Slashdot Mirror


Arrest in Caridi FBI Investigation

skillio writes "The FBI arrested one Russell Sprague in Illinois on Thursday in connection with the previously reported Carmine Caridi dvd screener leak investigation. Given the FBI's figure of up to 60 screeners a year provided by Caridi, and Sprague's clearly sophisticated setup, one can't help but wonder if this will prove to be the main, if not sole, source of these dvd screener leaks. Caridi has yet to be charged, but after he's admitted to supplying Sprague with screeners for the last 3-5 years, I highly doubt his innocence will remain unchallenged for very long."

37 of 482 comments (clear)

  1. Thank you.... by musikit · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Carmine Caridi for saving me thousands of dollars on rental fees, movie tickets, popcorn, late fees, dinner with friends/family and candy for providing the worthless crap that the MPAA puts out to the common man on the internet.

    1. Re:Thank you.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If it's worthless crap, why are you watching it?

    2. Re:Thank you.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If its crap than the easy solution would be dont go to the movies and rent the crap. these guys commited a crime as you do by downloading it. I dont agree with all the over the top pattent and copyright stuff weve seen lately but studios should be able to profit on making a movie. if the studios arent making any money then how do the make new movies?

    3. Re:Thank you.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Why are actors paid $50,000,000 for doing a film instead of, say, $50,000 or $200,000? It's just acting. It's not like they're risking their life or health. I think we're at the start of a trend which will end up with people who work in industries where copying is a problem being paid less, and people who actually provide something useful to society, such as teachers, nurses, etc getting paid more.

    4. Re:Thank you.... by Bootsy+Collins · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why are actors paid $50,000,000 for doing a film instead of, say, $50,000 or $200,000? It's just acting. It's not like they're risking their life or health.

      Well, $50M is a bit of an exaggeration -- you're not going to find many (any?) examples of that high a figure -- but some actors do get paid a lot of money, even millions of dollars, to do a film, yes. Why so much? Because that's what the market is. They're paid that much because the studios are willing to pay that much, and the studios are willing to pay that much because the filmgoing public is willing to pay what it pays. That's what our priorities are.

      I think we're at the start of a trend which will end up with people who work in industries where copying is a problem being paid less, and people who actually provide something useful to society, such as teachers, nurses, etc getting paid more.

      That would be nice; but it's hard to imagine. As long as people value entertainment more than they do education, public safety, or public health, entertainment will be where the money goes. And as long as the main contributing factor to the success or failure of a movie continues to be perceived (rightly or wrongly) as its acting lineup or director, directors and acting talent will get big money. However, it's certainly possible that some of that money that would otherwise go to foleys, carpenters, sound editors, costume tailors, etc. (which for a typical movie is comparable to the money than the acting talent earns, simply because there's a lot more crew than actors) will be spent on anti-piracy crap instead, with the result that the foleys/carpenters/sound editors/costume tailors/etc. make less.

    5. Re:Thank you.... by monique · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They're paid that much because the studios are willing to pay that much, and the studios are willing to pay that much because the filmgoing public is willing to pay what it pays. That's what our priorities are.

      This is kind of misleading. Watching a movie costs less than $10 a person. So yes, our priorities are such that we are occasionally willing to pay somewhere around $5/hour for entertainment. That's not to say that any individual values acting talent in the millions.

      That being said, there may be changes in the wind. My local theater upped its prices to something like $9 for evening shows; $7 for a matinee. SEVEN DOLLARS for a matinee! And for this, I get a lecture from an MPAA lackey, several minutes of commercials, and several minutes of trailers, some of which, I admit, may be interesting.

      It's looking more and more like the right financial choice for movie enthusiasts is to buy a high-quality entertainment system and rent the DVD. Rental is cheaper than a movie ticket, you only have to pay for one DVD no matter how many people are watching, you don't (YMMV) have to deal with trailers and whatnot, and you can pause it when you have to pee. Besides, it enhances non-movie experiences, like console gaming, too.

      --
      -monique
    6. Re:Thank you.... by Bootsy+Collins · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is kind of misleading. Watching a movie costs less than $10 a person. So yes, our priorities are such that we are occasionally willing to pay somewhere around $5/hour for entertainment. That's not to say that any individual values acting talent in the millions.

      I don't think it's misleading. The issue isn't that we value acting talent in the millions, but rather that we value it more than just about anything else. We're willing, as you say, to give that $10 to go see a single movie; but we're not willing to give that $10 to education, public safety, or public health . . .even though $10 from each U.S. citizen -- one less movie a year for each of us -- would raise the annual salary of every firefighter in the United States by $10,000. Now there's a career in which people do risk life and health, and get paid poorly for doing so. We could easily change that; we choose not to. Those are our priorities. Pass the popcorn.

      It's looking more and more like the right financial choice for movie enthusiasts is to buy a high-quality entertainment system and rent the DVD. Rental is cheaper than a movie ticket, you only have to pay for one DVD no matter how many people are watching, you don't (YMMV) have to deal with trailers and whatnot, and you can pause it when you have to pee. Besides, it enhances non-movie experiences, like console gaming, too.

      Some films look better on the 70 foot screen. But most of them, I agree, are just as good (if not better) at home.

    7. Re:Thank you.... by mooingyak · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As long as people value entertainment more than they do education, public safety, or public health, entertainment will be where the money goes.

      If I go and see a movie every week, bring my wife, and buy popcorn, I'll spend maybe $25 / week * 52 weeks = $1300. That would be a HEAVY movie-goer.

      A pre-school we're looking at for my daughter, 3 days a week, 1PM - 4PM, costs about $3800.

      One entertainer can reach millions of people at once.
      One teacher can reach maybe 200 kids during a day.

      It's not that we spend more on entertainment. It's that the money gets concentrated to relatively few people.

      --
      William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
  2. Call me crazy... by Txiasaeia · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...but I can't find any mention of DVDs in the article. Wasn't this guy being charged with ripping VHS tapes?

    --
    Condemnant quod non intellegunt.
  3. Re:All screeners? by dtolman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There are only so many screeners sent out by studios - if this guy _was_ sending out as many as they say he did, he probably represented a large portion of all screeners posted to the internet.

  4. sole source? by gl4ss · · Score: 4, Insightful

    UNLIKELY.

    If it were I'd kinda except all releases to have comen from the same group as well.

    well, it's hardly likely that it will change anything. they might scapegoat him for all the huge losses of entertainment industry that they've invented with a random number generator though.

    and you know what? sometimes the retail dvd is out in usa before the movie hits the big screen here in Finland. with phasing like that who needs screeners?

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  5. Don't burn him by blackmonday · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If he was just sending the guy movies because he'd watched them and was done with them, the only laws he broke were of the Academy, not criminal laws. As it says in the first article, if he didn't know the movies were being copied, he's criminally innocent.

    I can't really believe that Caridi really knew that his screeners were being uploaded to the Internet. He's an older guy, I wonder if he's even familiar with the Internet, much less file-sharing. Anyways, if they were guilty wouldn't he let this other guy know, so he could get rid of the evidence before the feds showed up?

    It's pretty safe to say he won't be voting for the Academy Awards anymore.

  6. So is an apology coming from the industry? by Zed2K · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Since many people have been telling the movie industry for years that it is mainly its own people who distribute good copies of movies on the internet and they have constantly denied it. Are they now going to apologize?

  7. Re:Great. by Dot.Com.CEO · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Could you please direct me to the article of the constitution that grants immunity to 70 year old criminals? Thank you.

    --
    Mother is the best bet and don't let Satan draw you too fast.
  8. it was a nice run- while it lasted by way2trivial · · Score: 2, Insightful
    now the only d/l available will be screenED..
    I often wonder, the commodization of computers made the pricepoint go down.. who pays 3k for a computer any more? no one..
    ever watch the original 'blob'? one great scene, where the kids are pulled out of the movie house by the local law enforcement.. they complain "ok sherrif, you've got out eighty cents"-- movies were a dime.. and until my adulthood, so were phone calls.. think about it.. movies and payphone calls were the same price at one point in time. and payphones held level for DECADES

    could not the widespread of free movies have forced the studios to re-normalize (read, de-gouge) to a point where the value was obvious?
    instead of selling popcorn/candy/soda/food at a huge markup, and forbidding bringing it in from outside.. charge enough of a price that precludes anyone from wanting to bring it in from outside.
    instead of selling 10-20 bags at 1$ profit, sell 100-200 bags at 20 cents profit

    --
    every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
  9. Re:also covered on cnn.com by nate1138 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Isn't it great that a FUCKING US ATTORNEY can't even get the infringement/theft thing straight? She should be disbarred for incompetence.

    There's also this choice bit:

    Among the movies being illegally sold off the Internet: "Master and Commander," "Last Samurai," "Matrix Revolutions," "Mystic River," "Gods and Generals," "Mighty Wind," "Matchstick Men," "Something's Gotta Give," "Love Actually," "Thirteen" and "Calendar Girls."

    There is no evidencd he "sold" anything to anybody. Fuck CNN, they have no respectability anymore.

    --
    Where's my lobbyist? Right here.
  10. And also thank you... by hoggoth · · Score: 4, Insightful

    > Thank you ... for saving me ... for providing the worthless crap that the MPAA puts out

    Thank you to all the people I've mugged in alleys over the years for saving me thousands of dollars on cars, motorcycles, clothes, drugs, jewelry, and dinner with friends/family for providing the worthless crap that our materialistic society demands we consume.

    I am a victim of a society gone rotten!

    --
    - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    1. Re:And also thank you... by Darth23 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Thank you RIAA and the MPAA for confusing the difference between sharing and stealing. Remind me to call the cops on all the people who have books, tapes and magazines of mine. Remind me to call the FBI on the Public Library as well.

      --

      -------- In Soviet Russia, "Soviet Russia" sigs hate Slashdot.

  11. Arresting the Criminals by TheDawgLives · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's nice to see the FBI arresting the person actually breaking the law, unlike the RIAA which suied napster and other P2P services for "providing a conduit to break the law." If the FBI thought like the RIAA, they would destroy all roads in the US, because they facilitate people breaking the speed limit.

    --
    -TheDawgLives suckitdown
  12. FBI has no business by nurb432 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This should be a civil manner, not something that has been escalated to a federal criminal issue. ( including their funding via taxes )

    Yes I realize that recent laws have allowed this, but that doest make it right.

    At this point the feds can go after anything they want, for any reason. regardless of how severe it isnt.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  13. Will this mark a change? by hugzz · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Just to be noted from the article:
    However, because this year the screeners carried invisible markings for the first time, the studios were able to identify the Academy member for whom they had been intended.

    If everyone who gets a copy of movies knows that they're traceable, wont this seriously cut back the amount of people willing to get screeners onto the internet? I know if I was given screeners and occaisionally leaked them, i'd stop right now (at least until I found out what these "invsible markings" were, and how to remove them)

  14. Good thing criminals are idiots by strictnein · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why wouldn't this guy have disposed of, or at least hidden away in some storage facility (pay with cash), all of his equipment?
    If I'm doing something like he was and my "supplier" gets busted, everything I have is going bye bye. You still might get busted, but they're going to have a hell of a lot harder time prosecuting you if they don't have that stuff as evidence.

    1. Re:Good thing criminals are idiots by ChicagoBiker · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Did you happen to catch the ages of all these people involved (50-60 years old)? There's a whole generation of folks out there who don't really feel this is all that much of a "crime".

      Add to that, there are some really, really stupid people out there (especially in that area of Chicago) who think that they are somehow invisible to the law, that "everyone is doing it", that it's "ok", and "some big corporation or the freakin' FBI ain't comin' after ME, I'm a nobody, I'm just makin' copies for my buddies from the Moose Lodge. We're on the inside track, we've got an important uncle in Hollywood. Billy Bob is the president of the Moose cause he gets all those cool movies first. And hey, if you want, you get in good with him, he'll give you one of those special TV boxes he makes that gets ya HBO for free. Free man! He's so smart"

      With the national news attention this is getting right now, there are a lot of suburban hicks in Chicago today disposing of VHS tapes, burned DVD's and Satellite black boxes. Too bad garbage pickup in most communities is Thursday or Friday (this morning), so I guess you'll see them by the side of the road. And someone's 16 year old son who's dad is about three degrees of separation away from the guy they arrested is having his computer and internet connection removed from his bedroom this afternoon and is grounded for life.

  15. Re:Great. by pclminion · · Score: 2, Insightful
    If the guy committed a crime, what's wrong with putting him in prison?

    So it's not okay for me to disagree with a law, or the harshness of the punishment for it?

    Sorry, I thought I was supposed to never question anything.

  16. What about Terrorists and Violent Criminals? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Shouldn't the FBI be using its resources for more serious threats, like tracking down violent criminals, drug dealers, bank robbers and terrorists.

    Wasn't it pointed out after 9/11 that the FBI was too busy (lacked resources) to investigate possible terrorists training at U.S. flight schools--I guess now we why they're so busy.

  17. Double Standards by thenextpresident · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I am probably going to be mod'ed as flamer, but still. I see a lot of double standards here (yeah, it's /., I know). These people broke the law. They should be punished.

    People are complaining about wording in the article or from quotes (people suggesting they "stole" something). Does it really matter? Does the description of the act to a news reporter change the crime? If I describe a murderer's act as "He hurt the victims...", does that change the fact that the murderer committed the crime?

    And for everyone complaining about how the big bad MPAA is going after people for these "littie" crimes. Remember, they are using the same laws that protect the Linux Kernel. When the community goes after a company that doesn't provide the source code they use, and don't follow the GPL, it's basically the same damn thing. We have rights they agreed to, and we expect them to act accordingly.

    I mean, seriously, by suggesting that the MPAA shouldn't be going after these guys is tantamount to suggesting that the laws should be different for big companies and small companies.

    Regardless of the current state of the laws in the country, that's just wrong. If these guys did commit crimes, nuff said. They should be punished.

    Saying that they shouldn't be punished for committing a crime is just wrong.

    --
    Jason Lotito
  18. Re:How is "interception" illegal? by general_re · · Score: 2, Insightful
    If they beam RF into my home, can't I receive it and -- purely for experimental purposes, say -- try to do something with it?

    No. And if your neighbors might be wondering the same thing, I suggest you don't buy a cordless phone. Or a cell phone.

    --
    ABSURDITY, n.: A statement or belief manifestly inconsistent with one's own opinion.
  19. That's why by r_j_prahad · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And now we know why Hollywood's been so focused on creating perfect CGI characters. It gets rid of all that overhead you just listed. Save a few million here, a few million there, pretty soon you've financed one hell of a render farm.

  20. Re:Well this is certainly odd... by Contact · · Score: 3, Insightful
    That would be like one of the RIAA people being found trading CDs on P2P networks in his off hours...

    Actually, some record industry guys were merrily quoting from an independent report a few months back, and when the author of the report asked where they'd read it (as not many copies had been purchased), they went a bit red and admitted they'd been emailing copies of it to each other.

    If they don't respect copyrights themselves, they really ought to realise why the general public don't seem to do so either.

  21. Re:contradiction by Gr33nNight · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Made in '03. Hero (with Jet Li) was made in 2002, but will be released in '04. So, its going to be considered an '04 movie in Hollywood.

  22. He should just kill someone by panic911 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I recall hearing about a congressman who is spending 100 days in jail for killing a biker when he hit him wrecklessly with his car. What a wonderful justice system we have in the US, you can kill a man and go to jail for 100 days or you can make copies of a digital video and distribute them and spend the next 15 years in jail. It's a movie, it's not worth ruining peoples lives over.

    I also like how the MPAA (and RIAA, for that matter) determines their statistics for stolen movies/songs. If you have a movie on your computer, thats money that the MPAA lost. But in reality, most likely you would never spend a penny on that movie anyway.

    Stupid MPAA

  23. Re:All screeners? by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm sure this will only make it so that all distributors of pirated screeners in the future will just blur any identifying marks from the film.

    It's not that simple. The identifying marks are red herrings. The real identifying marks will be obscured. This is easy to do with modern computing technology. Since they're already making multiple copies, and duplication is the hard part, they can stick assorted different symbols/logos into portions of the movie where they will not be noticed. Even easier; Chop specific scenes down here and there by a second or two. If you're writing the mastering software it should be easy to drop MPEG frames off the end of a clip, alter the header, and create your image for burning without screwing anything up. It would also be fairly trivial to add in assorted sounds which are not found in the movie normally, or time-shift them, by overlaying them onto the audio track later. Studios typically have not done this to date because it is harder than not doing anything, but they will start doing it, because they can't just stop sending out screeners (though screeners will typically be sent to less and less people, I think - maybe we'll start seeing more workprints, which must hurt their bottom line less) but they still want to discourage copying.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  24. What the hell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    You don't belong here on Slashdot.

    We, here, at Slashdot, are different kinds of sheep; we accuse all of the Fox News Watching Patriotic Americans of being sheep, while we follow our own shephard; we are more sophisticated sheep.

    You don't belong.

    Get out.

    Furthermore I want to say that the way that the FBI is infringing on Caridi's and that Segway guy's rights to privacy is preposterous. Why don't tehy just shove an RFID tag up their butt?

  25. Re:All screeners? by big_O_of_n! · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I had an internship in "the industry" for a few months, and I have a hard time believing one person was responsible for the bulk of leaks. I and my friends were all interns, so we had no reason to have screeners, but we had access to just about any movie in competition for awards. People seem to assume -- and news outlets seem to report -- that screener sharing is rare, but this assumption couldn't be farther from the truth. If the sharing makes its way to interns, it makes its way to everyone.

    There may be "only so many" screeners out there, but sometimes so many is so many!

    --
    Half the stuff I make up isn't even true!
  26. Maybe the sole source for one group by Rufus211 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I highly doubt that he is the "sole source" for all DVD screeners. It simply wouldn't make sense considering how many groups there are out there releasing them in competition with each other and with different versions. If there was one source there would be one group always getting the first release for every movie, which just isn't the case. My best guess was that he was OBUS's source. They're the only group that released all of the movies listed in the article and while they are a major group, they're far from the largest or most well known.

  27. Re:Great. by k98sven · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You do not put people in prisons to protect society, nor to punish them. It is a common misconception, however it is wrong.

    You don't spend a word on explaining HOW it is wrong, or what the correct reasons are?

    That makes no sense. This is a democracy, the 'common' perception of why the government does things IS the reason why the government does things.

  28. Re:Great. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Is is right that the US takes away more people's freedom than any other free country. The report crack was total shit though.