Slashdot Mirror
Ohio Also Passes Law Against Recording In Cinema
madmancarman writes "Following California's lead, Ohio has also passed a law making recording in a movie theatre a crime. A first offense would be punishable by six months in jail and up to $1,000 fine, which is lighter than the legislation introduced in Michigan that would bring up to 5 years in jail and a $250,000 fine. The most interesting quote concerns a study by AT&T Labs: 'Their conclusion: 77 percent of the films came from insider sources, either motion picture companies or theater employees taping from the projection booth.' I searched Ohio Gov. Bob Taft's press releases, but couldn't find any mention of it."
So Ohio passes a law making sure that at least there are less pirate movies. What is wrong with that?
I'm amazing. You aren't. SUCK IT
A movie theater is a private place. They can throw out anyone they want. Why don't they use their own security personnel to throw out people with cameras? Why should tax payers foot the bill for what the movie theater can prevent without new laws?
It seems that we are getting lazier and lazier with out punishments. Just throw everyone in the slammer for every infraction. Is jail really necessary for this crime? I think a much higher fine and/or serious community service would benefit society much more...
"The prohibition will be strongest when the group is nervous." - Paul Graham
i cannot imagine such a taping has any good quality. what would anyone do with such a "copy" of a movie? of course there are, for example, the star wars lovers in kathmandu who would like to see the movie before it is officially released in their country. but then again, the big blockbusters seem to be released everywhere at the same time...
THere is nothing wrong with this law as far as I can tell. They made the movie to make money off it and they are ensuring that they will make money off it by preventing illegal copies.
Anyway, if the movie is worth watching people will pay to watch it in theatres rather than watch a crappy video off kazaa. So, if they make a good movie, they need not worry about losing millions due to such copies.
New year Resolution: Don't change sig this year
So Ohio passes a law making sure that at least there are less pirate movies. What is wrong with that?
It's wrong to censor anything, even "pirate movies". Besides, these are only technically "pirated" if they are sold.
How much longer before movie-downloading becomes so commonplace and convenient that Slashdotters start convincing themselves that they're justified in doing it to appease that pang of guilt they feel? They've already done it with mp3s. After movies, all that's left is warez, but for some reason everyone is opposed to that.
"Sufferin' succotash."
So, how are you supposed to make an interesting film news and reviews show? If you can only use clips from the trailer you're only advertising. Isn't reporting news with necessary clips part of the fair use things you americans have? Say for example 'R2D2 wears a dress in the latest starwars films'. How do you back that up if the studio doesn't provide *those* clips? Just curious.
kan u get me teh leet 0day screenerz? klthnx
...who haven't figured out that you can get high quality DVD rips earlier and more reliably. This seems to be yet another solution in need of a problem.
How much longer before movie-downloading becomes so commonplace and convenient that Slashdotters start convincing themselves that they're justified in doing it to appease that pang of guilt they feel?
Why should any feelings of "guilt" be associated with free exchange of information? There is nothing to feel guilty about.
If you want to stop copyright violations go to a foreign country and start busting the K-Mart and 7-Eleven equivalents that are selling LOTR and Matrix movies on store shelves while the movies are still in the theatres.
There is nothing wrong with this law, in my opinion. But, I find it an incredible waste.
Curiously, when "Master and Commander" came out in Belgium a month or so ago, it was proceeded by a bold notice that anyone caught filming in the cinema would be hunted down, skinned alive, and thrown naked and bleeding to the dogs. And their film and camera would be confiscated and maybe kept for like a week or so.
The hordes of surreptitious filmers immediately ran out of the cinema, where they were aprehended by the local branch of the MPAA.
Not. I have never seen anyone filming in a theater, and the few pirate films I've seen that were made this way were incredibly unwatchable ("cough cough", shadows walking in front of the film, noises of coke being slurped and people making out in row 2.)
I mean... does this actually present a threat to the movie industry?
Surely a balanced law would also mandate prison for people who make movies like Matrix 2 and 3? This kind of crap product is a far greater threat to cinema revenues than pirates can ever be.
Ceci n'est pas une signature
As far as I've seen recently, the majority of bootleg movies didn't come from a videotaped recording, but rather from award screener dvds instead. This law should have came in effect back in the hayday of bootleg VHSs when bootleggers relied on taping of the bigscreen. Back in the day you defintitely knew it was recorded in a theater, you could even hear babies crying in the background at times.
Nuclear war would really set back cable. - Ted Turner
What next? A ban on masturbating in a theater?
When masturbation is outlawed, only outlaws will masturbate.
For example, the pirated version of The Hulk I saw (on a co-worker's laptop, Mr. MPAA Thug) was an early cut, with incomplete special effects and crappy audio. With movies like Cold Mountain and others being shot digitally and edited in Final Cut Pro, with DVD dailies being mastered regularly, it's concievable that the pirates will be soon beat the studios to post-production! Instead of the Special Edition Director's Cut, we could be downloading the Sp3c1@l Ub3r 1337 H@c|3r's Cut.
And of course, who wouldn't want to see Episode III: The Non-Crappy Version, complete with a Star Wars Kid cameo added by the pirate who actually edited together the flick...
Blogging Weight Loss, Distance Education, and more at verlin.com
What about rebroadcasting the entire movie with cell phones? Should they be allowed to transmit the entire movie over the airwaves? I'd like to see the morons in front of me who spend the entire movie talking sent to jail.
Ohio Legislators spend lots of time on
projects that have nothing to do with
promoting the welfare of the people they
serve. They are the most self serving
group of individuals you will ever see.
For leaving your cell phone on? Or bring a crying baby.
Reminds me of Seinfeld episode 137:
Jerry: What do you mean he's bootlegging the movie?
Kramer: Well, it's a perfectly legitimate business.
Jerry: It's not legitimate.
Kramer: It's a business.
Jerry: I don't care about Brody. I was up on 96th Street today, there was a kid couldn't have been more than ten years old. He was asking a street vendor if he had any other bootlegs as good as Death Blow. That's who I care about. The little kid who needs bootlegs, because his parent or guardian won't let him see the excessive violence and strong sexual content you and I take for granted.
George: I'm a bootlegger.
Anna: You're a what?
George: I'm bootleggin' a movie, baby!
Anna: Isn't that illegal?
George: I can do hard time for this one. And community service!
Frank: I'm sitting at home, reading a periodical, and this is the call I get? My son is a bootlegger? (He hits George in the head)
George: Ow! Dad...
Frank: Who put you up to this, was it her?
Elaine: All right. Wait a minute. I think you've got it backwards.
Frank: My George isn't clever enough to hatch a scheme like this.
Elaine: You got that right.
Frank: What the hell does that mean?
Elaine: It means whatever the hell you want it to mean.
Frank: You sayin' you want a piece of me?
Elaine: I could drop you like a bag of dirt.
Frank: You wanna piece of me? You got it!
I swear, in Ohio, they're on crack. Remember, this is the place where they were prosecuting artists for having naked pictures of men.
What a state.
I have this strange superpower called "memory". Maybe they should make a film about it.
Seriously, it SHOULD NOT BE A CRIME TO USE AUGMENTED MEMORY TECHNOLOGIES including but not limited to video cameras.
You're holding back the tide of human progress to favour a few decadent neonobles ("executives") in neofeudal fiefdoms ("corporations").
Fuck them. Not that I watch any of the movies _anyway_, but the concept of "ownership" of all copies of some information is abhorrent and barbaric and incompatible with a free society.
I wonder how they justify making this a separate and more serious offense from copyright infringement in general. Or do they even bother with justifications beyond the implicit "they paid me a boatload of money to pass this law" these days?
When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a skull.
Here's a useless law. Government is not needed in this case (as in most new laws, they are not relevant).
If a theater wants to show new movies, they should already have rules about this. Because a theater is private property, they should be able to ban anything they want (free speech, weapons, anything). If they want to ban recording cameras, they're free to.
Maybe a theater may want to ALLOW cameras. In this case, the major movie production companies will probably decide not to show movies there. Smaller companies may want the cult-like home recorded movies and may possibly allow it. The free market has provided this solution already, and government now will mandate one more way for private movie theater owners to run their business.
We are no longer free, we are no longer capitalist. We live in a mercantilist system of oppressive regulation, taxes, and tariffs. None of this system helps the average citizen.
Its amazing that our society now days the answer for any violation of law is "Throw them in Jail" seems for minor infractions you get more time then you do for harsh infractions.. Why should the tax payer pay for the Movie company's property rights to be protected? Hrm..
For reference, the state of Ohio has a bit of an inferiority complex at the moment. I'm sure this is one of those cases where the general assembly thought of themselves as being technologically progressive ("We're gonna be just like California!"). And they wonder why tech companies won't stick around, as seen by my personal experience.
"Their conclusion: 77 percent of the films came from insider sources, either motion picture companies or theater employees taping from the projection booth." I happen to be a projection manager at a local movie theater (not for bragging rights, just to set the stage that I actually know what I'm talking about) and I can safely say that taping a movie from a projection booth is the most retarded idea I have ever heard of. Actually, I doubt any clued-in projectionist would want to tape a movie from the booth. Most modern projectors are noisy as hell, likewise with the heat which is why film will melt extremely fast if the bulb gets too hot. The glass between the booth and the auditorium is usually (in a good theater) soundproof. Also, there isn't any sound in the projection booth with the exclusion of the "cute" hum of X number of projectors cranking away. Basically what that amounts to is: nobody likes standing next to projectors. Ever. You feed the film, start the film, and get the hell away. Repeat. Lastly, where I work, I am usually the only projectionist at night. This might be different, but trying to keep 14 projectors running at the same time gets to be a real pain. Nevermind having the time to be dicking around trying to setup a video camera to record Hollywood's next trashy movie. Cheers.
since movie theatres are private, they could already punish people who had cameras. they could throw them out, pay off a burly guard to punch them in the arm, and make them trip on the way. they couldn't send someone to jail, no. but, then again, someone in jail has the same effect on that theatre as someone banned from the theatre. and since most theatres seem to be owned by a couple of chains, it wouldn't be that hard to fax a memo to each theatre in the area with a picture of the pirate. They could do it like the coffee shop here does. when someone does something bad, their picture and a little text describing what a bad bad person they are goes up on a bulletin board behind the counter. Instant shame!
/. before, and the consensus then seemed to be, "what does this law do?" Since most of the pirated copies are allegedly from overseas (oh, but that could be faked, says a MPAA representative) and DVD screeners, how does this really make a difference when the copies originating from Ohio movie theatres seem to be harder to find than a rare pokemon. (okay, bad example; those things are everywhere, but you know what I mean)
this has been discussed by
If they really want to make a difference, how about firewalling the US in a similar fashion to what China did? Or maybe producing a law that goes after the people who commit the largest percentage of these crimes, not the easiest to molest.
Check his history, journal.
Please do not mod this useless comment up. Parent is simply trying to abuse the system.
When are those corporate scumbags going to learn that piracy increases their sales? People download bootleg copies of movies just to SAMPLE them, and a Hungarian study proved that this leads to multiple viewings in theaters later on. Also, downloading copies of movies we've seen is just "fair use"! I'm boycotting movies until this draconian law is repealed.
I live in Michigan. To kind of show you how the theaters here are I drove 2.5 hours to Chicago to watch RotK.
Watching movies here at any of the theaters is like watching one with sunglasses on. You can barely work out that there are moving images being projected. It's really that bad. They also don't really care when you try to complain. TURN THE BULB ON THE PROJECTOR UP!
I hate this state...but I love my family.
"Music is everybody's possession. It's only publishers who think that people own it." - John Lennon.
but did you also search the Slashdot archives before you posted this dupe? Check out the comments on that story for an explanation of why this law is super duper crazy.
We recently had heard in the office over one of the Yellow Machine that's made by Anthology Solutions.
Ok so it's now punishable by law to record in a theater, does this affect you? Were you planning on doing it before it became illegal? I already considered this a "bad idea" figuring any theater that caught me recording their warez would throw me out immediately forfeiting my HEFTY entrance fee.
I mean it's not like they made it illegal to go watch a movie and tell your friends the plot and ending (though in some cases I almost wish that were illegal!).
Though I wish they'd waste their time more productively but how is illegalizing (is that even a word) something most anyone with a brain would already realize was not something you'd want to do anyway all that big of a deal?
--- www.f-theocean.com
I have a friend who is the lead projectionist for both movie theaters in town. We were discussing how the l33t cams of new movies were taken. He was saying that the best time to snag the movie would be on the test run of the film they make the night before release, hence the same day, or night before release to the web.
This law that is passed shouldn't be all-encompassing. My guess, if I had to make one, is that the new cams probably come from someone working at the movie theaters, not a patron.
This leaves me torn on the neccessity of the laws in general; why pass a law that doesn't apply to 99% of the populace? Why not focus on where the offenders are coming from, and target those people not the rest of us. At the same time, should Joe Schmo (No, not the Spike TV guy) think it's funny to cam a movie and release it, I guess this law covers that. Don't know, but it seems uneccessary.
Can you ping me now? Gooood! | Manhappenin.Net - Things to do
I hope the number of dupes goes down now that the holidays are over. Its really been out of control for the last few weeks.
-Nick
gigli!
I wonder what the people who passed this legislation were thinking. I can see the sense in forbidding the veiwing and distribution of a bootleg film, but can't see the grounds for outlawing the act of videotaping anything. If movie companies can forbid someone from videotaping an event, I don't see how I couldn't argue for preventing someone from videotaping me. I'm concerned for my own privacy. What are the movie companies concerned about outside the likely (but certainly not inevitable) illegal viewing and distribution of thier films? The viewing and distribution is the only concrete wrong that I can see in the process. Stick to enforcing that, or grant the movie companies this and give me the right to say "Stop monitering me!" IANAL, but this should set a legal precedent that gives a person the right to fight for his privacy.
Ok so it's now punishable by law to record in a theater, does this affect you? Were you planning on doing it before it became illegal?
Yeah man, it quite possibly does. Have you ever bootlegged a music performance? It's a rewarding experience, let me tell you. The technical details, reliving the moment, sharing with friends, etc. Bootlegging music doesn't carry penalties like this. All musicians are aware of bootlegging. Many are indifferent to it, knowing that the concert experience has special qualities you can't capture on a bootleg CD. Many musicians actually support the bootleg idea. Is bootlegging a movie different enough than bootlegging a music performance in concept to warrant prison time and large fines?
Six months for this? People get less time for assault.
A bit harsh for recording/distributing a movie... What next? Bamboo-lashings for music-swappers?
nothing.can.stop.me.now
It reminds of the Great Wall of China. The Chinese built the wall to keep out the Mongols at a great financial and human cost. In its first 100 years it was breached 3 times. While the Mongols never successfully overran the defenses, the breaches did not come from superior Mongol weapon technology or military tactics. They came when Mongols successfully bribed guards. All that technology defeated by human factors.
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
The only logical thing to do when you want to deter behavior is to make more laws! Charging less for movie showings and releasing to films to DVD more quickly would have no effect on this problem. Nope, none whatsoever.
Join Tor today!
Either that was generated with markov chains or you should consider passing the bong around to others too.
On a related note, has anyone else noticed the watermarks they've been putting into movies lately (presumably to try to catch pirates)? My friend pointed out the patterns of pink dots which were appearing throughout "Master and Commander" (a terrible movie), and I couldn't help but notice them for the rest of the movie. Granted, if the movie hadn't been so boring maybe I wouldn't have noticed them, but still, they were quite annoying.
This law seems like a waste of time to me, but why should we argue about it? Certainly there are valid reasons expressed here as to why in theory it's mostly irrelevant; but really - if you don't plan to illegally film a movie, and you don't view these illegal recordings, why does this matter to you?
#DeleteChrome
but the other one is rediculus! Jail time and a quarter-million dollars just for a damn video camera in a movie theater!?
Then again, this is the same nation that treats breaking into a computer as a more serious crime than manslaughter. We should've expected this.
You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
Uh, like "no way, dude!"
This is not about being cool, it's about telling it like it is. The first Matrix movie was the best film of all time, surprising and inventive.
The second and third were boring and stupid, trying to be smart but just ending up confusing, with too much pretty shit and no substance, characters that moved like cardboard and sounded like they had wooden sticks poked up their asses.
Seriously, those two movies sucked big time!! Made me regret buying the long black leather jacket.
I see 4-5 movies a week (in the cinema, no camcorder), and I know shit when I see it. Even Scary Movie 3 was better and more amusing than those two pieces of refried tinsel.
Here's a clue: no-one gives a shit about "Zion" and "Machine City". They want characters that feel real, they want surprises that are original, they want a story that makes you wonder what will happen next, they want twists that give insight to things that happened before. Retelling the Bible using super-duper CGI effects is just lame.
You just illustrated exactly what I was talking about. You've justified it as a "free exchange of information" with "nothing to feel guilty about." You're so used to the convenience of doing it that you've removed any moral guilt you might have had, by labelling it freedom. Never mind legal guilt.
"Sufferin' succotash."
Some legal advice from Jim Carrey:
STOP BREAKING THE LAW, ASSHOLE!!!
Thank you.
This appears to be a trend.. If getting these restrictions passed at a national level is too difficult, or is noticed and opposed by too many people, the lobbyists go to the state governments. This was the same tactic taken for the anti-VPN law and others I can't think of right now.
While in principal I agree that filming of these movies should not be allowed. I find it disturbing how easily lobbying groups can get their pet projects pushed through state legislatures.
he can be thrown in jail ?
Damn, since when did crimes that did not hurt a 'person' became multi-year jail-sentences.
You people are going crazy overthere in the US : crazy, i tell ya...
When you go into a mall/cinema/whatever, there are security cameras recording you. What if i say "i don't want to be recorded", they will tell me "then you can't get in". Can i put a copyright into myself?, and make them to pay me if they want to record me?. This sounds crazy.And it is.
Sadly, copyrigth law exists. And they can put me in prission if they find me selling illegal copies of the movie, but, if i want to go and film the movie, the girl i went to the movies with, or the movie i am seeing, then it's of my fucking business!.
So, if they say cameras are used to record, and records are used in illegal manners, then you can't bring a camera here. Then i tell them: weapons are used to kill, kill is illegal, then security guards can't have weapons! (which should be true). And, in the same fashion, big company's lawyers are used to fuck customers, that is no good for people, so lawyers should be forbiden?
We should put restrictions in what is actually illegal; not in some things they think can be used to infringe the law.
And, besides that, 100% of the money used to pay for the congress/police/whatever comes from people, even when it comes through big companys, people gived those companys the money. And that money came from people's work. But, only 20% of the laws go to help people, and 80% of the law is there just to help big companys. The same with other resources like police.
So, We pay companys. We pay state. And companys use our money to soborn state to use our money to make laws to protect big companys?
WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
I have zero guilt.
If i download media, its beacuse i wasnt going to go see/purchase it in the first place.
Therefore there is no loss of revenue on their part.
Therefore there is no need for guilt.
If i was actually going to pay for the media, i wouldnt have downloaded it in the first place.
Unless it was to 'demo' it before i waste money on the purchase. If its worthy of my funds, then i go out and purhcase it.
For the record i do all 3... And if they would allow returns of poor product, then that would elminate 1 of my reasons to download, as I have no problem supporting things i like...
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Isn't recording in cinemas already illegal?
Only if you're recording the actual film, don't have permission from the copyright holder, and are not making the recording for fair use purposes.
This law goes a bit further. You can't record your friend's reactions to the movie (without audio). You can't make fair use recordings. Etc.
Short answer: no clamor for an end to bootlegging. More like a good lobbying job on the part of the MPAA. This almost flew under the radar at the statehouse, and I would be surprised if it got more than a Section C mention in any of our major newspapers.
Always look on the briight side of life! (whistle, whistle)
I was under the impression that most of the high quality videos available on P2P were from DVD screeners sent out to awards judges. If the movie execs really want to curb the tide of illegally available movies, they need to time their releases so that there is no need to send out DVD screeners.
http://www.aaplblog.com/ - News about Apple Inc.
People recording movies in a theatre are already covered by existing laws: copyright infringement in particular. An updated law for the "internet age" as politicians like to say, would require that they erase their cam footage when caught. That would be reasonable. Equating this with theft is preposterous---theft would be if they ran into the projector booth, grabbed the film, and ran out.
Not in that it's unconstitutional in and of itself (though perhaps it does violate the Ohio Constitution) but rather because it's preempted by federal law.
17 USC 301 makes void any state law that is equivalent to any of the federally created copyrights. This Ohio statute sounds as though it pertains to duplication -- which is already covered in 17 USC 106, making it void, at least in regards to that portion of it.
Honestly, you'd really think that someone would've checked that sort of thing in advance.
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
we like Jail
no wonder USA has the highest incarceration rate on earth with 3.2% of the population in Jail (2002)
The total Federal, State, and local adult correctional
population -- incarcerated or in the community --
grew by 150,700 during 2002 to reach a new high of
more than 6.7 million. About 3.1% of the U.S. adult
population, or 1 in every 32 adults, were
incarcerated or on probation or parole at yearend
2002.
A total of 3,995,165 adult men and women were on
probation at yearend 2002, representing a growth of
1.6% during the year. The adult parole population
grew 2.8%, rising to a total of 753,141 by December
31, 2002. Since 1995 the parole population has
been the slowest growing correctional population,
increasing 1.5% annually, compared to jails (4.0%
annually), prisons (3.5%), and probation (3.1%).
Over 4.7 million adult men and women on
probation or parole
so yeah throw those pirates in Jail !! (private profit making prisons of course)
Don't these fuckers have anything better to do than restrict our freedoms? Is there no state in this union determined to stand up for individual liberties?
Politicians are no longer finding it necessary to obfuscate their mutual back-scratching arrangements.
Feel-good laws for consortiums, just what the country needs...
what the hell are you talking about? i am not guilty at all downloading mp3s. oh wait, because the ones i download are one of the following
A) Independant/small scale Musicians who want their sound out. (i downloaded apoptygma berzerk's mp3 off their website, for example)
B) really f'king good, to the point that i will go out and buy the artists album when i get the chanse(i have every one of jewel's albums that i can get my hands on...)
C) rare and or bootlegs that you just can't buy.(rocked, by rape, for example)
i will never feel guilty downloading music off the net.
now, imagine a world where the industry that deals with distrobution does not have the ability to send swat teams into teenagers bedrooms. this is the world that i see and if people out there have to do some currently illegal actions to bring it to actuality, then all the power to them. i personally try to avoid downloading copyrighted material(even though downloading said copyrighted works is legal here, in canada, allegedly), because I DONT WANT TO HEAR THAT SHIT. i will feel better as an induvidual if i have developed a style of my own(as a musician) independant of the big labels and their filth. and the further i distance from them as i increase my skill, the more credible as an alternative to them i become. after all, sure it'd be great if i were as good as led zepplin, pink floyd or trent reznor... but what if i took a turn and became something so new that nothing compared?
and i can tell you right now, that i feel a HELL of a lot more guilty when i go into a HMV and feed the MPAA/RIAA money through CD sales, than when i download off the net. and you should too. dont' shop at hmv, and don't buy cds from the riaa at all. but hey, everyone has a breaking point, but make sure to feel guilty when you finally break down and buy that album, after all, you are funding terror tactics by doing so.
GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
By judging from up here in Scandinavia, only bad laws get set in America. This once again proves that the saying "Americans have the best goverment money can buy" and your politicians aren't even being ashamed, no, they'r are busy setting the next best record for stupid laws.
Not that it mattered else but usually the stupid laws enforced there end up here, luckily with a big lag. As pointed out before, filming in private place like the cinema is the problem ought to be taken care by the Cinema, not by the goverment. And the penalties for a huge people destroying crime like that are just absurd.
It's clear that no one is going to feel satisfied by the quality of those CAM and TS releases, even PROPERs are plain shitty (while being as good as they can given the circumstances) which makes it really hard to enjoy or understand the film. But as the CAM or TS works as a preview, less people will see it. As this also works the other way around, Hollywood people should be more engouraged into hiring more talented scriptwrites and new directors than lawyers and lobbiers.
Just my 0,10e
Can I have the version without Jar Jar Binks?
i remember not too long ago sitting on a 386 running windows 3.1, connected to the internet and reading slashdot on a dialup 33.6 modem, thinking to myself that i wished that there were more freedom of information along the lines that the above poster was saying. Convinience does not push this idea or give it any credibility. if this were 50 years ago, and computers were the size of large buildings, i would still believe the same things, for one. mabye there are roads left to travel. i can't download or view movies, because i can't afford a computer that could do that, but i do hope that one day, everyone can do this(just like, i hope that one day, everyone will have enough to eat, a place to stay so they dont' freeze to death, etc). i would say, that wishing everyone a better life is far more of a moral/ethical standpoint than whatever greed filled self destructive worldview your pushing. MABYE its impossible, and there can never be, on account of physical constraints, convinient, free transfer of movie/audio data. but until we are 100% sure of this, i intend to continue with the goal of helping make it work better. mabye this iteration will not succeed. mabye it will fall out of favor with the public, and it will be forgotten. but in 100 years, when computers are much, much more advanced, and wireless data transfers, and other stuff is way easier to accomplish, we had better be ready for this meme to revitalize,.. given the right input it is inevidible.
GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
why are you spending so much? pool your resources(i mean, obviously a project of that magnitude will have the support of a lot of people), and expect to gain nothing (except mabye reputation) from the project. after all, what is more important, making money, or having your name as part of the crew that put together a timeless edition of lord of the rings that will set the benchmark for movies to come for a good century?
GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
here's a question for you...what happens(or has happened) when there are just SO MANY BOOKS out there, that even IF you could somehow read through them, by a short way in you would become bored with them, because there is only SO MUCH you can do with books. and ditto with movies. what happens when it's all been done? and everyone's bored of the reruns? are we doomed to a "the metamorphasis of prime intellect" as a best-case scenario?
:D
is this a significant event at all?
btw, i'm just trying to play devils advocate
GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
Ohio's already getting to the point where free thinking is about to become a criminal offense. It really saddens me to say that, however, some of the changes that have happened in the past few years really make me wonder what the General Legislature is trying to do here. The Law Enforcement communities run this state. They've done their hardest to keep as much information on their citizens as they can, and limiting the amount of information that you can receive to a bare minimum.
For example, try getting a copy of your driver's abstract record. It takes 2 weeks and $5, however, if you're a corporation, you can get it online, in thirty seconds, without written permission or consent. Also, try to apply for a professional license of any kind. Criminal Background Checks (What, you mean I've got to be fingerprinted to become a PE?), and the privatization of the state's prisons and the slashing of the budget for the prisons they already have (I know that they've closed at least 2 prisons, making the other 30 or so overcrowded--making those prisons a risk to the employees that work there), and giving financial incentives to the counties for sending people to prison (each county receives an amount for holding and transporting the prisoner to the DRC's Correctional Reception Center--sometimes to the tune of $20K/inmate). Add to the fact that the State Highway Patrol frequently stops people for doing 1 or 2 miles over, or when they "think" there are no seatbelts on, and then detain them until a drug dog comes (This happened to me--pulled over on suspicion of having no seat belt, Christmas Day of 2001. My Brother, 19, didn't have his driver's license on him, and we had ample holiday stuff in the back, so, he decided he wanted to search our car, pat us down, and make our life miserable for a little over 3 hours--either waiting for the drug dog, or waiting for them to search the car, or waiting for My Brother's Driver's Licence photo to come back from LEADS. Finally, they let us go...no ticket, no charges, nothing.)...it's really becoming to the point where you should just throw some razor wire up around the state.
Ohio has really gotten to the point where it is a sad state of affairs. Once my company lets me relocate, I'm so out of this state.
Ian
I disable sigs...do you?
there are many reasons to make something illegal. discouragement is one of these reasons, and it may even be the main one, but it isn't "the whole point"
GENERATION 26: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation.
How about DUI? Probably not. But, as we can all see, its the corps that need the most protection from us nefarious citizens.
I also can't help but wonder whether the law goes beyond the mere operation of a video camera. Could I be jailed on suspicion of wanting to copy a movie? What if I want to bring my camcorder into the movie theater so it doesn't melt in my car?
"In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
Try getting state legislators to increase penalties for drunk driving or vehicular homicide, and nothing happens. Grease a few wheels with your well paid lobbyists and all of a sudden, mountains are moved. Lovely system.
Average Time Served: (from http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/psatsfv.pdf)
Homicide: 71 months
Rape: 65 months
Sexual Assault: 35 months
---------------
Recording a movie
in a cinema in Michigan: 60 months
" in California: 12 months
Is it just me? Yes, I know that these are the maximum sentences, but many violent crimes carry maximum sentences around only 10 years, and they are often less than that anyway.
<sarcasm>Basically, the message here is that if someone tries to arrest you in a theater for videotaping the screen, you should shoot them, cause hey, it would only be another few months in jail if you get caught.
</sarcasm>
Wer mit Ungeheuern kämpft, mag zusehn, dass er nicht dabei zum Ungeheuer wird. --Nietzsche
I suppose it is OK to bring your camcorder into a locker room? Or is using a phone cam even better? I don't know if it is illegal yet, but my health club now posts signs forbidden such behavior.
Those that suggest you "dance like no one is watching" really want to see you make a complete fool of yourself.
No Slashdotter has yet to legally or morally justify pirating an artist's music
You probably mean copying, not pirating. Anyway, it is easily justified morally in the case of music that the artists REFUSE TO SELL in the first place: concert bootlegs, and out of print CD's.
This is what I mainly used Napster for. The lazy bums clearly did not want the money, because they refused to sell it in any form.
I noticed five different tables this morning at my local flea market with Paycheck, Kill Bill, and Matrix Revolutions.
At another local flea market (one of the largest in the country) there are as many as 50 tables that have pirated movies.
These sales should be stopped at a flea market management level or the OWNER of that market should be fined.
Yell & scream & rant & rave... it's no use... you need a shaaaave ~ Bugs Bunny
So it's pointless to do something about the other 23%?
Do you have a child? If so, please give me the address of your household, so I can send him some underage porn
Your free speech rights stop at my property line.
Where is this flea market?
Leave the manager alone. The responsibility for selling pirate items should like solely with the individuals selling them. It does not lie with those who are not selling them.
Ohio does not have a "churning" legislature. What I mean is, some legislatures (like California's) introduce every single damn bill that they could and then try to pass it. Many state legislatures work this way, the culture being that they measure their productivity on how much they pass.
Ohio doesn't, they like to have lots of meetings to make perfect little bills, of which only 150-200 will be enacted in a two year time period. A state rep told me (I'm an amateur lobbyist) that Ohio legislators are scared to pass anything that another state doesn't have, in fear of making a mistake. It's like their primary day to day job is to make sure they get re-elected.
The law was enacted with HB 179 The original purpose of HB 179 was to allow for driver's license revocation/suspension for a person who drives off without paying for gasoline. (A bill spearheaded in the Senate Transportation Committee cuz the guy who's the head of the committee owns a bunch of Shell stations.) At any rate, I guess the movie industry successfully lobbied some committee to have this stuff added, and it meets the single subject rule (I guess) because both parts of the bill deal with "theft." And the penalties of the bill can be explained by virtue of the fact that they link directly to the general theft code (and I suspect that the penalty for theft of gasoline was compared and they decided to make it similar.)
Michigan's penalty probably came about because their law was enacted through a unique bill, but I'm not sure. The fact that penalties are so wildly different indicates that the movie industry is working very hard to get the bills introduced as quickly as possible, since the national conference of legislators hadn't discussed these bills yet in order to ascertain a model penalty.
The word theft has a specific meaning, which duplication never matches. "Data theft" is only theft if the original is destroyed. If the data is merely copied, it is never theft.
"Identity theft" is somewhat different: a theft often does occur when someone takes away your online/bank/etc identity from you.
Patently Offtopic Comment: Now for the really important stuff, Gov. Taft... former Gov. Voinovich left us a 'rainy day fund', i.e. a budget surplus that was to be kept in case of economic downturns. Where is it now?
I'd have a personalized plate on my car, but "toxic bachelor" won't fit into 7 letters.
Dennis Kucinich [kucinich.us]: the only presidential candidate who voted against the PATRIOT Act
He's also the only one who thinks that the middle class is not taxed near enough. He also thinks that there is too little government control over media. He also thinks that government should be the only one to choose political candidates. One good thing does make up for a regressive, fascistic agenda based mostly on the desire to increase the power of the rulers at the expense of the governed.
Thankfully, everyone knows he is not a serious candidate. The Democratic Party rejected him months ago, and even ABC is not bothering to wsste coverage on him anymore, with his 1% support to Democrats. It's nothing but an ego trip for Dennis the Would-be Menace right now.
The only thing it's doing is helping the FUD for those who claim "Star Wars 2 was available on the internet in digital quality 30 minutes after its grand opening.". Digital quality?
Actually, while I can't comment on Star Wars 2 specifically, many, if not most movies are in fact available online when the movie premieres, in full digital quality.
No one bothers with cams anymore, because screeners get leaked like there's no tomorrow. These are DVD copies of the final movie sent out for reviews, etc. Someone copies it, uploads to usenet/kazaa, and bam! I've seen many movies as of late that are in fact available days and weeks before they hit the theatre.
Cams are so 1999. And laws like this are absolutely pointless (and assinine), as most movie trading is done using screeners anyway.
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
Star Wars 2 was available on the internet in digital quality
um. I really don't expect to see "star wars 2" and "quality" in the same sentence. Especially "digital quality": this film looks like fuzzy bad 1970s amber-tinted sitcom video (see "Facts of Life" or "WKRP").
I've known more than one SCI (Secret Compartmented Intelligence) holder who had done all kinds of crazy shit before they started working for The Man. But none of these people gave a damn.
FBI Questioner: "Did you fuck that chihuahua in Mexico City back in 1988, as your ex pain mistress asserts?"
Would Be Secret Agent: "Yep, I sure did, and damn that was fun."
FBI Quesitioner: "OK, you're good to go. Obviously you can't be blackmailed."
I also know someone who was refused a Top Secret, and it really screwed up his career. They don't even tell you why they reject you. They just give you the axe. Then everyone you work with thinks that there must be something really screwed up about you, so even keeping your existing job becomes an up hill battle.
Maybe the fact that he still lived with his mom had something to do with it.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
How long until even camcorders require DRM licenses for distributing one's own video? The power of the press belongs to the owners of the presses, and boy are they jealous of the massive potential power of person-to-person video networking.
--
make install -not war
I constantly see postings where the responses are always blasting any laws or actions taken to combat piracy but I have yet to hear a resonable solution for all parties. It's easy to say in an ideal world films would be free but that's hardly a reasonable business model. Most want the big epics these days. They are expensive. Even moving them out of the country they are still costing 150 to 200 million or more. Given people aren't going to make them for free, some of those are tech people and I doubt you all want to work for free, how do they continue to make films if piracy continues to grow? It's also easy to say it doesn't hurt sales but the music industry has had a different experience. Broadband connections aren't fast enough to be practical and freely duplicating movies is not a solution. Copying films may be fun in the short term but it hurts everyone in the long term. Independant film sales have plummeted in recent years. Most are showing a loss. People complain about the quality of films but the markets are drying up which limits the number of people that can make films on a reasonable budget. Most don't want to watch golified home movies but the returns are so small soon we'll be left with no budget and mega budget. Sure some people buy copies of the blockbusters but given the choice on lower budget films do you buy or copy? It's funny, people will fight to pay $50 or $100 to go to a ball game where you have a couple of dozen people compete for a couple of hours but whine when they have to pay $10 to see a film that took 500 people a year to make. Films are still a good value. The real problem right now is concentration of wealth. Most of the money is made by the top 2%. Piracy doesn't help this situation it makes it worse. Those at the top are fairly well insulated. It's everyone else that's at risk. Runaway production has nearly killed the American film industry. Piracy could be the final blow.
Those who share on the net ugly quality cams should be jailed for their lifetime. I'm not sure it was the original intention, but the immediate effect will be less sh1t polluting the net and better visibility for high quality DVD rips.
The real problem right now is concentration of wealth. Most of the money is made by the top 2%. Piracy doesn't help this situation it makes it worse
Concentration of wealth is not a problem since the wealth is earned/created by those who own it. It is really none of our business what in their wallets.
Let me paraphrase:
First they came for the music downloaders...
So you are taking something meant to warn of Nazis and their ilk and changing it a little so it warns of people who do nothing wrong (just sharing information).
I wonder why they just didn't call Napster "Nazster" in the first place, if file traders are just like Nazis.
I disagree - in my state (and many others), bartenders are responsible for their patrons drunkeness. I see this as no different
That is outrageous. So much for personal responsibility. These laws need to be changed. If the drunkard is drunk, it is the drunkard's own fault.
I should go find those kids who stole my doormat this weekend and beat the living crap out of them. It was a really cool South Park doormat too. I bet I would get less time for sending them to the hospital than I would for recording a movie.
-R
I know I'll get modded down for this, but whatever, I'll be the heretic in this thread (referencing another Slashdot story).
What's the problem here? Seriously, why are so many people so rabidly against this law? I've seen a lot of people in this thread saying something like, "We have laws against copyright infringement, whereas this law makes it illegal to operate a camera in a movie theatre."
WTF?!? I have NEVER had the desire to use a camera in a theatre, nor have any of my friends, nor have I ever seen anyone using a camera in a theatre.
Listen closely: THERE IS NO REASON ANYONE WOULD HAVE A CAMERA IN A THEATRE EXCEPT TO RECORD A MOVIE AND THAT'S ILLEGAL!!
If for some reason someone were using a camera in a theatre for reasons other than recording the movie (recording their friends, seeing who's in the theatre, getting that delicious down-blouse/up-skirt shot), they should rightfully have their ass kicked and get removed from the theatre for interrupting everyone else trying to actually watch the movie!
Sheesh, folks, pick your battles. Is this law a bit draconian? Maybe. Are there other offenses that most would agree are worse that receive lesser sentences? Probably.
But the point is that no one's rights are being infringed here.
Look, I'm no fan of the RIAA or MPAA (I think they're oligarchical monopolies that exist to conrol popular media to keep themselves in power and profitable) but don't let your hatred for them cause you to fight for something that just isn't worth fighting for.
/.: why the hell am I here?
There is no reason for this law. If you don't like cameras in the theatre, DON'T USE ONE. As long as it isn't flashing annoying red lights and bothering anyone, it should not be anyone's business.
Thank you!
I bought exactly one (ONE!) bootlegged first-run movie off the street. It was a copy of 'tears of the sun,' that was videotaped off the screen in some theater somewhere. It had subtitles in Chinese. It was a dull and murky and, frankly speaking, unwatchable.
Months later, I spent three dollars and twenty-five cents to rent the DVD and I got to watch Bruce Willis have an unbelievable crisis of conscience involving a young doctor with great breasts and a shirt that would never, ever button up correctly and as this passed before my eyes,I experienced a moment of rhapsody, of pure religious bliss.
I started sweating and shaking as the spirit took me. I fell to my knees and tears streamed down my face as the words of my new-found faith spilled from my mouth:
'Thank GOD I didn't pay ten bucks to see this crap!! I believe! Oh thank you, thank you, thank you, Jesus!! Thank you!!...'
Laws like the one in this post, the one in California and now, Ohio, are meant to protect corporate profits at the expense of the consumer; they are meant to insure that the only way of finding out that reviewers foaming at the mouth with rage and disgust weren't wrong, involves a lot of money and watery soft drinks that taste ever so slightly of metal.
You've got to love it. You've got to admire laws built to make corporations happy. In the real world, a law against taping off the screen would be really simple: a ticket for a thousand-dollars and your camera taking pictures at a policeman's wedding.
Instead of this, you've got a law that's there to scare the peasants: one that envisions the state's spending money to to overcome your legal defense, demanding more money than you could possibly have, and then paying for your food, lodging and medical expenses--the kind of law you only get when the law is written by lobbyists.
To mail me, remove the 'mailno' from my email addy.
"Yeah. It smells, too..."
Is taping considered disorderly conduct, likely to endanger other patrons?
As the poster mentioned, about 77% of the copying done is an inside job, by the industry's own claims. While technically, a technician working in the booth may also be covered by this law, that part is seldom enforcable.
The projectionist is in a room where most observers don't have access, and may be duping with the encouragement or even at the behest of the theatre owner. That makes his version of the crime much harder to detect. Since he is more likely to be part of a commercial pirate group, and his copy may be rapidly multiplied and sold for cash, this makes the law effectively analogous to a drunk driving law that catches many of the people with blood alchohol just over the limit, say 0.08, but comparatively few of the most serious offenders, with the equivalency of 0.25 or so.
This is just one reason why laws like this seldom help the situation. A law which had tougher penalties for those duping for resale than for amateurs would probably do better. Specific penalties for people who abuse an insider position to get access for duping might also be feasable and if so would be a great improvement.
Who is John Cabal?
Isnt it a federal crime to record in theaters now? Unauthorized duplication? IANAL, nor am I well versed, but is this true?
So he's fine to setup a big screen on your sidewalk? You tool. :P
A tool of the truth, you mean! If it is my sidewalk, it is my property. D'uh!
How much movie piracy occurs in Ohio? Shouldn't these wanks be more worried about trying to get some jobs and industry back into the state? (Wife is from Ohio. I've looked at relocating there. No thanks.)
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
I saw the latest hobbit-fest in what I suspect is one of the better theaters in SF. The ticket was $9.50.
First, there were 20 minutes of commercials. Then, the video quality was poorer than I'd get from a DVD. I mean it was really bad! The brightness varied greatly from frame to frame. The image was particularly grainy. Oh, and I had to fight for a seat becausemorons were reserving seats 30 minutes after showtime.
My take? Theaters suck: customer experience, image quality, and value. I would much rather download a good cam rip than go to the movies again.
And I'm a (up til now) paying customer. Until theaters make it worthwhile to me, I'm not going.
This will do a whole lot of nothing to curb movie piracy. As is mentioned, most of the (quality) pirating jobs are insider jobs, ripped from screener-DVDs or digitally scanned with digital audio, at way better quality than a person video taping could do. Also, just because something is illegal, does not mean that it will magically stop occuring. Murder is illegal, and we see how deterring that law is.
I hate sigs.
I have to weigh in on this one.
I have a friend who routinely downloads camcordered movies off of IRC channels and such.
He thinks he's putting one over on the establishment somehow, like he's getting the full theater experience in his basement for free.
He'll spend all night... ALL NIGHT... trying to download a movie like "Shaft" or "Spider-Man" and then sit there gleefully watching it in its miserable handheld camcordered glory on his 17" computer screen.
He actually said to me, when Spider-Man was in the theaters, "Hey, dude, don't bother going to see Spider-Man in the theater. I've just downloaded it! Hee hee hee! Come over and watch it!"
And I replied, "You know what, dude? Given a choice between sitting on some rickety uncomfortable discarded old wooden dining room chair in your basement, watching a camcordered version of Spider-Man on your scratched-up 17" computer screen while you fill the air with cigarette smoke, pausing the movie every twenty minutes to go upstairs for more beer, or paying about six bucks to catch a matinee of a big-screen, Dolby Surround-Sound version of Spider-Man in a smoke-free, quiet, comfortable stadium-seating high-back chair envirornment, which do you think I'd pick?"
Needless to say, I went out soon afterward and saw Spider-Man in the theater, and enjoyed it pretty well.
Downloading or otherwise watching camcordered movies is, in my opinion, a crime that punishes itself.
Camcordered movies look and sound like hell.
You want to see a movie? Please do yourself a favor and just go to the damn theater, pay the pittance they're asking, and see it there, the way it was meant to be seen.
Roger Ebert said years ago that "If it's on TV, it ain't a movie," and I can't imagine what he'd say about what camcordered movies look like on a computer screen. I think he wouldn't even dignify it with a comment.
You are in error. No-one is screaming. Thank you for your cooperation.
It'd be more fun than watching a camcordered rip of an overpriced shitshow any day.
He's also sticking his head in the sand over sensible concealed-carry reforms that the legislature has introduced.
E! and Entertainment Tonight "journalists" routinely use camera equipment in movie theatres. And so no longer will we have to put up with brownnosing of people with high cheekbones and nosejobs.
Excellent point. Perhaps a more clever MPAA exec would have left cams alone, since (as you imply):
1) the MPAA can use cams as a source for FUD.
2) cams dilute the pool of good, high quality videos.
3) passing such ineffective laws (i.e. which at best removes poor quality videos from circulation) may annoy citizens (e.g. who may be carrying a camera for other purposes), which is a bad idea.
It may have been a misstep to get these laws passed.
Strange how it can become "chic" to constantly harp on how supposedly bad a movie was, to the point where it's worked into EVERY SINGLE witty reply.
Kind of like Waterworld. It wasn't such a horrible movie. It's problem was they spent so much money on a movie that just "wasn't such a horrible movie".
Matrix trilogy was fine, and you people know it.
Does it take excellent timing to jump on such a fast moving bandwagon, and is it dangerous?
It seems that we are getting lazier and lazier with out punishments. Just throw everyone in the slammer for every infraction. Is jail really necessary for this crime? I think a much higher fine and/or serious community service would benefit society much more...
You are right. The punishment should fit the crime. If someone is caught they should be forced to act in a movie without pay.
If you want to stop copyright violations go to a foreign country and start busting the K-Mart and 7-Eleven equivalents that are selling LOTR and Matrix movies on store shelves while the movies are still in the theatres.
What do you mean 7-11 equivalents? In Thailand there are 7-11s all over the place. No joke.
I think this is just a PR move. Everytime they enact a new law somewhere, even if the law is ineffective, they're maintaining their argument against "piracy" in view of the public. I'm not sure if this will work here, but if you repeat something to the American people frequently enough, you can change their minds.
[speaking to a judge]
...
Your honor, is it illegal to make a recording of the movie, WITH MY MIND?
[judge]
Well, erm, no, not exactly according to this law.
[me]
Well, it's about my friend. He's handicapped and subject to the Americans with Disabilities Act. No, his legs aren't broken, rather, his mind is broken. You see, he cannot create memories. A prosthetic device must be used by him to aid in the capture and storage of memory. It has inputs similiar to his 5 senses. Sight. Sounds. Is THIS illegal?
SCO: 800-726-8649
Verisign: 800-361-8319, 888-642-9675
Diebold: 800-433-VOTE (8683)
Is there anyone who disagrees with the MPAA (and their government cohorts) and still watches the Association's movies (or any movies at all, for that matter)?
First off, let me start by indicating that this law is invoked by a citizen activating the audiovisual recording function of a device in either a retail establishment or movie theater when a movie is being shown.
This means that it will be illegal to try out a camcorder at an electronics store if there is a movie being shown on a TV there.
This also means that it may be illegal to use your camera-phone in a mall that has a movie theater in it!
Note, however, that wholesale establishments appear to be exempt from this. Additionally, if you are bootlegging a movie with one device capable of only recording audio and another, separate, device only recording video, you should also be exempt.
Pretty sweet law, eh? Fortunately, I can vote against the idiots who came up with this tripe.
aQazaQa
Does anyone have a link I could use to verify the actual nature of the legislation, specifically its scope?
Thanks in advance.
Sec. 2913.07. (A) As used in this section:
(1) "Audiovisual recording function" means the capability of a device to record or transmit a motion picture or any part of a motion picture by means of any technology existing on, or developed after, the effective date of this section.
(2) "Facility" includes all retail establishments and movie theaters.
(B) No person, without the written consent of the owner or lessee of the facility and of the licensor of the motion picture, shall knowingly operate an audiovisual recording function of a device in a facility in which a motion picture is being shown.
Now, I am not a lawyer but this doesn't seem to include the copying of media by staff of a theatre or retail outlet while the film is not being displayed publicly.
So what is the purpose of this legislation? To ensure that pirate videos are at least of telecine quality?
Maybe the legislators are sick and tired of downloading crappy cam quality ripoffs from Kazaa.
It's good to see that some politicians are prepared to stand up and be counted to ensure Quality In Piracy!
I'm so glad the 0.5% sales tax increase and 20+% auto registration fee increase is being put to good use in my fair state. Heaven forbid they use the money for something frivilous like roads or other infrastructure improvements!
it's exactly 24fps. 23.976 is what you get after inverse telecining from NTSC material (because NTSC is slightly less than 60 fields per second, for reasons i can't remember right now).
This is my Sig, this is my Gun. One is for Slashdot and one is for Fun.
Damn bootleggers. I still don't understand the end of "Cry, Cry Again."
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Just curious...who forces you to pay $10 a show and $5 for a watery drink to watch the movie in the theater? Does someone make you watch the movie in the theater instead of waiting for the rental or for it to appear on cable/satellite/the late-nite show on the local network?
Denver Isuzu Suzuki
I agree with this post.