California Makes Recording in Cinema a Crime

Maharet writes "According to this article in the Sacramento Bee, recording devices will be outlawed and you will be able to make a citizen's arrest if you observe someone recording a movie. I don't advocate piracy, but this just looks to me like industry pressure (although the MPAA, et. al. are not mentioned). What if my cellphone has a camera? My favorite quote from an LA city attorney: 'If you carry one of these into a movie theater, you have to ask yourself, "Do I feel lucky?"'"

Comments

Re:Another well thought idea

[Hungus]

You cant actually make a citizens arrest over something like this., Unless they specifically wrote it so you could. The liability for a CA is huge if you don't know what you are doing and or make a mistake you can be hit with a felony for unlawful detainment. (oh and of course it should be noted I work in the security business) Hense my address SSI Security and Investigations and yes the SSI stands for SSI Security and Investigations

Re:Talk about FUD

[whoever57]

Unless you're USING YOUR CELLPHONE TO RECORD THE MOVIE, there is no problem.

According to the article (but who reads that?) mere possesion of a video recording device in a theatre is sufficent to create the possiblity of arrest and prosecution.

So, as another poster asked, what happens if you forget to take your camcorder OUT of your car when you go to the drive-in (and yes, there are still drive-ins in California)?

Won't reduce piracy

[phalse phace]

This won't reduce piracy one bit. Why? Because most of the pirated movies are the result of leaks by movie industry insiders. Isn't that why the MPAA is trying to stop the mailing of DVD and video screeners, as it's own members are the main source of piracy?

Besides, if people are recording the movies in theatres, then won't the large reddish brown spots that flash in the middle of the picture make them useless and unviewable?

Re:But what about PDAs?

[silentbozo]

Just to further the point, more devices that you'll have to leave behind or risk being turned into the resident of our jail system:

3rd generation iPods (recording feature is part of the rom.)

Pretty much every PDA manufactured after 1999.

All cellphones (if you use the transmitter interpretation that I put out above.)

Very interesting to note (from the text of the bill):

(1) Existing law provides that a person admitted to a theater in which a motion picture is to be or is being exhibited who refuses to cease the operation of a video recording device upon the request of the theater owner is guilty of intentionally interfering with and obstructing the operation of a lawful business, a misdemeanor.

In other words, it's ALREADY illegal to use a camcorder to tape a film, if they tell you to stop (duh.) So what is this new law going to do?

This bill would provide, in addition, that every person who operates a recording device in a motion picture theater while a motion picture is being exhibited, for the purpose of recording a theatrical motion picture and without the express written authority of the owner of the motion picture theater, is guilty of a public offense and shall be punished by imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding one year, by a fine not exceeding $2,500, or by both that fine and imprisonment. By creating a new crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.[italics mine]

[State-mandated local program meaning a law that requires enforcement, the cost of which may or may not be reimbursed by the state - this bill offers no such reimbursement] In this instance, a recording device is defined as:

(1) "Recording device" means a photographic, digital or video camera, or other audio or video recording device capable of recording the sounds and images of a motion picture or any portion of a motion picture.

I think we need a new law protecting the citizens of California from MORE LAWS.

Re:There's a good reason!

[cioxx]

This bill was not signed by Arnold. It was Gray Davis who did it.