Oscar Screener Leak Traced

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Posted by michael on Tuesday January 13, 2004 @09:01AM from the dumpster-diving dept.

EvilLiberalGuy writes "CNN has an article about a leak of a screener copy of 'Something's Gotta Give'. They are reporting that 'visible and hidden markings on the videocassette copy on the Internet identify it as the one sent to Carmine Caridi, a film and television actor'. Apparently this didn't stop the leak from happening in this case, but will it result in actions against Caridi and make others think twice before leaking films to the net?"

6 of 519 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

possible picture by elykyllek · 2004-01-13 09:05 · Score: 4, Informative

Here's a possible picture of him from images.google.com
Carmine Caridi
Re:I want an apology by LostCluster · 2004-01-13 09:09 · Score: 5, Informative

100% of screeners that wind up on the 'net are leaked by Academy members... they're the only ones who are authorized to have them to begin with.
Re:Automatic guilt? by LostCluster · 2004-01-13 09:16 · Score: 4, Informative

Is there something that people sign when they receive a screener which says that if the screener shows up on the net they are somehow liable?

Yep. RTFA.

Screeners are DVDs/tapes of movies that are still in theaters given to Academy Members so that they're able to see all of the films nominated so that they can properly vote for the Oscar awards.

While there's no proof that he actually did the encoding, there is proof that it was his copy of the movie that was incoded rather than anybody else's. It becomes a chain-of-custody issue from here on. I assume there was a point that there was a tamper-evident seal placed around the package, and if somebody had broken that seal in the mail process he should have called in right away.

Yeah, not quite automatic proof... but clearly a reason to look into the guy's connection because it sure seems likely he at least gave his copy away which would be a violation of his contract...
Re:I, here and now, define the term.... by bay43270 · 2004-01-13 09:33 · Score: 4, Informative

VEEEERY small picture
Re:I want an apology by Teancom · 2004-01-13 10:22 · Score: 4, Informative

Actually, when I worked at Alberson's headquarters, on Saturdays we would head up to the room where they kept all the screeners of movies that the various companies wanted us to buy (in order to rent out at our stores). There were a crap-load of them (technical term) and all new releases. We could easily have taken them home with us (I did a couple times, though I brought them back) and ripped them there. So no, Academy members *aren't* the only ones who get them.

Just so you know...
Re:Not to defend Shatner... by CleverNickName · 2004-01-13 15:07 · Score: 4, Informative

...but if you were privy to the techniques they used to encode the scripts, wouldn't the other actors have that knowledge too? If so then the script could be modified to make it appear that it came from some other source.

Well, I don't think WFS needs to be defended. I wasn't accusing him of anything, so if it came off that way, allow me to correct myself.

*correct*

As to your suggestion, I suppose it's technically possible, though why anyone would want to go to the extreme lengths to falsify a script's ID is beyond me. We're talking about numerical codes on random pages, and the actor's (or sometimes character's) name stamped, by hand, across the center of every single page. If you watch the extended behind the scenes features on the LOTR DVDs, you can see them reading their sides, and each page is stamped "Sam" or "Frodo" or "Gollum," etc. (goddamn I'd do just about anything to get one of those! /geek)

Oh, and the encoding methods weren't exactly common knowledge. I was the only TNG cast member who read 2600 and TAP, if you get my drift.