Slashdot Mirror
Theaters vs. Camcorders, Round 27
ackthpt writes "CNN is reporting two people, one in Los Angeles and one in Canada, were caught recording The Day After Tomorrow in cinemas, while a third got away. No mention if night-vision goggles, as previously mentioned, were of assistance." Reader azmatsci writes "Tuesday Sony was issued a patent for technology that will attempt to block camcorder recordings in movie theaters. Funny to me because I just came up with the same idea and discovered it while doing a patent search. Only problem with the idea is it will only block camcorders that use CCD recorders, which are sensitive to IR light. Another jamming idea which probably work for all camcorders can be found here."
What kind of provisions does the MPAA have, most likely under the DMCA, to prosecute people who are caught recording movies in the theaters? Will these people go to jail, or just get a slap on the wrist?
They should be fined just out of poor taste.
D
Interesting idea - crank up those IR emitters enough, and people will get hot, and need to go buy more drinks. Maybe the big soda companies have a stake in this too?
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
Exactly... I noticed how IR can be seen by camcorders, so why not have a few IR floodlights that would eliminate camcorders? Anyone not using a modern camcorder isnt going to be doing it for internet release anyway, so why bother with other methods. Besides, why would I want a crappy cam of a move? Telesync and DVD-Rip all the way!
I am not sure what the best solution would be. It's very hard to stop piracy on these types of thigns because of how many hands they cross when being produced. Most movies created these days require outside influence for CGI enhancements. From there it gets shown to have the music soundtrack added.. Include test audiences (and those that screen it for them), previews to movie theater employees and you have so many leaks along the chain you sometimes don't know where to start. This also isn't all inclusive of the movie industry either... The music industry suffers the same fate, albeit the music is a lot easier to take than a full-length movie.
Hmmm.
Maybe i won't have a popular opinion on this, but i'm happy they were caught.
I love all our priveleges and i dig our open source OSes and software, but i don't feel everything should be free.
Let the slashdot hypocracy follow:
do() || do_not();
I do not know too much about camera filters, but I have heard of ones to block IR. Would that not make the system pointless?
The sad thing is not that they were caught taping the film... but that they were caught in there in the first place! Two fools parted from their money after being suckered by Hollywood's marketing to go and see yet another low-quality big-budget summer block-buster.
suggested by Paul Reubens, formerly PeeWee Herman; Cinema in the nude.
As they'd just stick an IR filtering lens on the thing. Problem solved. Cheaply too.
The thing with varying the framerate to introduce distortions sounds cool, but probably overly expensive for the limited scope of the actual problem itself.
- Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
They'll probably just use Infra-red filters!
Or the movie companies could require the theaters to do what they did in cryptonomicon: put really big magnets in the doorways, so that all of the camcorders are destroyed. They could even post a sign about it to avoid being sued.
Help! I'm being repressed!
Keep releasing bad movies no one wants to bootleg.
Instead of trying to prevent copying, cinemas should just force all viewers to strip naked before entering. As an added benefit, if the movie is boring, the audience can devise their own entertainment.
I don't know how effective the sony method would be. It seems like a dedicated person could filter the IR. I know that they do this in astronomy when using a CCD to look at stars and in high end photography:
high end photography using filter astronomy using hot mirror
Are there just a lot of geeks among reviewers who want information to be free? Are they selling them? It's strange to risk your job over something like this.
-I am an elective eunuch.
(And here's an amusing summary/parody of the thing for those who are up for a little MST3K style ribbing at it.)
In terms of putting UV projectors behind the screen or off to the side, cant you just get a UV filter and put it over the lens, to filter out all the ultra violet light?
And in terms of messing with the projection rate. All of the things they seek to exploit stem from the fact that the human eye doesn't see descrete frames, it sort of blurs them togethor. Couldn't the people using the camcorders decrease the shutter speed to accomplish basically the same thing?
paul reinheimer
Can you say "waste of time and money"? Who is going to choose a camcorder copy of a film over actually seeing it? That's right - those who weren't going to see it in the first place anyway.
If I can't at least check out the film beforehand i'm probably not going to pay at the box office either. Hollywood has pretty much set themselves up for this, with all the crappy movies they let out the door yearly.
I'll wait for the DVD and rent. They get minimum $$ out of my pocket, which is my goal. Most of the sheeple don't have the willpower to do so, sadly. Things might change if they did.
HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
just make everyone see movies naked--no cameras to conceal!
Here's an idea: Security metal detectors! Homeland security will happily oversee who has what when entering the theatre. This will also reduce terror.
Tickets will now read "seating at 6.45. Movie starts at 7.00. Please be here two hours prior to the show due to security measures."
And this must work, since I haven't seen people recording movies on airplanes.
When filming a movie, get a buddy to sit with you with a camcorder as well. Activate the night vision on the camcorder, and scan for the evil anti-piracy guys using night vision. When you spot one of them, and they spot you, activate your camcorder's 1000 candle spotlight and aim at guy, and run for it.
Hmmm... this sounds like a really good Splinter Cell mod. Splinter Cell: Theaters VS Camcorders.
"There is no spoon." - The Matrix
Using Lasers to Temporarily Neutralize Camera Sensors
have a blocking filter that will defeat this technique. Surely camcorders will have it as well...
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
Using this might keep people from being able to use a camcorder too.
Rhymes that keep their secrets will unfold behind the clouds.There upon the rainbow is the answer to a neverending story
I read somewhere that point source emmiters (high-powered I/R leds) can damage eyesight because the eye is not sensitive to I/R and hence has no protection against such emmisions...could this be a future problem??? ..much like we have not evolved to handle high ammounts of background cell phone RF radiation, i guess the world is just getting more polluted all the time!!
FINALLY I can get my 700mb copy of the DAY AFTER TOMORROW in NIGHT VISION... does this mean I can watch the movie in pitch black and it will be all green and cool and stuff?
This is a dream come true, what a way to save $6 that's for sure.
Excuse me, I don't mean to impose, but I am the ocean
This wouldn't be such a good "view" for films such as "Star Wars". 300 naked star wars geeks, doing light-saber battles and fighting evil.. it's just too much for my eyes!
Hmmm.
Damn those Linux programmers, if we just had Windows virus/worm writers to worry about, the world would be a much safer place.
"Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a fat white guy who is threatened by change."
make me want to make a fake camcorder out of a block of wood and some paint and see if I can get arrested...
Awesome furniture, accessories and cabinetry in Santa Rosa, CA: http://humanity-home.com/
Sony, in addition to film and audio distribution, also make camcorders. How much you want to bet that they are simply going to integrate into their camcorders some kind of wireless "switch", and sell transmitters to the theaters? They could then license this technology to all the other camcorder manufacturers (or if the problem is big enough, give it away?). You might say "Well, I will just bypass it, like with mod chips" - if integrated at some low chip level, without external antennas (or using the "ground" plane as an antenna) - and more powerful transmitter (to make up for the embeddedness) - it would probably be damn near impossible to bypass it (although nothing is a "sure thing")...
Reason is the Path to God - Anon
They could dub sound from Independed Day onto the Day After Tomorrow and end up with the same movie because they are virtually the same movie.
Plot sploiler for both movies. Crazy scientist/pilot discovers threat to mankind -> authorities don't believe him -> mass destruction ensues -> authorities realize the err in their ways -> scientist/pilot risks own life to save others -> people are saved -> presidency personally thanks scientist, says mankind should unite to protect itself against evil.
I don't think it is as much these evil pirates out there risking their money and freedom to shoot in dark theatres just so they can put it on the Internet and get caught later. I believe that it is the people from the industry that leak the movie to their friends that eventually put it up for download. Most copies on the p2p networks are very good quality copied either from screeners or with a nice sturdy tripod - one that only a movie theatre employee would setup after hours during a "special" viewing. I know theatre managers that let their friends in and organize special shows for the unreleased movies. And it would be a surprise to Sony, but the night vision stuff is just another toy for the 16 year old kids who work at the theatres to play with.
Last time I checked, circulating these less-than-quality camcorder copies on the Internet can only increase the hype and exposure for the film itself in terms of media: articles written about the pirating of the movie by newspapers and television spots reporting the abuse that happen to mention the film's name one more time (that includes SLASHDOT...and. People who really want to experience the film will go see it and pay money for it...and yes, even those people who download those crappy copies will shell out 10 bucks to see Harry Potter because they want to see the REAL version, not the pirated version with crappy quality. After all it's a family event. So preventing camcorders filming is cutting into the bottom line box office.
Modern digital handheld camcorders can use extended exposure to essentially mimic the human eye's perception, making the frame timing rather useless unless you alter it so much that it looks bad to the eye too. technology simply advances too fast, they wont be successful til they stop the gear from getting in front of the screen in the first place. Add that to the fact that camera rips certainly arent the only source of leaks, this technology will be rather pointless eh? find a cure for cancer or something!
Tonight, at the Sony Metreon in SF: Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban in IMAX . Now that's the way to see the movie.
The wolves were the dumbest thing about "The Day After Tomorrow." Did the wolves freeze too? WHO CARES! Dennis Quaid was much better in "Dinner With Friends."
Great so they can jack up the ticket prices even higher to pay for the "jamming" camcorders for the very very small percentage of theaters or people that try to record that way?
It's not just for hats anymore!
And the last part of the name is quickly becoming more and more ironic, what with RFID chips and all.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I just sumbitted a patent for this jamming device.
We'll see how it goes. In tests so far it's been 100% effective.
Wait wait hold the fucking press, cinema recordings are crap, infact they are so crap i actually don't think i could ever bring myself to watch one. If someone gets ripped off buying one then thats their problem, piracy (ie selling for profit) is bad and we have police that go around stopping it, but the only purpose of filming off the screen and putting it on the net is so that people can see the film before it comes out in their country.
Who the hell cares if someone watches a film before it comes out in their country? better yet, who the hell cares enough to stick nightvision in cinemas and go to all the trouble to try and stop cameras from working (which is just an up-hill battle that will go through round after round of expensive research and cheap ways to circumnavigate it).
And giving out serious charges and prision time for this is just total fucking bullshit on the highest level. I can understand listening to an mp3 instead of a CD, i can understand watching a divx instead of a DVD, but if someone actually seriously wants to watch a poor quality cinema video then they're either too cheap to even go to the cinema (so dont bother chasing them) or they are total fanatics who need to see star-wars the very second it comes out and who will likely go and see it in the cinema about 20 times aswell.
I believe in stopping things at the source but this just takes the piss, chuck people out if they have cameras but dont do this to your customers because some of us arnt sheep who will take your bullshit excuses and give you their money just like they take bushes bull shit excuses and wave their flags around or take blunketts crap as he says "duuhhhh i think we should have id cards because they help fight terrorists" or listen to the fucking criminal israeli government as they say "yeah that vanunu is evil, kidnap is ok", some of us don't give jack about jay-lo's failing career or ben afflecks right to have 3 jets, the cinema industry is just becoming shitty like all the other industries and soon they are going to wake up either to a society of sheep who will buy their DRM or a society of people who say fuck you and boycott every
ok im going to sit down now.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
I'd use this. Quite a bit more effective than your puny 1000 candle power mini-spotlight. After you blind them with this they might think twice about coming after you, as long as their retinas are important to them anyways.
...one of the more recent "Terrible Terry Tate" Reebok advertisements, in which Terry's company had looked into other fields of athleticism for productivity boosters. Needless to say the Biathalon skier/shooter did not work out very well.
Expect rollerblading ushers with NVG's and long rifles by July 4th.
--"It's Bradford Company, slash your last name, dot your first name"
I never could understand the motivation for these rips.
The quality of the captured movies is awful. For me, it makes the movie unbearable to watch and completely ruines the fun...
Why would anyone risk getting caught for such a low quality copy?!
I bet that the money the movie industry is loosing directly because of cam-corder copies is only a small fraction of the total and the majority of the money comes from other, higher-quality alternatives like Screeners.
Why don't they play the movies at different refresh rate. Just like a when you record a computer monitor with a video camera, you see black line crossing the video every once in a while. This is because the refresh rate of the computer monitor exceeds the refresh rate of the video tape recoder. Remember the Nyquist-Shannon sampling theorem? If they go faster, the human eye won't see a difference, but the cam will record the annoying line.
Wow, this should be a testament in itself. It seems as though nobody has even bothered to waste the money to see the movie. Nobody here can even make a real comment about what the movie is even about.
I think that just shows the quality of the Hollywood movies these days. I can't remember the last time I spent money on such trash.
See Subject =)
I can count to 1023 on my hands. Ask me about #132.
will whole theater go blind after starring 3hours at strong IR source?
to design ways of jamming camcorders. As correctly pointed out by others here, most of us will want to view a decent DVD and not settle for crummy Digicam vids. Second, the jamming technique that is supposed to block all digital camcorders from recording relies, if I read between the lines correctly, on modulating brightness and perhaps color in a way that the human visual system will not grok but that will definitely show up on CCD. Now, how long would it take to either
-color/brightness correct in software, or
- modify the camcorder in such a way that its image acquisition becomes as slow as a human's (not sure if that can be done, anyone here with an understanding of camcorders?)
It's the usual senseless paranoia of the greedy big media trying to rake in every last penny that can possible be wrung from a movie release, causing us consumers more headaches than anything else. And it STILL won't prevent people from ripping DVD's and spreading the copies. So they will be losing money (but not much methinks) anyway.
----- One learns to itch where one can scratch.
Movie theatres are already pretty tight about people bringing in food and snacks from other places into the theatre, but they can't stop/don't notice the people who bring camcorders?!? That big box of Hot Tamales seems like it would be whole lot easier to smuggle in and enjoy than a camcorder would be to smuggle in and use.
Of course, I know there are always going to be exceptions - like the guy who goes to the movie theatre that his buddy works at and therefore knows that he won't get checked on while filming the video - but, as some previous posts would indicate - there's ways around everything, including a security system built into the motion picture itself.
Wouldn't it be easier for the MPAA to force the theatres to enfore their security better? And maybe provide for penalties for security that is lacking?
I was in the park the other day wondering why frisbees get bigger and bigger the closer they get - and then it hit me.
hmm .. guess jamming using emf wont work cause people may have pacemakers or other health gadgets.
I guess the only solution is frisking airport style hopefully with less sensitive equipment and intrusive. That's what it's coming to.
Can you say "waste of time and money"? Who is going to choose a camcorder copy of a film over actually seeing it?
There's a huge flea market in the no-mans-land between Dallas and Grand Prairie, Texas, where you can buy just about anything you want. A friend of my daughter brought over "Freaky Friday" and "Freddy vs. Jason" the week they hit theaters -- she told me her mom bought them there. The image was grainy, the soundtrack muted, and of course there were no DVD extras -- you put it in and it started playing.
The problem, in this case at least, isn't us geeks. Our bittorrents and mp3s and such are an entirely different issue. The camcorder copies go straight to the underground economy, sold off the back of a truck at a flea market where if you don't habla el lingo, you'd better watch yourself. And the folks buying these goods often don't know the difference between pirated and legal: they're just buying it, just like they'll buy fake Nike shoes at the next stall.
That's the problem they're trying to solve. They're not trying to bust geeks, they're trying to bust criminals who will sell pirated copies of movies for hard cash.
By the way, my daughter and her friend both got informed, in detail, about what piracy is. My daughter now tells her friends "No, you can't borrow my CD to burn a copy, 'cause my dad won't let me." That's good enough for now.
Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
I hope the next time an idea like this starts to shine like a bright strobelight in its inventor's mind, at least they'll have a look at some hardly known websites like these:
The second method of causing distortion or a pattern just doesn't matter. People don't watch pirate copies for movie quality, they want to get the plot and often, the script. It's hard to transcribe something without a recording.
The IR method is useful, as almost all pocket movie recorders use CCD.
I still don't know why people lug in these cameras. Just get something like one of these or one of these.
Basically, only an idiot gets caught from such low tech detection (NVG, gimme a frikkin break).
It embiggened him.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
This is taken from the news.com.com.com article, talking about digital projectors
"But the technology has raised concerns that audience members might eventually create high-quality copies of movies using handheld video cameras smuggled into theaters."
Rriiiiigggghhhhhttttt, so I'm going to be able to take a wobbly handheld camcorder into a movie, sit behind some tall bloke, and magically record an ultra-high quality digital copy of a movie.
I guess some people just hear the word "digital" and suddenly get reality confused with a load of RIAA/MPAA propaganda.
nifty...but what if they have a really good IR filter on the camcorder?
sounds to me like we have a new cat and mouse game.
Which one of you got away? Was it extremely difficult to escape the grasp of buttery fingered, 8.25/hr ushers?
Assuming 'Intent' must be proven, maybe a quick ransac^H^H^H^H^H^Hsearch of their homes by the gest^H^H^H^Hauthorities could turn up a system and evidence of previous nefarious activity. I'm sure somewhere beyond the usual warning 'Use of recording devices is forbidden, yada yada yada' there are some teeth to back the warning up.
I also doubt 'Fair Use' has a twig to lean on here..."Hey, I was just capturing it in case I missed a part and wanted to rewind and see it again *during* the movie."
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
"Machines see the world more closely to reality than humans do." Schumann said.
Perfect, just jack straight into my visual cortex to get the "raw feed".
The human line-out.
"Oh, you hate your job? There's a support group for that, it's called everyone, they meet at the bar."
Just read it here.... It's also on surpnova too if you really don't want to pay for it. :-/
Why don't they send out screener copies using multiple edits, and use that as a watermark? Pick a scene; rearrange a couple of flowers and turn the phone on the table 20 degrees, and reshoot. Edit multiple identifying items and end up with enough copies to uniquely identify a small group, or even one single screener copy, when the video hits the web.
>>the visuals were absolutely awesome. It's one of those movies that you just watch because it looks pretty and sort of turn your brain off.
>Redundant. People who use "awesome" as a superlative have their brains in a permanent off state anyway.
Modded: Troll
My comment was not troll. It was a flame. There's a difference dammit.
Sure, anything is possible.
:)
You can theoretically block any kind of camera, in fact, that second blocking technology might even block the nightvision goggles as well. Which I think would be ironic and funny, but I digress...
Does anyone believe these fourth rate copies that end up on the internet are actually costing the studios any money? Really? People would rather sit at their PC, stare at their 15-17 inch screens at close range for a movie that has terrible sound, and a crappy picture? Come on.
I tried it once with the Ring, and couldn't deal with it after 10 minutes. It's just not worth it. Takes too long to download such things, and the quality just isn't there. You're better off just going to the video store and renting it, or spending a couple of bucks at the second run. But if you want to see a bad movie (they never camcord the good movies) bad enough, you're more than welcome to try.
But with all the effort that you would have to go through to watch a movie that you shouldn't have, you could go out and rent ten of them and be happier. Besides, you get cleaner copies that way
Every single week, I read about yet ANOTHER movie that has had 'the biggest box office opening weekend EVAR!!1!!111'
If piracy was such a problem, wouldn't box office openings be down?
Spending millions on anti-piracy technology, when it seems that more and more people are seeing the movies, seems, well, stupid.
I mean, just what other reason do you have to use a camcorder in a cinema?
The quality of a camcorder recording is already crap! Both the sound and video are usually awful. Does anybody really buy these things *instead* of going to the movies? A friend of mine bought the LOTR bootleg when he went to NY, as a gift for me to tide me over until the DVD came out, but I couldn't even bear to watch it, it was so bad.
WWJD? JWRTFA!
According to Cinea's grant abstract, the motion picture industry loses some $3 billion a year due to piracy, including the sale of illegal copies made using camcorders in theaters. The company predicted that its efforts could cut movie piracy by 50 percent.
Riiiight. Tell me another one. This is just as bas as the BS the RIAA feeds us. They're no losing any money I bet because many of the people who are trading/buying these illegal copies wouldn't buy the real thing anyway.
Presently here, but not there.
I would like to propose that we pass laws requiring movie theaters to start the actual movie at the time they represent they will i.e. a 7:30 movie actually starts at 7:30.
If people want to see the previews, etc they can come early, those who don't arrive as represented...
Fine the theaters for starting late and they'll fall into line might quick!
Relative to what? Taking a crap on celluloid?
Do ya think that maybe the MPAA had a little influence on this reporter?
WWJD? JWRTFA!
I've always wondered if there was a way to make a similar device that I could use to fend off the Paparazzi. My goons aren't allowed to cause bodily harm to annoying photographers, so is there a device I could carry a that would destroy their film without hurting them and not be considered vandalism? Something that gives off a energy in the range that will enter the lense/shutter and overexpose the film, but isn't visible to the naked eye?
https://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
When I read the grandparent post, I was mainly thinking of people with laptops. Pacemakers didn't occure to me. Maybe because none of my grandparents had them. Of course, being a Talking Toaster makes having a pacemaker a moot point.
I'm suprised I didn't think of credit cards. Just about everyone has an ATM and/or Credit Card these days. Hopefully Principal Skinner doesn't work for the MPAA.
Howdy Doodly Doo!
Anybody want some Toast?
Airport styly security checkpoints for theater goers. OR register camera purchasers at time of purchase and create a nation wide data base so that when you buy tickets, they check your name against the database and they spot check you if you are not clear.
Excuse me, but the biggest problem the MPAA and Theater owners should be concerned with is the guy who works for the studio which produced said movie. The guy who has access to post production dvds of said movie. The guy from which I buy my pirated movies! Kill Bill 1 and 2. I watched them in my home before they even came out on film! Much like yesterdays story of the RIAA trying limit CD burning, the MPAA is worrying about the all little fisies instead of the few big sharks.
"Patience is not a virtue, it's a waste of time."
exactly.. and because of this arms race and inability for people in charge to see the wood for the trees, it'll end up like the situation we have with audio CDs (or is consumer opposition reversing the tide yet?), where they're f**ing up quality that humans can perceive in the name of "copy protection", but all that's happening is they're pissing of their customers (you know, the people who pay to go see movies) and not stopping piracy, as someone gets a clean un-fucked-up copy (either before the protection is applied, or by figuring out how to remove it). I already find the dots ("crap codes") annoying - i go to the cinema for the great picture and sound - if you take that away, what's the point? i urge the industry, just in case anyone's reading, not to get into this arms race, for their sake and ours (speaking for the movie-going public, not for pirates). While you're at it, remove the damn "don't copy" messages, and do more simultaneous worlwide releases, please.
This is my Sig, this is my Gun. One is for Slashdot and one is for Fun.
What a waste of time and money! The cost of any new counter measures put in place will surely be added to the cost of already inflated ticket prices! The MPAA and theater owners are after the wrong people. (They) need to worry about catching the guy who works at the studio where said movie is produced. The guy who has access to post-production copies of said movie. The guy who made copies of, and sold, Kill Bill vol. 1 & 2 for $10, before the movie even came out! Much like yesterdays story of the RIAA trying to limit the number of times a CD can be burned, the MPAA and theater owners are worring about all the little fishies rather than the few BIG sharks. Wake the hell up!
"Patience is not a virtue, it's a waste of time."
Especially about the first part of the posting. I assume this is just the /. kneejerk reaction to *any* kind of copyright enforcement, that doesn't involve someone violating the GPL? Someone is doing anything at all to prevent piracy, so it's a bad thing by definition?
Just because someone is enforcing their legally given right to control distribution does *not* make them an evil entity. It really doesn't.
God knows there's a hue and cry when someone does something w/ linux and doesn't share the code. You can't have one, without the other.
The same laws that make the GPL legally enforcable, make other copyright laws legally enforceable too.
"Politicians are interested in people. Not that this is always a virtue. Fleas are interested in dogs." P.J. O'Rourke
Sorry.
"Patience is not a virtue, it's a waste of time."
Not to mention all the other problems mentioned (pacemakers, credit cards, etc) a DVD-R camcorder would circumvent it if it was only strong enough to wipe the magnetic media but not strong enough to damage electronics (not even sure if that would be possible in the scale we are talking about).
Underloved Movies and Pub Quiz: donotquestionme.org
Indeed, I have a UV filter over all my lenses by default, simply to protect the lens. I suspect IR filters would work just as well.
I've stoped killing ppl and attacking ships for their cargo a while ago.
Looks like your pathetic attempt at karma whoring FAILED IT LostCluster, you must feel really shitty now, why don't you just go and kill yourself? It would be doing us all a favour.
- It costs the same or less to rent a movie than to see it in the theatre. All of your friends can come over and you can all watch it without having to pay more.
- You can start the movie when you want to instead of waiting for it to begin.
- You don't have to worry about getting a good seat and you and your friends can sit together (not always possible in a crowded theatre).
- No ringing cell phones and crying children.
- You don't have to be subjected to 30 second commercials before the previews and the movie.
Add to that:I am just wondering, what about different framerates based on the amount of movement on the screen, something like 24-30FPS or something similar to help deter the smaller camcorders that people sneak in. If you imagine a CRT computer monitor flickering because the refresh rate doesn't sync up to cam the same could probably be done (or similar) to to movie theatre projections (as crappy as they are). Btw Hollywood, if you guys use this idea I want royalty fees ;-)
My cam has a tinfoil lens hood, it is impervious to all attakcks!
Hah, blinded the attendant!
Oh, oops, I just gave away my location to everyone not wearing night-vision specs, owing to lighting up a literal spotlight in a darkened theater in the middle of a movie...
Trying to jam a normal camcorder with IR is useless, most videocamera's are filtered against IR light. If they are not go get a filter in a camera shop
The second scheme probably relies on slightly changing the flicker frequency of the light in the projector. You know the effect from trying to film a computer monitor, bands of different brightness will appear or the image on the monitor wil flicker when seen trough the camera.
This is allso not really a problem. They will not be able to put the frequency of this flicker below 50 fps since it will become noticeble to the eye and it could "set off" epileptic people into a spasm.
Most film is shot at 24 fps, so simply selecting a low shutter speed wil eliminate the flicker and the remaining brightness jumps can be taken care of with a virtualdub filter.
Next DRM scheme please! This one is useless!
You're crazy if you think they don't track the number of tickets sold, especially with the modern computerized box office. They track everything, whether Entertainment Tonight reports it or not. The local theaters have to know exactly how many people watched each film and at what times, because they shift films from the high seating capacity theaters to the smaller screens down the hall based on projected sales.
::shudder:: cheaper tickets or just wait for the DVD.
Also, as anyone who has worked in a theater can tell you, they lose money big time on ticket prices but recoup the difference (plus some) at the concession stand. If they drop the concession prices, tickets would skyrocket. So let the sheep pay $4.50 for their sugar-water, and either be grateful for the
For those theaters who offer them, afternoon matinees are usually discounted. Good alternative for families because you skip the evening crowds, and the kids aren't all cranky from staying up late and pissing off the other patrons.
Study everything, you'll find something you can use - Jason Bourne
I don't see how can you say that my use of my memory is the same as some thug mugging someone for their iPod. Is it that you were you dropped on your head as a baby? Your mother ate too much mercury-tainted fish, perhaps?
Talk to a manager. Tell him that it ruined your experience. Tell him exactly what the problem was. He'll write it in a log. Get him to give you a readmit pass. The theater people don't care because for every readmit pass they issue, that's $8 that they don't send away to the studio.
The way they handle the complaints, they don't usually fix the problems right away unless it's a catastrophic failure. Usually they'll just log the complaints and then have the tech guy check it out the next day. Also, they know that only 1-5% of people are going to complain and get readmit passes.
Of the 8 or so movies I've gone to see in the last 6 months or so, about 3 of them I've gotten readmit passes for. Something or other was screwed up (gum on screen, bad sound, excessively jittery projection, etc). Unfortunately, it's hard to get your $9.25 back because the content sucked.
My other first post is car post.
Number one, it's copyright infringement, not theft. Look up theft in the dictonary, if the difference still isn't apparant, I'll explain it to you. More important, however, I should be allowed to take my personal property in with me. While the act of taping a movie may be illegal, simply having a cam corder should not be. I should basically be allowed to have any item that isn't already illegal with me, and not have it be illegal just because this happens to be a movie theatre.
This goes double because the day soon approches when things like PDAs will be able to record movies. They have cameras on them now, flash cards are getting bigger, and soon the technology to capture motion video will be on them. That would then make them illegal. So you are telling me that a PDA, which most people that have them carry everywhere, should suddenly be a felony to carry in a theatre? That's bullshit, and a really bad precident for laws.
Can anyone explain why copyright laws should have anything to do with the criminal court system, and not be handled in civil court, like patents and trademarks are? Why is there a difference?
"Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
They are 24fps, have been pretty much since the beginning. When converting them to NTSC they are slown down to 23.976fps, then a telecine procedure is applied to bring them to 29.97fps. For PAL, they usually just speed them up by 1fps and leave it at that.
My god, why don't they worry about movies that people actually want to see!
The Day After Tomorrow? I'd rather watch static.
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
Women are ALL fucking idiots. Boring wifes that can't deliver a good blowjob for years, that aren't able to relax even after a stable, true, loving relationship for four years and umpteen hours of loving foreplay this day, who are just too brainwashed to enjoy sex. And the rest of these bitches are unfaithful whores screwing anything that moves except you (and me).
Women are the scum of the earth and I am sure they will pay for it sometimes. Can you say "burkha"? Stupid cunts!
I went to the Midnight showing of the latest Harry Potter and after finding out that people had been standing in line since 6:00 PM (6 HOURS?!? Jeeze...) I decided to go see Kill Bill Vol 2. But as I came out of my flick, I saw that the lines going into Harry Potter were having all bags searched and people being frisked. One geeky looking character was asked by the security folk to accompany a theater official to the office and was forcibly ejected from the theater about 20 minutes later. When I talked to him in the parking lot, he said they had confiscated his DV camera, taken his picture and ID'd him, and threatened to arrest him. Turns out he was a college student who apparently has been successful at this in the past. Guess an evening at the movies will involve the rubber glove treatment for anything on opening night from now on. As if the forcible gropings at the airport aren't enough... ---
This might work too as it's not supposed to affect the people in any way! (Directly, that is.)
While most of the cheap single CCD cameras are over-sensitive to IR light, get your self a decent 3CCD unit (I have a Panasonic MX500 which is about the cheapest 3CCD there is) and you'll find that they have no sensitivity to IR at all.
The prisms that split the incoming light into red, green and blue, simply don't pass the infra-red spectrum at all.
And, as an added bonus, you get a *much* better picture with richer colors and better dynamic range.
I fear for the MPAA.... I fear they are going the way of the RIAA... they are making things harder for the people that pay for their product, while the people that are satisfied with stealing it have no problems...
CAM RIPS LOOK LIKE CRAP, making them look worse won't stop the same people from watching them...
so, "hidden" feedback lines, or the brown dots all over my screen when i payed to see a movie piss me off... and make me not want to pay to see any more... even if it was infrared projectors i can't see... somewhere down the line the cost for paying for those comes out of the paying patron's pocket...
Days after the initial implementation of this procedure, movie ticket sales have fallen to nearly $0, proof that piracy is responsible for reduced MPAA profits. The MPAA is going to begin suing individuals while lobbying the government to pass more stringent laws regarding movies, because the Constitution states that the MPAA has a God-given right to eternal perpetually increasing profits, and the government has a duty to guarantee that those profits increase by a satisfactory amount each year.
...and it takes pictures too! I guess people won't be too pissed about cameras that randomly malfunction whenever they catch some random noise from somebody's cell phone or wireless network... Either that or getting mad about it will be illegal...
No problem, I'll get right on it.
I read a thread on here about a year ago, and it inspired me to come up with a great new device: An array of IR bulbs placed behind the movie screen. Since CCD cameras pick up infrared light as BRIGHT WHITE LIGHT, it would make the recorders non-functional. Since humans can't see IR light, it wouldn't affect their movie going experience what-so-ever. However, since CCDs see IR light (it's how night-vision cameras work) they would see the array lights and make the video imperceptible.
Here's an experiment to try - Point an IR remote at a video camera and see what happens. Here's a hint: BRIGHT WHITE FLASHES from that little device is what happens.
How did I get the idea... hrmmm... lemme see - Oh yeah, it was based on an article I read here on Slashdot last year!
I will a link to the article when/if I find it.
I'm not trying to stifle innovation here, I'm just pointing out that you can't claim originality to and idea that was posted publicly a little while back.
Don't think that a small group of dedicated individuals can't change the world. It's the only thing that ever has.
In order to stop the nucience of camcorders in theaters I reccomend body cavity searches at the door and don't stop until you reach the backs of their teeth! Those seen walking into the theater yapping away on a cellphone and/or with small screaming children in tow are some of the most likely suspects.
I've never understood why people would risk being caught with a cam in a theater when you could easily record movie at a drive in. Sure it isn't quality as theaters, but it could be made up for with the use of a very professional setup and high quality camcorder, just mount it in the back of an SUV. And since most drive-ins use radio frequency for sound, you'd have a fairly high quality sound stream as well.
The only drawback would be that you'd only get to pick from a few major movies. But from what I see on the torrent sites, most downloaders have as much bad taste as move movie goers anyway.
I can take your cellphone off the table when you aren't looking. That's theft. Mugging is both a violent act and an act of theft.
So, I have to ask, how to do you equate mugging and theft? Seems like you have the problem of misidentification here as much as anyone...
Copyright violation is theft in my book. Pure and simple. You are told you cannot have something without paying for it. You take it and don't pay for it. Now, the thing isn't quite as tangible as your cellphone, it's instead information, or perhaps the enjoyment brought by that information.
Either way, the seller sets the price. You either meet it legally get the product/service, you don't meet it and don't get the product/service, or you don't meet it and steal the product/service.
Pretty simple, actually.
Seriously, how the hell did that get stuck in there? DeCSS was written in standard ANSI C, wasn't it (if not, forgive me, it has been a while since I gazed apon it)? Also, last I looked, DVDJon was one guy.
C|Net has however, seemed a bit biased before, but it's not as if they've never reported on the subject before. (<rant>Only brainless morons would buy the "com" domain so they could actually have "news.com" as their
CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
this is what i suggested last year!7 631
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=65970&cid=607
Now, they're patenting methods to make such new "time/place shifting" impossible. Beautiful.
I guess the movie theatres have strict rules, but to be fair, even in copyright there are doctrines of fair use that override otherwise absolute monopolies. Shouldn't someone be concerned with that? I guess nobody thought the right place to kill infringment is actually when such non-fair infringement occurs! That would be too obvious.
Just sell the movie to moviegoers on the way out of the cinema!
The overwhelming reason why pirates can sell their crappy recordings is the insanely stupid idea that US moviegoers should get first dibs, then overseas moviegoers, then US rental customers, then overseas rental customers and only then can people in the US *buy* the movie (as can the rest of the world with code-free DVD-players).
This leaves a several month gap which the pirates can - and will - fill.
Therefore: Drop the gap and sell the movie as well as screen it everywhere from day one. Problem solved!
"For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
> while a third got away.
Jebus H., how hard can it be to corner someone in a theater? There are only 3 exits.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Robert
Bastard Operator From 193.219.28.162
Most of the comments, both pro and con, are moot if you consider bringing your car to the movie. Tailgate party, anyone?
File this patent in the "Press shift key to bypass copy protection" bucket.
Thanks to Walmart, most item sold will soon have a tag. Camcorders could have one installed at the factory.
I have an idea. Put a sign outside the movie theater stating that you are not responsible for any damage that may come to electronics that are brought in to the theater. All electronics, including cell phones, pagers, etc., must be left in the car. Then, at all the movie premiers, emit a low level EMP every 5-10 minutes to disable any electronics equipment. Granted, this would kill anyone with a pacemaker, but old people scare me anyways. You'd also have to shield the camera room. Hey, it could happen, cap'n.
Listen to my experimental-industrial-techno!
I thought of a way to make it harder for paparazzi to take photos of stars etc. The stars wear a device around their neck, which flashes like a camera flash whenever it detects a flash from cameras. That could screw up the exposure of conventional film cameras.
But with the advances of digital photography tech pretty soon (even now) flash use could be optional under normal lighting - flash only used if you want/like the effect.
It would need to be a really fucking strong magnet.
The DoD once built a degausser strong enough to wipe a hard drive, but it made the lights dim and bent the disk platters. Try an experiment yourself: take a floppy, stick it to the refrigerator with a magnet, leave it there a few days, then try reading the data. It will likely still work (unless it was broken in the first place).
the testing continues, as of right now, the process cause viewers eyes to bleed, and a green substance resembling guacamole to come out of the ears...
A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing. Emo Philips
All CCD's are sensitive to IR. They have a blocking filter internally to prevent it from fuzzing the image as IR has a different focal length than visible light. Matter of fact the Sony NightVision cameras simply moves the IR filter out of the CCD path and turns on an IR emitter to turn it into a miniature and low powered nightscope. So IR could never be the answer to blocking recording in a theatre.
Regards,
BubbaJonBoy