot war show host Mick "Mankind/Cactus Jack/Dude Love" Foley.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Was it Woz?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, another person gets whacked for ripping off Star Wars IP.

Now who was it again who flew down down one evening many years ago to get a copy of Empire Strikes back the day before its release so everyone in Bandley 3 could get a copy on VHS or BetaMax?

I bet Lucas really misses that cash.

[Anonymous Coward]

George Lucas hasn't suffered one bit from this. In fact, it might even have generated free publicity, however, the main point is here is we have some fantastically wealthy person destroying the lives of people to protect an obscene fortune. Sure the guy did wrong, but it's not like he made big bucks off this. George, if you read this, IMHO, your an evil person running an evil empire. Shame on you bully. So much for fairness and kindness in American justice.

A possible early outline of Ep. III:

[Anonymous Coward]

Star Wars Episode 3 by George Lucas The Clone Wars are now over two years old. The entire galaxy has been thrown into chaos. On one side of the conflict are hundreds of wayward star systems, led by Count Dooku, who are rebelling against the Republic led by the scheming-in-secret Chancellor Palpatine/Darth Sidious. The inhabitants of the galaxy are growing tired of the wars. Battles will break out with no warning in various star systems. Many star systems have been completed devastated by the Clone Wars. Suddenly, peace will be agreed upon by both sides and then, suddenly, the fighting will break out again. Palpatine manages to frame the Galactic Senate and the Jedi Knights for much of what is going on during the wars. Palpatine makes them the scape goats for all of the galaxies many problems. The people grow tired of the Galactic Senate and the Jedi Knights. They are ready for drastic change and Palpatine realizes this. At the beginning of the movie, Anakin is seen at an awards ceremony receiving yet another medal for his valor in battle. A pregnant Padme is with Anakin at the ceremony. After the ceremony, Palpatine manages to separate Padme from Anakin so that the beautiful, asiatic-looking Darth Xio Jade can seduce Anakin. Xio Jade introduces herself to Anakin and uses a powerful, irresistible dark side mind trick to seduce Anakin. It doesn't hurt that Xio is also one of the most beautiful women in the galaxy. She records their affair on a Sith holocron and sends the holocron to Palpatine. Palpatine then orders the Jedi Council to send Obi-Wan Kenobi to deliver the holocron to Padme. Padme is devastated after seeing Anakin with Xio Jade. Her trust in Anakin is now completely destroyed. She refuses to see Anakin when he arrives at their home. Palpatine's red royal guards quickly lead Anakin away from Padme. Palpatine then orders the Jedi Council to have Obi-Wan hide Padme from Anakin. Palpatine then sets up a secret meeting with Anakin. Palpatine tells Anakin that their are conspirators against both Palpatine and Anakin amongst the Jedi Knights. He warns that Anakin's master, Obi-Wan, is no longer really his friend. Palpatine states that Obi-Wan wishes to end the marriage between Anakin and Padme. The blood in Anakin's veins nearly boils after hearing of this deception. Palpatine relates that Obi-Wan is the one who wanted Xio Jade to seduce him. Palpatine warns that Obi-Wan may secretly be a dreaded Sith Lord. Anakin confronts Obi-Wan on a volcanic world. Anakin demands that Obi-Wan take him to Padme immediately. Obi-Wan refuses and states that the Jedi Council has told him that Padme is not allowed to see Anakin. Anakin is outraged. Anakin draws his light-sabre and ignites it. Anakin demands to see Padme again. Obi-Wan refuses and tells Anakin to put down his light sabre. Anakin refuses. Obi-Wan lights his light sabre and then orders his padawan to put down his sabre. Anakin again refuses and strikes at Obi-Wan. Obi-Wan quickly ignites his sabre and blocks Anakin's sabre. Obi-Wan states that this duel is dangerous because they are surrounded by many molten pools of lava. Anakin refuses to end the duel unless he is given access to Padme. Obi-Wan states that he cannot disobey the Jedi Council and continues to block Anakin's attack. The two duel for quite some time. Anakin gets reckless and falls into one of the molten pools. Anakin's light sabre falls to the ground. Obi-Wan watches Anakin sink into the lava pool. Obi-Wan leaves to find help to rescue Anakin. Palpatine enters and has his storm troopers rescue Anakin from the molten pool. They then quickly leave the area. A few minutes later, Obi-Wan returns with some medical droids. They are unable to find Anakin. Obi-Wan assumes the molten pool has consumed Anakin's body. Obi-Wan finds Anakin's light sabre on the ground and takes it with him. Obi-Wan tells Padme that Anakin is dead. Padme is saddened by this news. Palpatine's medical droids nurse Anakin back to health. Anakin is eventually placed into his familiar-looking black mask and body armor. Palpatine introduces Anakin to the ways of the Sith. Anakin grows to hate the Jedi and the Republic. Palpatine promises that, in time, Anakin will be reunited with Padme, but in the mean time Anakin must be patient and allow their plan to unfold. Anakin takes the name of Darth Vader. Only Palpatine and his trusted minions know that Darth Vader is actually Anakin. Everyone else believes that Anakin is dead. The Clone Wars continue to rage on and thousands of Republic clones are killed in the various battles. The Galactic Senate is under heavy pressure from their people to find a way to end the wars. Palpatine continues to frame the Senate and the Jedi as the reason the wars are going so badly. The people demand and end to the Jedi's and Senate's incompetence and corruption. Palpatine takes this opportunity to declare himself Emperor. He immediately abolishes the Galactic Senate, Jedi Council and the entire Jedi Order. The people hail Palpatine as the saviour of the Republic. Palpatine replaces the Galactic Senate with the Imperial Senate. The members of the new Senate are hand picked by Palpatine. The Imperial Senate and Palpatine issue a proclamation declaring the Jedi Knights to be enemies of the Republic. They order the immediate arrest of all Jedi Knights. The Jedi begin to go into hiding. Boba Fett and Jabba the Hutt help Palpatine hunt down the Jedi. Many Jedi are killed during this purge. A new seven-membered Sith Council, whose members all have the title Darth, replaces the Jedi Council. Darth Sidious is the leader of this Council. The other members of the Sith Council are Darth Tyranus, Darth Vader, Darth Jade (Xio Jade), a cloned Darth Maul, Darth Tau and Darth Vorron. To avoid arrest, many of the Jedi agree to become Sith Lords and hunt down their former Jedi allies. Vader leads the hunt for the Jedi Knights. The Sith Council confronts the remaining members of the Jedi Council. An epic light-sabre battle between them erupts. Most of the Jedi Council is killed during this duel, but Yoda and Mace Windu are captured and taken to Count Dooku's star ship. Later, Padme is captured and also brought to Dooku's ship. Obi-Wan continues to fight in various Clone War battles. Count Dooku's agents leak false information to Republic spies concerning a "Time Detonator" weapon being developed by Count Dooku's scientists on Geonosis. The fictitious "Time Detonator" is a weapon which temporarily freezes time. When it is set off in a star system, time freezes for everyone who is in the star system when the weapon is set off. An invading force can then enter the star system and conquer it rather easily. Palpatine states that the Republic must have this weapon. Of course, the "Time Detonator" does not exist and Palpatine knows this, but he uses this weapon as an excuse to send all of the Republic's remaining star ships into a trap. Palpatine expects Count Dooku's cloaked fleet to completely annihilate the Republic's star ships and remaining fighters. All the star ships of the Republic military converge on Geonosis. The flag ship of the Republic fleet contains Palpatine and Darth Vader. Obi-Wan sneaks his star ship into the Geonosis system. Palpatine's flag ship detects Obi-Wan's ship and captures it with a tractor beam. Obi-Wan is brought aboard Palpatine's ship. There are no enemy star ships visible near Geonosis since Dooku's fleet remains hidden with cloaking technology. When the trap is set, Dooku's fleet de-cloakes and destroys most of the Republic's remaining star ships and fighters. Count Dooku demands that Palpatine surrender unconditionally. Palpatine pretends to be scared and agrees to Dooku's demands. Dooku's troops board Palpatine's ship and take Palpatine, Darth Vader and Obi-Wan as prisoners. The three are held in the lower levels of Dooku's ship. Yoda, Mace Windu and a pregnant Padme are brought before Count Dooku. For Dooku's protection, Yoda, Windu and Padme are surrounded by four members of the Sith Council: Darth Jade, cloned Darth Maul, Darth Tau and Darth Vorron. Dooku announces that Palpatine and the entire Republic have surrendered. The great Republic has finally lost the war. Dooku announces that he has a surprise for Yoda and Windu. Out from the shadows of the room steps the legendary Darth Bane, thought to have been dead for many centuries. Bane is even older than Yoda. Yoda and Windu gasp in amazement. They immediately recognize the incomparably malevolent Darth Bane. Bane cackles nefariously. Bane explains that he is no clone. He is the actual Darth Bane, who has remained in the shadows for centuries waiting for the opportunity to finally destroy the Jedi Order and the Republic. Palpatine, Darth Vader and Obi-Wan are brought before Dooku and Bane. Bane explains to everyone that he has used Palpatine and Darth Vader to destroy the Republic and the Jedi Order. Bane announces that he is going to have all of them killed including Palpatine and Vader. Palpatine pleads for his life. Bane laughs menacingly. Bane states that the only threat to him is Anakin and Padme's unborn child, the child of Anakin must die. No one knows that Padme is carrying twins. Bane reveals that Vader is actually Anakin and then Bane reveals that Palpatine is a Sith Lord called Darth Sidious. Bane raises his hands to send powerful dark side lightning through Padme. Vader uses Sith super speed to jump in front of Padme as the lightning leaves Bane's fingers. Vader absorbs the lighting and then pulls out his light-sabre and ignites it. For the first time in his life, Bane is terrified. No one has ever survived a direct hit from his dark side lighting yet Anakin appears unhurt. Anakin is truly the only child of the Force and the most powerful Force user the galaxy has ever known. Palpatine begins to cackle and explains that Bane and the members of the Sith Council are the ones who have really fallen into the trap. Darth Jade immediately flees the room. She know that Vader and Palpatine are going to kill everyone in the room. Mace Windu uses the Force to snatch a lightsabre from one of the Darths. Windu ignites the lightsabre and uses it to keep the other Sith Lords from getting to Yoda, Obi-Wan and Padme. The three (Yoda, Padme and Obi-Wan) quickly exit the room under Mace Windu's protection and head to the hanger bay to get a shuttle off of Dooku's ship. Windu bravely sacrifices himself to Darth Vader and doesn't survive much longer. After Windu's tragic demise, a terrifying duel between Vader/Palpatine vs. Bane/Dooku/Vorron/Maul/Tau takes place. Vader and Palpatine completely annihilate their enemies. Meanwhile, Darth Jade jumps out at Yoda, Padme and Obi-Wan with her light sabre. She tells them that all of the shuttles on Dooku's ship have been rigged to explode upon powering them up. She says it is a trap set by Palpatine to kill them. Jade states that if they will help her hide from Palpatine then she will let them use her ship as a means of escape. Yoda, Padme and Obi-Wan agree since they really have no other choice. It turns out that Jade's ship happens to be a Corellian freighter called the Millenium Falcon. They escape on the Falcon and enter the safety of hyper space. Vader and Palpatine loom over the dead bodies of the other Sith Lords. Palpatine feels Jade's betrayal. He realizes that Yoda, Obi-Wan and, most importantly, Padme and her unborn child have escaped. The Falcon arrives on an obscure planet called Dagobah. Prior to Luke and Leia's birth, Obi-Wan states that he will now go by the name Ben. The Skywalker twins are born on Dagobah. After many shed tears, Yoda is left behind on Dagobah. Jade then drops Obi-Wan and baby Luke off on the forgotten world of Tatooine. The final destination for Jade, Padme and baby Leia is the safety of Alderaan. Bail Organa greets them with open arms. Bail gives them a secret hiding place. Lastly, Obi-Wan is seen at Owen and Beru Lars' home. He gives Luke to them to raise. Obi-Wan tells Owen and Beru that Obi-Wan is now dead along with all the other Jedi Knights. He will now go by the name Ben. The film ends with baby Luke in the gentle arms of Ben Kenobi. The ghostly spirit of Mace Windu and the ghostly spirits of many other Jedi Knights appear behind Obi-Wan and baby Luke.

Umm .. can you say 'FAN'

[RembrandtX]

Lets face it folks, anyone who is a fan of something .. then finds themselves in a position of WORKING for a company that produces what they love .. is going to wind up with stuff.

I worked for games-workshop .. and man .. the stuff people would ask to take home. Big card board cutouts of orks .. dice .. tape measures with 'games-workshop' on them.

I personally have FOUR jackets given to me by the company .. some signed artwork from the studio in the UK, a japanese bayonette , [I helped start Gmaes-Workshop Japan], a few coffee mugs from the studio I worked in, (we were all given mugs) and tonnes of toy soldiers that were not released.

The studio often passed out copies of rules for games that were not out yet .. asking folks to take them home and read them over (i have a bunch of this stuff still to.)

My point being, this kid worked for friggen STAR WARS. If he really was such a goober on this stuff .. of COURSE he brought some stuff home .. Hell .. some or all of it could have even been legimitate.

I work for Black & Decker now .. and every once in a while someone will give me one of the tools they are producing .. if to say 'thanks for working on my project' or to bribe me to get theirs done before someone elses .. it doesnt matter. These are written off by the guys who have 100's of them to give away.

SO lets get back to lucas. Some drafter is working on scenery .. has a few duplicates of storyboards to work off off (photo copies .. or what not) finishes his job .. and the geek who was running the rotoscoping camera over it asked if he was just gonna throw those out.

This guy thinkgs its kinda cute that the geek is drooling over a copy of this story board (that now has epoxy stuck to it) and makes his day by giving it to him.

Imagine, a REAL fan boy .. who gets himself into this situation as much as he can. [Knowing folks in the Video Game industry, at Games Workshop, At Wizards of the Coast .. I can rest assured from PERSONAL experience .. This happens ALL the time .. some geeks would rather take home something 'cool' from their job than go to lunch .. so the spend their lunch hours talking to the guys who don't need this stuff anymore.

Now is this going to be the case every time ? I don't know . but lets step back and look for a second. Its QUITE possible that all (or at least most) of the stuff this guy has .. was legimatly aquired .. or at least aquired the same way im sure 90% of the guys at SkyWalker Ranch have some cool prop from one of the movies at home.

I mean, WHO wouldnt ??

Ian McCullen has the door knocker off of Bilbo's Door at Bags End. Why is it so hard to believe that this guy ... considering his job .. might have either brought this stuff home for work purposes .. or just cause he was a geek ?

Foley effected more than just his own life

[jvenzon]

While some might argue that 13 CDs and paperwork don't add up to much, what is not being mentioned is what Foley took represented over a decade of sound design work on the part of Ben Burtt and his sound crew. What also gets lost in the George Lucas good/evil is that Foley's actions didn't just impact his life, but also those of the editing crew he worked for. Being a feature film editor in Hollywood, the single greatest fear is having a copy of the movie leak out, not because we are afraid of people seeing the movie before we're 'done' with it, but because we know that the producers and studio execs will blame editing department for the leak. While we might agree that the figures that Lucasfilm propose are inflated, that doesn't change the fact that the producers believe that's what the theft cost them. Those same producers are not likely to rehire us for the next project or worse, tell others that you or your editing crew can't be trusted. If you don't believe me, wait until Episode III comes out and see how many people in the editing crew aren't asked to come back because of this. Foley's actions will have ramifications to that editing crew long past whatever time he ends up serving.

Mod parent up please, TIA

[drinkypoo]

I've been holding off posting this same sentiment because I just knew that someone would say it below.

There is only one possible response to this; Make sure to make a rip of the movie and distribute it via the internet.

I wouldn't say it's exactly civil disobedience, though I suppose technically it is. But it's capital disobedience.

Face it, we want to see these materials. We will see these materials. And if you insist on being this much of a dick to the people who bring it to us, we will cause you a loss of revenue. We have the ability to make our feelings known to the world. Corporations only feel hits to their wallet.

In this capitalistic society in which the almighty dollar can buy you anything, and therefore rules all, the most effective way to vote is with your money.

Now that's what I call a crime.

[s4m7]

How come Lucas didn't get punished for releasing it? Seems to me he should have been.
What do you mean 'product'? I thought it was some kind of memetic brain virus.

So who is waisting our time.

[Alehandro]

Lucas must be charged with 11 counts of theft and property trespassing. Plus misuse of our trust and waisting our time.

Maybe it's just me...

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Plus don't forget that Spider-Man had the bizarre "luck" of being a movie about a superhero saving NYC in a post-9/11 world.

Maybe it's just me, but I never made that connection when I saw the movie.

Legitimate? What?

[Cl1mh4224rd]

My point being, this kid worked for friggen STAR WARS. If he really was such a goober on this stuff .. of COURSE he brought some stuff home .. Hell .. some or all of it could have even been legimitate.

Apparently you missed the part where he was arrested.

Re:Legitimate? What?

[RembrandtX]

No .. i read that point :P
I also remind you that California is the land of frivilious lawsuits and trumped up charges.

*My* point was .. normal office drones don't get arrested for bringing home pen's with the company name on it .. or maybe a stapler.

Used story boards, and various other brick a brack that it sounded like this guy had .. could very much be the equalivant of pens & staplers if you worked for Lucas.

[Kinda like dice and Toy soldiers are the equalivant of pens & paper clips if you work for Games-Workshop]

He was arrested because they needed a scape goat to blame for EP II's lower-than-expected take in .. Now .. if YOU needed to justify your movie to someone/yourself .. and you KNEW Carl the goob always used to bring stuff home ..

Is it easier to say 'Gee .. maybe since im 50 .. im a little out of touch with what folks want.' or 'GOD DAMN that CARL ! I *KNEW* he leaked it .. thats why it did so bad.'

Which one seems to fit human nature better ?

Can they get Knowles?

[jdedman4]

. Other than the fact that Ain't It Cool News and Harry Knowles aren't being charged with anything, police aren't saying much.

Provided that Mr. Knowles and his lackies did not conspire with him, there is little that the authorities or Lucasfilm can do to AICN.

Recently, the Supreme Court addressed a similar matter in the case of BARTNICKI v. VOPPER.

In that case, some enterprising individual surreptiously recorded a cell phone conversation between a union negotiator the union president. Someone sent the tape to a local radio show host, who played it over and over again. The union offials sued the host, and the Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment prevailed in this setting. The issue in that case, strikingly similar to that here, was: "Where the punished publisher of information has obtained the information in question in a manner lawful in itself but from a source who has obtained it unlawfully, may the government punish the ensuing publication of that information based on the defect in a chain?"

As the court concluded, "[a] stranger's illegal conduct does not suffice to remove the First Amendment shield from speech about a matter of public concern." The only question is whether the information that Knowles received is a "matter of public concern." Many of the privacy concerns of a telephone conversation are not at issue in this case, and certainly, there is great interest in artistic endeavors. Who knows? Jim

The guy took maybe $5 worth of stuff

[Rogerborg]

Assuming that he was too cheap to bring in his own CD's to burn copies on. Uncle Sam can bring criminal charges against him for that. Lucas can bring a civil copyright case for the rest, and demonstrate that they had a right to make whatever figure they care to put on the leak. I'm sure that he can subtract an equally imaginary figure for the extra revenue generated by Knowle's excstatic jerkoff review.

I agree that what he did was wrong, but I don't want my tax money paying to keep this guy behind bars when there are career burglars and muggers and rapists walking free simply because we don't the police or court time or the jail space to deal with them. Let's keep some perspective here, and remember who's paying for this show trial.

Re:The guy took maybe $5 worth of stuff

[entrigant]

Physical materials isn't all they are counting. A leaked copy of a movie will more than likely effect ticket sales. Especially if ppl see that said movie is bad then decide not to go opening night. It's even worse when it's not the final edit and it still has rough edges. If people do not realize this it makes the movie look that much worse. Then there's losses from people who see it in the theater one time just for the sake of the big screen but then never go back 'cause they got their svcd copy. They lost a lot more than $5 because of this guy.

As far as tax dollars are concerned... I don't mind them being used to keep this thief behind bars anymore than I mind them keeping any thief behind bars. Besides tax dollars are going to keeping everyone caught with a half ounce of weed behind bars. They let the rapists and muggers go to make room for them. Hail to the drug war.

BTW I realize you probably realized most of what I said in the first paragraph however your topic is extremely misleading... perhaps anyone who reads your topic and my actual post will get the idea ;).

Quit making unfounded allegations.

[Performer Guy]

No he didn't steal what the headline says, READ IT. There is no evidence he stole anything (except a story board, which was probably headed for the trash can). They searched his mom's apartment looking for evidence he leaked the film and found none. So instead they throw the book at him because he has some images and sound samples on a disk. He was a frikin' production assistant and they charge him with grand theft because he had some *copies* of data on a disk. NOT the whole film, just a few images.

The criminals here are Lucasfilm and others who dupe law enforcement into thinking this is some kind of outrageous theft.

Re:Quit making unfounded allegations.

[dwaggie]

er, yea, that's why he said in one of the many articles about this that he was just taking it home for his own personal collcetion .. riiight.

At any rate, unfounded? All I said was that he leaked the movie. He's admitted to that.

Re:Quit making unfounded allegations.

[Performer Guy]

He hasn't admitted to that. Jeeze learn to read before accusing people. He had 2000 images, NOT a movie. He never had the movie, go back and read the article.

Make the punishment fit the crime

[DrXym]

Sentence him to have Harry Knowles sit on his face while watching a sneak preview of Episode 3.

Re:OH HELL NO. (thank you)

[gosand]

The problem is that there is a fine line of distinction with taking "intellectual property". The whole fair use mess is a tough nut to crack. Yes, I have downloaded songs before. But I really don't like much of what is out now. I used to own a lot of tapes which have since broken or worn out. If I find a good version on the net, should I be entitled to download it? I think that is fair use. I bought it once before, I should still own it. (or is it just the media we own?) Same reason that I have downloaded some of the artists whose CDs got ruined.

Then I have this gray line, where I have downloaded songs, or had people give them to me, that were from my era. One guy is collecting the Top 10 songs from every week during the 80s. It is nostalgia more than anything. Am I going to go out and buy all of those CDs, just to get the songs I want? No way. So technically I haven't purchased them, but there is no real viable alternative. If the record companies offered older songs at a reasonable price, I would buy them. They don't, they are hoarding what they "own". Everyone else has embraced digital music except the people who control the music industry. They really need to wake up.

Third is the outright stealing. I wanted to hear Eminem's new album, so I downloaded it. I listened to it a couple of times, and now it sits. I decided I didn't want to buy it, but I haven't deleted the files. I think this falls in the "wrong" category. But I rarely do this.

I refuse to download movies, just because I don't think it is right. I'll pay to see something I want to see. I like good movies, so I try to avoid crap anyway, which is why I still haven't seen Episode II. Why would I download it if I didn't even go to a theater to watch it? Even Lucas deserves to get paid for his hard work, but I don't think he deserves to get paid for this one (at least not by me). I usually go by the consensus of reviewers that I like, and recommendations from friends. Or maybe I'll rent it if it looks interesting.

Come on people, it is up to us to draw the line when it comes to piracy, because if we don't someone else will. And I doubt that line will be very forgiving. If you morally believe that things like music and movies should be free, so be it. Then stand up for those beliefs. Don't download stuff just because you can, and because it is "free". Pretending to be some type of freedom activist just to get free stuff makes you an idiot.

Kill thousands of people

[pommiekiwifruit]

in India (Bhopal), and be harboured by the USA, remaining free to wander between your various mansions.

waisting?

[Hoi Polloi]

Actually he'd be charged with WASTING our time.

Re:OH HELL NO. (thank you)

[DaytonCIM]

So technically I haven't purchased them, but there is no real viable alternative. If the record companies offered older songs at a reasonable price, I would buy them. They don't, they are hoarding what they "own". Everyone else has embraced digital music except the people who control the music industry. They really need to wake up.

You know I would buy an AC Cobra if it was offered at a reasonable price. However, Ford and current private owners refuse to lower the price to one which I can afford; so they're hoarding them too!

Am I justified in going out and "acquiring" one through other-than-legal means?

I applaud your "stand up and be heard" rhetoric, however I have to call into question your self-promoting ethics. Just because the labels and distributors price music above what we may think is fair, doesn't give us justification to steal. Just because studios and theatre chains price admission above what we think is fair, doesn't give us the right to download a pirated copy or sneak in through the backdoor.

he broke the law...

[funkydollabill]

Doesn't matter whether the movie was good or not, geeks. He signed an NDA (I did when I went to work for ILM years ago), and I am sure was told numerous times, that nothing leaves that place. You are told that when you interview, on your first day by HR/Legal, and again in your new hire orientation. You are also reminded by the bosses via broadcast e-mail to the entire company while the show is ramping up, and during production. Heck, during the production of the Special Editions, and TPM, the art department made some cool posters, a'la WWI/WWII propaganda posters warning about leaking information ("loose lips sink starships" was one...)

He knew, and he's not the first to do something like this.

Whether it was George's movie or not, all images, sound effects, props, and everything else that wasn't _given_ to you (i.e. production swag, posters, or other gifts), is the property of the studio.

If your production house is working on some other studio's movie, and images/sounds/props/sets/costumes/whatever are leaked or stolen, your production house can be found liable, and be sued by said studio. Those things are trade secrets.

Re:OH HELL NO. (thank you)

[gosand]

You know I would buy an AC Cobra if it was offered at a reasonable price. However, Ford and current private owners refuse to lower the price to one which I can afford; so they're hoarding them too! Am I justified in going out and "acquiring" one through other-than-legal means? I applaud your "stand up and be heard" rhetoric, however I have to call into question your self-promoting ethics. Just because the labels and distributors price music above what we may think is fair, doesn't give us justification to steal. Just because studios and theatre chains price admission above what we think is fair, doesn't give us the right to download a pirated copy or sneak in through the backdoor.

The difference is that it costs money for a company to produce a car. We are talking about music that has been created, and is just sitting doing nothing. They don't make it available because they are too busy pushing the "next great thing". I know I have crossed the line, but that was because there was no alternative. To the positive thinker, that means "there is an untapped market out there that people are swarming around". To the RIAA, it means "Pirates! We must stop them!"

This goes well beyond me and you. It is about the RIAA and record labels wanting to maintain their control over music. There is absolutely no doubt that online music is an incredible force. So instead of embracing it, and giving back to the fans that lined their pockets for so many years, they simply want to exert more control over them. Instead of trying to kill online file trading, they should make it not worthwhile by offering a better product. Why bootleg video cassettes when a DVD costs the same or less? Because it is a better product. They aren't hearing the message that is being screamed in their ear.

and THEN...

[TaleSpinner]

...and after that, he can make all his
CUSTOMERS robotic and at long last his
system will be secure and copies will
never leak again.

Re:OH HELL NO. (thank you)

[DaytonCIM]

The difference is that it costs money for a company to produce a car.

When did it become free to produce an album? Because if something has changed recently, I have a couple of songs I'd like to put down on vinyl.

We are talking about music that has been created, and is just sitting doing nothing.

No. What we're talking about is a group of companies and individuals that hold the rights to hundreds of songs and albums. It's their property. And they don't want people downloading it for free.
An entire industry survives because people have always PAID for music. What has changed? With the advent of P2P, why is it ok to not pay for music, movies, or software?

They don't make it available because they are too busy pushing the "next great thing".

$899 to $12.99 will get you just about any CD from an artist's back catalogue.

To the positive thinker, that means "there is an untapped market out there that people are swarming around".

To the marketing company it means an entirely new way of delivering product to consumers. And I'm sure one day we'll see the Net play a much larger role in the music industry.

To the RIAA, it means "Pirates! We must stop them!"

Granted the RIAA goes WAY too far in trying to enforce its monopoly. However, can you blame them?

P2P networks are distributing, for free, copyrighted works. If the same P2P networks distributed pirated (i.e. ripped) copies of Unreal 2003 wouldn't that be stealing? It's someone's intellectual property. A group of individuals sat down and worked from someone's idea to create a video game. What's the difference?

Is it fair for a competing network to pick up Fox's broadcast of the World Series and show it on their own network?

It is about the RIAA and record labels wanting to maintain their control over music.

It's there music! They own it. Copyright holders OWN it. They can do whatever they want with it. Just because a certain song or album brings back fond childhood memories, doesn't mean you own the song and can do with it what you please.

Instead of trying to kill online file trading, they should make it not worthwhile by offering a better product.

Now, I've ranted and raved throughout this little diatribe and I apologize if I've offended you. When I got to this part I smiled. You have hit the capitalist nail on the head.
The music industry doesn't want to involve itself in new technology... never has. The only reason the industry agreed on the CD format is they knew it would "wear out" quickly and people would have to buy more. It took 15 years before digital recording became the standard in the industry. Why? Because it is sooooo easy to make copies from a digital recording, the label executives were afraid that artists would realize that they could make the same recording at home as they could at the million dollar Sony Studio in NY; and that putting it out on their own "label" would give them a larger share of the profit.

Bottom line is most people that use a P2P network don't feel the slightest grief about downloading copyrighted works (be it music, movies, or games). The majority feels as if they "deserve it" and justify their actions by telling themselves that Metallica and George Lucas are rich enough, "they don't need the money."
They're right: they don't need the money. But the people they employ do.

Example: after Jerry Garcia died and the Grateful Dead stopped touring, they had to lay off 75% of their staff. The remaining 25% support the website and merchandising. What happens if someone comes along and copies the same GD shirts you pay $25 for on the website and offers them for free? Is this stealing? Is this copyright infringement?

What's the difference between bootlegging shirts and downloading music from the NET?

Re:OH HELL NO. (thank you)

[gosand]

...The difference is that it costs money for a company to produce a car.

When did it become free to produce an album? Because if something has changed recently, I have a couple of songs I'd like to put down on vinyl. I wasn't talking about new music as much as archived stuff.

... We are talking about music that has been created, and is just sitting doing nothing.

No. What we're talking about is a group of companies and individuals that hold the rights to hundreds of songs and albums. It's their property. And they don't want people downloading it for free.

Sorry, that is hoarding. The whole copyright issue (aka the Mickey Mouse law) is a whole different issue. Although it is somewhat related.

An entire industry survives because people have always PAID for music. What has changed? With the advent of P2P, why is it ok to not pay for music, movies, or software?

It isn't. As it stands now, it is illegal. But that doesn't mean it is right. And it sure doesn't mean that P2P is an illegal application. THAT is what the RIAA wants, to shut it down. They are backing laws to allow only approved digital devices to access digital content. The way they are trying to enforce the law is WRONG. The fact of the matter is, there is an entire market of people out there who are downloading music. Should I give up my fair use rights in order for the RIAA to stop them? Hell no. They want to incorporate DRM to stop me from doing something that is legal. If P2P goes away tomorrow, I don't care. But I want to be able to have my MP3 server in my house, and burn CDs for my car. The RIAA doesn't want that.

...They don't make it available because they are too busy pushing the "next great thing". $899 to $12.99 will get you just about any CD from an artist's back catalogue. How many people actually do that? Like I said, I would like to have some of those old albums, but I won't pay $12.99 for them. Nevermind the price fixing of CDs, and WHY they cost that much (they don't). It isn't worth my money. The record companies could make all of those songs available . It satisfies the fans, they make MORE money than if they just sit and nobody buys them. I don't see a good reason to not do it. They would still own the copyright on them, they aren't losing anything. It gets people interested in music, which is their business.

... To the RIAA, it means "Pirates! We must stop them!"

Granted the RIAA goes WAY too far in trying to enforce its monopoly. However, can you blame them?

Yes, I can. It infringes on my fair use of a product that I bought. That is all I want. Being able to buy old songs cheaply would be nice, and it is something that they could certainly do. As long as they don't infringe on my rights, I don't care if they go after people who are stealing their music.

P2P networks are distributing, for free, copyrighted works. If the same P2P networks distributed pirated (i.e. ripped) copies of Unreal 2003 wouldn't that be stealing? It's someone's intellectual property. A group of individuals sat down and worked from someone's idea to create a video game. What's the difference?

Well, the whole concept of intellectual property is something I won't go into here. I personally think that it is OK, but as usual, someone has to Disney it up. If it was just about intellectual property, I don't think this would be such a big deal. It goes way beyond that. They are pushing for legislation to suit their business needs, and it is going to F up everbody else in the process.

...It is about the RIAA and record labels wanting to maintain their control over music.

It's there [sic] music! They own it. Copyright holders OWN it. They can do whatever they want with it. Just because a certain song or album brings back fond childhood memories, doesn't mean you own the song and can do with it what you please.

If I owned Led Zeppelin IV on 8-track, I bought the music. If I borrowed that CD from a friend and ripped it, is that stealing? Are they selling me the music, or the right to listen to that particular media?

... Instead of trying to kill online file trading, they should make it not worthwhile by offering a better product.

Now, I've ranted and raved throughout this little diatribe and I apologize if I've offended you. When I got to this part I smiled. You have hit the capitalist nail on the head.

Not at all. All of my rants are because the RIAA holds a monopoly, and refused to acknowledge that there is a market out there for digital music. Yes, I am being selfish by saying that I want cheap, maybe even free, music. Why is that so bad? Just because the recording artist sold their soul to get an album produced doesn't mean that it is right. Don't assume that just because something is illegal it is wrong. Maybe the basic assumption behind WHY something is deemed illegal is wrong.

I don't argue these things because I am a cheap ass and like sticking it to tha man. I think there is something fundamentally wrong with the way the RIAA and record companies run their business, and the way they treat artists. Not to mention how they stick it to their customers. That's me. I am just standing up for myself.

Re:OH HELL NO. (thank you)

[DaytonCIM]

So, your point (simplified) is:
1) entertainment (music, movies, software, literature, etc) is too expensive and should be less costly
2) entertainment should be easier to attain (i.e. watch a new release movie in the comfort of your own home), and
3) entertainment should be owned by the people and not by the artists or corporations?

I bet Vader really misses that cash.

[Anonymous Coward]

Vader hasn't suffered one bit from this. In fact, it might even have generated free publicity, however, the main point is here is we have some fantastically tyrannical person destroying the lives of people to protect an obscene power hierarchy. Sure the guy did wrong, but it's not like he became emperor off this. Vader, if you read this, IMHO, your an evil person running an evil empire. Shame on you bully. So much for fairness and kindness in Imperial justice.

MOD PARENT UP INSIGHTFUL

[Anonymous Coward]

SW doesn't suck, just it's sheer overrated-ness. So there.

Re:OH HELL NO. (thank you)

[gosand]

So, your point (simplified) is: 1) entertainment (music, movies, software, literature, etc) is too expensive and should be less costly

No. Movies cost a LOT to make. I don't think people should be able to download them for free. DVDs are cheaper than CDs in many cases, and the costs behind movies are much more than that of CDs. (did you ever wonder why CDs still cost the same to buy as they did 10 years ago?) The MPAA is bad, but the RIAA is so much worse. Yes, it is well known that by charging what they do for CDs, they are just lining their pockets (and not paying the artist what they deserve). This is all very well documented. Which is all fine, they can charge whatever they want - I won't buy it. BUT.... Then they start wanting to pass laws that infringe on my fair use of CDs that I have purchased. If I want to have an MP3 server in my house, I can. If I want to burn copies of the CDs I have purchased to protect against losing or damaging my only copy, I can. If I want to make a compilation CD, I can. The RIAA wants to make these activities illegal. It isn't that they are losing money, they see "piracy" as money owed to them. Which isn't really true at all, but they are twisting those "facts" to pass laws to make them more money, and to make sure that they have complete control over the music industry. What I am saying is that there is a business model out there that they could fill if they weren't blinded by their own collective ego and greed.

2) entertainment should be easier to attain (i.e. watch a new release movie in the comfort of your own home), and

The technology isn't quite there yet for movies (well, there is PPV) but for music it is there and has been for a few years now. Imagine walking into a record store, or even online, and being able to compile a CD of MP3 files of any song from 1920 to 1999. And pay for it. That technology is possible, and a lot of people would love it! The possibilies are fantastic, but it won't happen because the companies in the RIAA own all that music, and they will do with it as they see fit. (which is only in their interests) What they don't see is that they could provide this and still make money at it. The fact is, music IS easier to attain. It is just illegal because the people who "own" the music haven't accepted that fact and provided a legal alternative. Why not? It has been proven technically feasable.

3) entertainment should be owned by the people and not by the artists or corporations?

First, take artists out of there. Artists don't own squat! They sign it away to get that record deal.
After a reasonable amount of time, yes, things should be public domain. Do the heirs of Robert Frost still deserve royalty checks for his poems, or should they be released into the public domain? Should the silent movies be released to the public domain, or should some company own them and just sit on them because they can? There are many people out there who can argue this point better than I can, and have. Do a search on google to find more info. The problem is that companies are lobbying for laws to extend the copyright laws to some ridiculous amount of time after the author's death. It is all about control, and stifles creativity because no matter what you do, you may be infringing on someone else's copyright. Don't release a CD with 4 minutes of silence on it, someone has that copyrighted. Don't use a term that is similar to Mickey Mouse, or you'll hear from Disney's lawyers.

Re:OH HELL NO. (thank you)

[DaytonCIM]

If I want to have an MP3 server in my house, I can. If I want to burn copies of the CDs I have purchased to protect against losing or damaging my only copy, I can. If I want to make a compilation CD, I can.

I agree as long as the above is for personal use. If you open your MP3 server to the world and allow people to download files, then you are supporting piracy.
You'll get no argument from me on personal use. I believe once you buy one cd you should be able to make a 1000 copies or more, but only for personal use.

First, take artists out of there. Artists don't own squat! They sign it away to get that record deal.

Not completely true. I can name an artist that owns his own music for every artist you name that signed his rights away.

Do the heirs of Robert Frost still deserve royalty checks for his poems, or should they be released into the public domain? Should the silent movies be released to the public domain, or should some company own them and just sit on them because they can?

You're using examples that are more than 80 years old and as such are easier to argue that they should be part of public domain.

What do you think is a fair time frame for copyright? 5 years? 10 years? 20 years?

Re:OH HELL NO. (thank you)

[gosand]

I agree as long as the above is for personal use. If you open your MP3 server to the world and allow people to download files, then you are supporting piracy. You'll get no argument from me on personal use. I believe once you buy one cd you should be able to make a 1000 copies or more, but only for personal use.

But the RIAA and the purchased politicians are trying to make personal use illegal at worst, and "only if we approve it" at best. I don't support piracy either, but I also realize that they aren't just going after piracy.

Not completely true. I can name an artist that owns his own music for every artist you name that signed his rights away.

And I bet I will have never heard of them. :-)
Normally, the people who aren't afraid to speak out against the music industry are those whose indentured servitude has expired.

You're using examples that are more than 80 years old and as such are easier to argue that they should be part of public domain.

And they are trying to extend the copyright laws to keep them out of the public domain. Check out this article . Yes, they are old examples, and yes, corporations are fighting to extend the copyright for them. If it were up to them, copyright would be infinite. I don't know what should be fair, but I know that "life + 70 years" for personal work and "95 years" for corporate created work is atrocious! They are buying politicians to enact laws to do whatever they want. It is disgusting.

Last Post!

[alpg]

Real software engineers don't like the idea of some inexplicable and
greasy hardware several aisles away that may stop working at any
moment. They have a great distrust of hardware people, and wish that
systems could be virtual at *___all* levels. They would like personal
computers (you know no one's going to trip over something and kill your
DFA in mid-transit), except that they need 8 megabytes to run their
Correctness Verification Aid packages.

- this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...