Canadian Movie Camcording Addressed With Legislation

dottyslashdottydot writes "During Arnold Schwarzenegger's visit to Ottawa yesterday, it was confirmed that Prime Minister Stephen Harper will be introducing a bill to make camcording in movie theaters illegal in Canada. However, people are skeptical that this will make any difference in the amount of pirated movies available. Doug Frith, president of the Canadian Motion Picture Distributors Association was quoted as saying, 'is really the first step — not only for the movie industry — where the government has shown it will seriously address the whole area of intellectual-property theft.'"

Comments

My comment to the CBC

[davecb]

Since the last major public study on movie piracy in 2003 [http://lorrie.cranor.org/pubs/drm03-tr.pdf], concluded that 77 percent of pirated movies actually come from industry insiders and movie reviewers, "camcording" is not something the Motion Picture Association of America should really be concerned with. I suspect we'll see an act making any copying of a DVD an indictable (criminal) offence rather than somthing one deals with in a lawsuit.

Re:My comment to the CBC

[seaturnip]

Anyway, it seems preposterous to assume anything can be done about camcording: it can only have an effect if all attempted camcordings of a given movie are prevented. A single recording provides an infinite supply of pirated copies. This is even more hopeless than the War on Drugs.

Re:My comment to the CBC

[Applekid]

Except the MPAA can't summon police forces to take care of inside jobs... that would be civil infractions that wouldn't immediately carry criminal charges (maybe they can peg fraud or something, but IANAL).

If camming is made illegal in the letter of the law, however, now they don't have to do any work though their Intenal Affairs departments. Fighting whatever percentage of priacy that comes from cams can basically become outsourced to government.

Re:My comment to the CBC

[Pojut]

This is even more hopeless than the War on Untaxed Drugs

fixed.

Re:My comment to the CBC

[linzeal]

Haven't they start putting codes on these copies so they can figure out who leaked them? By the same token how long till those digital projectors start putting in watermarks in every single movie theater across the world?

Re:My comment to the CBC

[ajanp]

But why look at problems within your own distribution system or try to address the larger concern of finding ways to secure the high quality DVD screeners that magically find their way to the interwebs when you can just as easily find that the real problem stems from those evil canadian bacon eating molsen drinking bastards.

It amazes me that you've all apparently forgot those 2 magic words that should rule every aspect of both your personal and professional lives.

BLAME CANADA!

Re:My comment to the CBC

[maxume]

Who cares? I mean, it kind of bothers me that people think this is a good use of enforcement resources, and it sucks that the cost of all the security gizmos gets built into the price of a theater ticket, but do people really live in a world view where they go to a private building, agree not to make a copy of the movie they are about to be shown, and then think that they should be able to make a copy anyway?

Re:My comment to the CBC

[Opportunist]

...and you get to pay for it, don't forget the most important part. That's pretty much what ticks me off about pushing those "crimes" into the criminal level: That I get to pay to protect the interests of the mafiaa.

Re:My comment to the CBC

[Aliriza]

Who watches a cam recorded movie , If I was going to watch a pirated movie I'd better wait for the dvd version comes up and captured. Pirated movies also kills the local cinemas for example there are real nice german films but they can not advertised enough.

Re:My comment to the CBC

[hackstraw]

To continue with this. What is next?

Making it illegal to sell illegal drugs to an undercover officer wearing a bikini within 100 yards of a fire hydrant?

My point is that copyright laws, and probably a few other ones, already makes camcording a movie illegal. Or at least the distribtion of it, which is what I would assume the law is designed to prevent.

I'm not a fan of minutely specific laws because 99% of the time a more general law already makes the behavior illegal.

Re:My comment to the CBC

[shark72]

"Except the MPAA can't summon police forces to take care of inside jobs... that would be civil infractions that wouldn't immediately carry criminal charges (maybe they can peg fraud or something, but IANAL)."

A few people have faced criminal charges as a result of leaking screeners. Here's one example.

It's a similar situation in the retail industry: employee theft and other "inside jobs" are a big part of the loss, yet retailers still attempt to stop shoplifting. In the movie industries, retail industries, and many other professions, walking and chewing gum at the same time is an important skill. Slashdotters have often suggested that the MPAA take care of screener leakage "first" rather than picking on unrelated pirates -- but why not do both at once?

Re:My comment to the CBC

[Hatta]

This is even more hopeless than the War on Untaxed Drugs

If that were the issue, they'd just tax them and be done with it. What this is is a War on Drug Users. What it comes down to is the government waging a war on its own citizens.

Re:My comment to the CBC

[An ominous Cow art]

This is even more hopeless than the War on Untaxed Drugs

If that were the issue, they'd just tax them and be done with it. What this is is a War on Drug Users. What it comes down to is the government waging a war on its own citizens. And since that government is ostensibly "by and for" the citizens, what it comes down to is certain citizens waging war on certain other citizens.

Re:My comment to the CBC

[Anonymous Coward]

Absolutely. It's as ludicrious as putting murderers, thieves, and such behind bars. After all their CITIZENS.

Re:My comment to the CBC

[sunwukong]

If the hydrant suddenly burst open, showering all nearby bikini-clad officers, I'm sure they could sell enough tickets to make up for any revenue lost due to piracy.

Re:My comment to the CBC

[Pojut]

Tell me something, are you a man/woman of faith? Do you believe in "god"?

If you do, then tell me how things like marijuana are bad and shouldn't be legal. god said not to eat the apple, never said shit about smoking a plant.

To say marijuana is illegal is like saying nature is illegal. Or, if you are a "god-fearing" person, it's like saying god made a mistake.

Sounds just a little more silly now, doesn't it.

Re:My comment to the CBC

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, we understand, you've listened to Bill Hicks. Congratulations for obtaining a +5 by repeating his words as your own. Now give it a rest.

Re:My comment to the CBC

[Pojut]

And what does that have to do with those words being right or wrong? Absolutely nothing.

I have a Bill Hicks quote as my sig, for fucks sake. It's not like I'm claiming the words as my own. They are pertinant to the conversation, and thus I put them out there. Sorry for using the words of someone who could express themself better than I can; next time I'll be sure to wrote something completely incoherint instead.

Re:My comment to the CBC

[Old Benjamin]

It's as ludicrious as putting murderers, thieves, and such behind bars... I'll agree with you on that part... they should be shot instead :)

Re:My comment to the CBC

[phulegart]

You ask the question...

"Do people really live in a world where they go to a private building, agree not to make a copy of the movie they are about to be shown, and then think that they should be able to make a copy anyway?"

Yes. They do. We happen to live in that same world. You can find a cam recording of any newly released movie available through multiple torrent sites, within hours of it being released. THIS would prove that people actually do live in a world where they go to a private building, pay for a ticket which is also an agreement NOT to make a copy of the movie they are about to see, and then whip out the camcorder and make a copy anyway.

Now, is there a good use of enforcement resources going into stopping this? I personally think that some of the watermarking technologies that are being applied are quite innovative, when it comes to tracking down exactly what theater the cam recording came from. I also like how some theaters are using Night Vision goggles to spot those with cams. Does it suck that all of this anti-camming is costing the person out for a movie, when it comes to the price of a ticket? Absolutely. But face it, it would cost the end user anyway. Whether the movie company charges more to the theater for the movie because fewer people are going to see the movie in the theater, or the Theater charges the movie-goer more to offset the added security... it still means that Joe Average ends up paying.

This is not all that unusual.

First off, Joe Average has decided that he is going to pay more to see this movie in the theater, as opposed to waiting for a DVD release, a Cable/Satellite move channel release, or Network broadcast release. No silly arguments about how a DVD is more expensive than a movie ticket. You can watch a DVD over and over again. You only get to see a movie once for your ticket price. So, Joe Average already decided to shell out his cash. That outrageous price covers the Air Conditioned, ultra cushioned, drink holder on each arm seating, a HUGE screen, head-pounding audio, and a short social gathering of other people interested in the same thing he is. The amount of money added onto a ticket price will be quite small, to offset the additional costs of a new security technique to add watermarking to the show, so that those with Cams can be ferreted out.

Face it. Movie companies make movies to make money. Anyone who tries to take that money away from them makes them upset. Getting upset filters all the way down the chain of people involved in that process that extends from Making the movie, to showing it. If you don't like the outrageous cost of a Movie Theater ticket, then either wait for the DVD, wait for the Broadcast Release, or download a cam recording of it. Nothing you say or wish is going to drop the price of a Theater Ticket.

Re:My comment to the CBC

[maxume]

I'm sorry, I forgot I was on the internet and didn't fully and completely qualify everything I said.

What I meant was(and I thought it was sort of clear from the context), do people really think that they should be able to ignore the agreement not to make a copy of the movie with absolutely no chance of consequences? Because that is the only reason anybody would side with the cammers over the theater owners in this particular discussion.

Re the prices, I'm going to go ahead and continue blaming the anti-social people(occasionally including me) who choose not to pay, right along with the money grubbing industry. Having less doesn't make greed any more attractive.

Re:My comment to the CBC

[phulegart]

Your context was understood before I replied.

Do people really think they should be able to drive 5 to 15 miles over the posted speed limit without dealing with any consequences? (When they get their license, they are agreeing to obey all the rules of the road.)

Do people really think they should be able to have a few drinks and drive themselves home without dealing with any of the consequences?

Do people really think they should be able to hedge on paying their taxes, or look for illegal workarounds, again, without dealing with any consequences?

Do people really think they should be able to do many of the things they do to circumvent rules they don't like?

The answer is Yes to all three of those questions, and the first three I asked up there, are done FAR more than people recording movies with Cams.

So people, all the time, think they are above the rules that surround them. They believe that a rule doesn't apply to them, or that they won't get caught, or that there are so many people doing it that it's assumed to be OK, or who knows.

And I still say that we live in the same world they do.

Re:My comment to the CBC

[Nullav]

Look on the bright side of things. If this ridiculously specific law works, we won't have to worry about all of that background noise, shaky views, and timestamps in our pirated movies.

On a more serious note, copyright laws forbid this and so do the policies in most theaters. If those aren't working then the violators are obviously doing a decent job of hiding their cameras.
Wouldn't it make more sense for the individual theaters to check visitors at the door rather than repeating threats of imprisonment and fines to someone who already knows he's breaking the law? I certainly wouldn't mind waiting a few more seconds that would otherwise be wasted by the ads anyway.

Re:My comment to the CBC

[Anonymous Coward]

concluded that 77 percent of pirated movies actually come from industry insiders and movie reviewers

It should be said that there is currently, and since February a huge campaign against 'piracy in Canada'. I can hear at least once or twice a week on the CBC alone a "Special report" on how 80% of illegal movies are recorded in Canada.

No mention of the source of course. I wrote the CBC about these biased reports, and ask they verify the facts and number they get from the MPAA, but I got no answer.

They only interview people from the Movie distribution business (MPAA and their Canadian counterpart). No consumers opinion on quality, price, or why would someone buy or download a low quality copy "The 40 year old virgin", yet still pay CAN$ 120 for the LOTR trilogy.

Re:My comment to the CBC

[rohan972]

Tell me something, are you a man/woman of faith? Do you believe in "god"?

Yes

If you do, then tell me how things like marijuana are bad ...

Well, I've had hemp clothes, and I didn't think I was being bad. In my experience and observation people often suffer significant harm from drug use, yes, even marijuana.

and shouldn't be legal.

Well, I'm with you on this one probably. I don't see why marijuana should be illegal, or other plants, opium etc, even if they have harmful uses. I think the negative effects of drug prohibition as we have it today are easily recognisable and difficult to refute.

Or, if you are a "god-fearing" person, it's like saying god made a mistake.

Not at all. The world and everything in it is significantly different to the way it was created. Even if it wasn't, there wouldn't be many things if any that don't have the potential for misuse as well as beneficial uses. Consider the rock Cain killed Abel with, for example.

Personally I think it's just one example of the much larger problem of not regarding people as sovereign over themselves, whether it's harmful or not is a distraction. In my country, for example, suicide is not illegal, so how could drug use being harmful be a justification for making it illegal? What I wouldn't want to see though, is a situation where people could be effectively enslaved by the mass marketing of drugs, with no legal recourse. Lets not even get into discussing the pharaceutical industy as it is today.

Re:My comment to the CBC

[Mozk]

Assuming they're women, yeah... Unless the said hydrant were in San Francisco. But then again, the piracy there is more of the butt kind.

Butt pirates thailing the theven theas, as it were.

Re:My comment to the CBC

[Yaztromo]

To say marijuana is illegal is like saying nature is illegal. Or, if you are a "god-fearing" person, it's like saying god made a mistake.

Sounds just a little more silly now, doesn't it.

Anthrax is also found in nature. Possessing and/or distributing it without a license is likewise illegal. Or are you arguing that Anthrax should be legal, just because it exists in nature?

(Your off-topic argument) [s]ounds just a little more silly now, doesn't it?

Yaz.

Re:My comment to the CBC

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, How can you even compare Anthrax to Pot when .. oh I don't know.. ANTHRAX KILLS AND MARIJUANA DOESN'T

Idiocracy....

Seriously

[saibot834]

I'd rather buy the movie than view it in camcorder quality (or not watch it at all).

Re:Seriously

[davecb]

It's ok, the clean copy from a screener DVD or a quality film scanner will be along in a second (;-))

--dave

Re:Seriously

[Anonymous Coward]

That's where the Russian releases come in. Recently, the studios have been releasing fully legitimate DVDs of current movies in the former-Russian states in order to compete with piracy. They're rush jobs, so they're not the highest quality transfers, but they are very good quality, and they don't have any extras or other audio mixes or anything. But again, they are legitimate transfers. Sure beats a camcorder copy.

Re:Seriously

[drgonzo59]

Not the crap from Hollywood! I wouldn't even see it if someone gave me the tickets. I would want my "free" back at the end of the movie probably. The movies I like I can either borrow from the library (classics) and yes, I am paying for them as well through taxes and I pay for the movies I support just to support them. In other words it doesn't matter if I see a movie at my friend's house and I could have a copy made, I would go an buy it just to support the artist (most of them are "indie" films, that's why).

What I could never understand is why so many people pay so much money for Hollywood crap. The prices are not cheap -- more than 10 dollars / ticket! And an even better question is why do people risk getting nabbed by the **AA's and downloading this shit. It would really be sad to know that someone will go to jail or pay a $20,000 fine for downloading "Big Momma's House".

Re:Seriously

[f1055man]

10 dollars / ticket is damn cheap for 2 hours of entertainment if you consider that theater is alive and well when it can cost 10 times as much. The problem is that 10 dollars is ridiculous for the shit Hollywood throws up. 10 bucks for Chinatown or Once Upon a Time in the West on itunes is a bargain(last weekend), 10 bucks for Spiderman 3 is bullshit.
Hollywood meet Vaudeville, Vaudeville meet Hollywood.

Re:Seriously

[grumpyman]

I'd rather buy the movie than view it in camcorder quality (or not watch it at all).

Honestly these day I hardly watch ANY movie, period. I read RottenTomatoes though :)

Re:Seriously

[prelelat]

Thats the thing most of what the scene calls good releases are not camra recordings, TS can sometimes be okay, but I think what hurts the industry more is the DVD releases that perviewers leak and such. I mean I love going to the movie, but if its not something I really really am excited about like the 300 or spider-man 3 or what ever and I can get a DVD release and watch it at home without the little kids yelling, I would prefer it.

Thats why I rent and buy a lot of dvds and wait for video release. I don't think camera recordings hurt the industry as much as leaks in their own security. I doubt that this legistlature will effect much, and I don't think it matters too much to people in general. I think it is a slippery slope I hope they don't start writing up bills for pirated music and such like in the states. That would scare me, I know alot of people that use P2P networks up here in Canada. I don't do that kind of thing...

Re:Seriously

[Anonymous Coward]

That's where the Russian releases come in. Recently, the studios have been releasing fully legitimate DVDs of current movies in the former-Russian states in order to compete with piracy. They're rush jobs, so they're not the highest quality transfers, but they are very good quality, and they don't have any extras or other audio mixes or anything. But again, they are legitimate transfers. Sure beats a camcorder copy.

Ya, what were they thinking? I have a good copy of "The Last Legion" it was released in Russia already but wont be released in the US till August.

Re:Seriously

[amuro98]

$10/ticket is too much when you consider that your average moving going experience consists of:

* 10 minutes of TV commercials.
* 20 minutes of movie previews (most of which you've already seen or really don't care about.)
* a mis-balanced, overly loud sound system.
* a theater packed full of kids (in a R movie?!) chatting on cellphones or waving laser pointers around.
* paying $5 for a 16oz pop and small popcorn.

Or if you wait 6 months, you can get the same movie on DVD for $15-20 and watch it in the privacy of your own home. Not that I buy many movies on DVD. Netflix is much cheaper.

Does this really matter?

[chill]

How big of a deal is this, really?

I've always found captures of camcordered movies to be of crap quality. It has never stopped me from later buying the DVD, or from even going to the theater. From me, they've never lost a dime because of this.

Well, okay. Once when in high school, when living in Europe, the only way we got to see some movies was camcorder rips of U.S. screens. There may be one or two that I never actually paid theater tickets for. This was back in the days of VHS and 300 bps modems.

Still, considering the amount of money being made in theatrical releases, is this really a problem or just another smokescreen?

Re:Does this really matter?

[morgan_greywolf]

This was back in the days of VHS and 300 bps modems.

Gee, Uncle Chill, it must have taken forever to transfer those divx/xvid'ed VHSes via a 300 bps modem!!! ;)

Re:Does this really matter?

[deadsquid]

It's a big deal because it's a first step to trying to bring Canadian copyright protections to a level the media companies are happy with. We have a set of laws that have a decent amount of balance between protecting the property rights holder and protecting the consumer. There's tremendous pressure from various interest groups to change our copyright laws to bring in things like provisions in the US DMCA without fair use guarantees. So while this by itself is a very small thing, it opens the door into a much bigger deal.

Re:Does this really matter?

[Your Pal Dave]

This was back in the days of VHS and 300 bps modems.

Gee, Uncle Chill, it must have taken forever to transfer those divx/xvid'ed VHSes via a 300 bps modem!!! ;) Nobody's sure how long it would take, the TRS-80 hasn't finished encoding the video yet.

Re:Does this really matter?

[Opportunist]

What's the big deal? I can tell you. If you only know the previews and ads and teasers, you might think it's a great movie.

After you've seen the movie, in whatever crappy quality, you know that those 30 seconds of previews, ads and teasers actually were ALL the good parts of the movie. Are you gonna go watch it and pay for it?

Re:Does this really matter?

[amuro98]

Yeah, because you know, Canada is such a hotbed of piracy action. Nothing like China, which is producing millions of DVD-9s containing 5 or 6 full-length (mostly-American) movies recorded at VCD quality for $5. A friend of mine came across some in the Chinese markets down in LA. Most of the movies were in English, with Chinese subtitles. A few were dubbed into Chinese, and one was an American movie dubbed into German, subbed in Chinese. Knowing a little of both languges and the movie, I can attest that neither translation was very good. But hey, for about a buck a movie, it's probably good enough for a lot of people.

Besides, doesn't Canada already have something similar to the copyright laws in the US that forbid people from making or distributing unlicensed copies of stuff? Why create something so specific as "no camcorders in movie theaters"? This means it's still not illegal to download a movie via Bittorrent, for instance...

Re:Does this really matter?

[wfberg]

I've always found captures of camcordered movies to be of crap quality. It has never stopped me from later buying the DVD, or from even going to the theater. From me, they've never lost a dime because of this.

This move is analogous to some singer taking out a multi-million dollar insurance on her ass.

It's to make the asset appear more valuable than it is.

Going to a movie theater and sitting there in person, the sound and video quality is already far inferior to a DVD. A camcorder video of that experience is worthless. The experience itself..

Who watches cam copies anyways?

[tomstdenis]

I have too much respect for my time to watch a cam copy. A DVD rip maybe, but a cam copy? Just why???

Why not just search bags going into the show? It's private property, they have the right too. Personally I wouldn't mind (and yes, I carry a bag with me most places) provided they were respectful and didn't try to swipe anything.

Tom

Re:Who watches cam copies anyways?

[Anonymous Coward]

"and yes, I carry a bag with me most places"

Are we talking a purse here? You come straight from grocery shopping to the theatre? What is the purpose of bringing a regular bag into the theatre?

Re:Who watches cam copies anyways?

[gstoddart]

Why not just search bags going into the show? It's private property, they have the right too.

They might, in theory, have that right (though I'm not sure here in Canada).

But, I can be fairly confident in saying that if they start subjecting their paying customers to personal searches, they willl see their movie sales decline very rapidly. People won't put up with it -- getting patted down or searched everywhere you go is way over the top.

The first minimum wage theatre employee who asks to search my bag or frisk me is going to get told in no uncertain terms to go fsck himself.

Personally I wouldn't mind

Really? You're cool with allowing random people to search you or your stuff? I'm not prepared to put up with that. Certainly not from some 17 year old working in a movie theatre, definitely not from some rent-a-cop security guard, and not from the police unless they have a good reason. The *AA's can get bent.

Treating everyone like a criminal to catch the small percentage of people who might be doing this just plain blows.

Cheers

Re:Who watches cam copies anyways?

[tomstdenis]

You don't have to see the movie. And why for fuck sake is hyperbole standard issue nowadays? Being asked to be searched on private property IS NOT THE SAME as random searches in public. Holy christ almighty, salvation, lordy lordy, fuck.

If you can't form a cogent argument, don't use hyperbole to try and make a point.

And I didn't say pat down searches. Just through bags, maybe through bulky coats. Most people don't bring bags into theaters so it wouldn't be a huge problem IMHO.

Tom

Re:Who watches cam copies anyways?

[tomstdenis]

we're talking a knapsack. As to why I have one with me. Usually it carries loot (e.g. music books, gameboy, food, nerf guns, etc). But sometimes I use it to carry my wallet/passport/keys. I'd rather a bag over the shoulder than random shit in my pockets [which knowing my luck will fall out].

And before anyone makes a "purse" comparison, a bag over the shoulders is easier to carry, and it can hold more. So it's not a fashion statement [in fact it's a several year old targus bag I bought on sale at FutureShop].

Tom

Re:Who watches cam copies anyways?

[Abcd1234]

I'll second this. I carry a backpack almost everywhere I go. Between keys, wallet, change, a book, my DS, a PDA, and other random junk, it's basically become my man-purse, and I'm perfectly happy admitting that.

Re:Who watches cam copies anyways?

[IgnoramusMaximus]

Being asked to be searched on private property IS NOT THE SAME as random searches in public.

How so?

Does the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the Canadian version of the Bill of Rights) no longer apply? Does that piece of land fall then into some kind of a different, foreign jurisdiction? Does the fact that someone owns that piece of land make him a king or an emperor then, one with an ability to enact arbitrary laws in his feudal fiefdom? What then if he passes a law that it is all-right for his hired goons to beat people in his "kingdom"? Torture them? Detain them for any arbitrary period of time? Kill them? All because they crossed the "border" into his "private property empire", no?

Yes I am engaging in hyperbole but this type of over-the top argument is actually a rather sane method of debunking claims which appear common sense on the surface but which lead to trully ludicrous ends if followed logically to their conclusions. This is called reductio ad absurdum.

Ownership of some piece of private property does not grant the owner magical privileges, far above the laws of the land applicable outside of it. Neither do those who cross into such property magically become serfs of the landowner, nor their rights vanish into thin air.

Re:Who watches cam copies anyways?

[tomstdenis]

You have no right to be on private property. You *agree* to either leave or abide by their laws. Being searched by the public isn't actually illegal btw, only by the government [without due process]. For example, if you leave your bag on a bus, I can rifle through it all I want. That's perfectly legal.

Similarly, if you walk into my store I have the right to ask to search your bag. You have the right to refuse, and I have the right to have you removed from the premises. See how that works?

They can't *force* the search, but they can deny services if they don't get what they want.

Tom

Re:Who watches cam copies anyways?

[MaelstromX]

It's not so much hyperbole as it is just being totally off the mark. IANACL (Canadian), but I am not aware of any laws being broken when a customer and theater engage in a contract whereby the customer agrees to be frisked in exchange for admittance into a movie. If the customer doesn't want to be searched he is free to leave, at which point a forceful search against his will would be the only conceivable way this policy would deny him or her any of his "Rights and Freedoms". In fact, "freedom" is allowing businesses and customers to make consentual agreements with each other depending on each one's circumstances.

According to some of you, a search policy would be a make-or-break issue for an average prospective movie seer. As somebody who flies a lot and typically has to wait 15 minutes to get through security, I'm thinking people really won't care very much.

Re:Who watches cam copies anyways?

[IgnoramusMaximus]

You have no right to be on private property. You *agree* to either leave or abide by their laws. Being searched by the public isn't actually illegal btw, only by the government [without due process]. For example, if you leave your bag on a bus, I can rifle through it all I want. That's perfectly legal.

Yes, the only privilege that ownership of private property gets you is the ability to deny access to it. In this respect you are correct, that the owner's only legal option is to ask you to leave, otherwise the law provides for the remedy of charge of tresspassing. But if he does not give you that option at any time as an alternative to any of his "rules", all his subsequent actions are brute-force coertion and thus very illegal. Furthermore, some rights are not voidable, even with your consent. This is purposefully so, to aviod people being manipulated by clever tricksters into, essentially, slavery.

The case of the legality of the search of the bag is not tied into this because at the point when the bag is found, there is no easy way of determining the owner and thus his instructions as to its use. Furthermore, it is usually necessary to search the thing in order to try to determine the owner and return it to him. Again, this is predicated on the absence of the owner and the implied desire of his for his property to be returned to him.

Similarly, if you walk into my store I have the right to ask to search your bag. You have the right to refuse, and I have the right to have you removed from the premises. See how that works?

Again, this is predicated on your giving me the option of leaving without the search. If you do not, then you better be sure of some other crime (which is also a crime outside of your property, say shoplifting) with which to charge me because otherwise you are engaging in brute force assault on my person, irrespective of my being on your premises or not.

So in the case of the movie theaters searching the bags, I have a right to refuse at any time and the only option of the owner is to ask me to leave. That is precisely why these assholes are trying to pass additional laws, to give them a "probable cause" (akin to what suspected shoplifting does in a store) to try to charge you with, because such a law would be then enforceable irrespective of your presence on their property.

Re:Who watches cam copies anyways?

[IgnoramusMaximus]

I am not aware of any laws being broken when a customer and theater engage in a contract whereby the customer agrees to be frisked in exchange for admittance into a movie. If the customer doesn't want to be searched he is free to leave, at which point a forceful search against his will would be the only conceivable way this policy would deny him or her any of his "Rights and Freedoms". In fact, "freedom" is allowing businesses and customers to make consentual agreements with each other depending on each one's circumstances.

The potential trouble comes from two directions: 1) the owner of the private property must give the option of simply leaving as an alternative to any of his "contractual rules" because the only privilege which that ownership grants him is to control access to his property, and 2) some rights are not voidable, even with your own consent, and that is so to stop people from being manipulated into, essentially, slavery.

So as soon as you are being forced to be searched without the option to abort and leave at any time in this process your rights are being violated.

This is precisely why they are pushing for this law, because it creates a crime which is independent of your presence on their property and acts in a similar way as the laws dealing with shoplifing do, the owner of the theatre can then threaten you with him performing a "citizen arrest" on you on the suspicion of your breaking that other law.

If you refuse, you are then detained until the real police arrives under the suspicion of "camcordering" or some such nonsense.

According to some of you, a search policy would be a make-or-break issue for an average prospective movie seer. As somebody who flies a lot and typically has to wait 15 minutes to get through security, I'm thinking people really won't care very much.

I personally haven't been to a movie theatre in good 7 years or so, partially because there is nothing there I found worth seeing and partially because the idiots running the places are far more concerned with selling overpriced crap food then with making sure that the experience is better then a DVD at home. I can't stand people talking, getting up to go to the can in front of me, chewing and grinding loudly cracking stuff with their jaws, slurping drinks, rustling massive amounts of aluminium foil and other noisy wrappers, passing gas, yapping to each other, cell phones ringing, kids with laser pointers and all of that other lovely crap that combines to give me an experience wholly different from the movie theatres of old where you would get kicked out swiftly for any of that.

So by all means, add metal scanners, bag and body cavity searches and anal probes into the mix. I positively can't wait to miss that experience.

What does concern me however is that the new generation of movie-goers is being raised up by being brain-washed into accepting all those infringements on their rights and persons as "normal". This is how an Orwellian distopia can be brought into being, by slowly, step by step, eradicating our freedoms, always in the name of "protecting" someone or something from Bogeymen ranging from "Rag-headed Terrorists" to "Camcordering Villain Thieves".

Everybody Knows

[HawkPilot]

Everybody knows that all the latest Hollywood releases are first released in Canadian Theaters, where they are cammed and put on torrent sites. I think this will help piracy greatly.

Re:Everybody Knows

[davecb]

Alas, some people who ought to know better, including the Globe and Mail, have accepted this story as if it were the truth.

Disappointing, really.

--dave

Keep focusing on the camcorders

[snowraver1]

Yes... Excellent... Keep focusing on the cams. They are the problem...

Re:Keep focusing on the camcorders

[AnalogDiehard]

Yes... Excellent... Keep focusing on the cams. They are the problem...

*Jedi hand wave* These aren't the cams you are looking for...

Bah.

[TripMaster Monkey]

Camcorder piracy is for those who don't have the technical expertise to commit proper piracy. ^_^

Re:Bah.

[Anonymous Coward]

harro Munkey! how are yoo ta-day?
Did mom let you out of basement? Or are you stealing the Jones' unsecured wifi again?

don't forget to take trash out, and stay off Mr. Jones' lawn.

Very good!

Bye-Bye! *_*

movies, intellectual?

[mulvane]

move industry?
movies in general?
intellectual property? (serious)
Maybe I'm just of mixed opinion, but is a movie really an intellectual property? Should intellectual property be something that makes me smarter? And shouldn't intellectual property be something freely given away anyway as a way to foster increased intelligence to the masses as a whole?

Re:movies, intellectual?

[Opportunist]

So what? Another oxymoron. One would think after military intelligence, poltical correctness and Microsoft Works, people would be less sensitive.

Intellectual Property

[Colin Smith]

If you can have intellectual property, (and obviously the use of these words is to deliberately conflate the concept of owning ideas with the law on physical property ownership).

Shouldn't you be held liable for any damage (whatever it is) which that property causes? After all, ideas can be dangerous and, until now, they have not been thought to be ownable...

Sigh..

[fadeaway]

I would like to take this opportunuty to thank my American friends for allowing their corporate owned administration to spin so far out of control as to spill their misguided witch hunt into my country. Now not only will YOUR taxpayers money be wasted on chasing, prosecuting, and imprisoning IP "criminals", ours will too!

I would also like to thank my own government for being such slack-jawed pansies and allowing the Governator to actually influence Canadian policy.

I want to wretch.

Re:Sigh..

[Anonymous Coward]

i'd like to thank fadeaway for being a nationalistic asshat who wastes my time with his idiotic posts.

it's called freewill, jerkoff. look into it.

Re:Sigh..

[Anonymous Coward]

their misguided witch hunt

The US is hunting misguided witches?

Cool! A Minnie Driver/Anne Hathaway love scene.

[Impy the Impiuos Imp]

This legislation will never work -- you have to nip the demand instead.

I support legislation to kill people who think watching a camcorded movie is a great experience.

Agreed

[Mateo_LeFou]

"This is even more hopeless than the War on Drugs."

The ineffectiveness of this stuff is so painfully obvious that I often wonder if even the dense skulls in the 'content industry' aren't fully aware of it. Maybe I'm paranoid, but it seems that all these "content industry" gripes result in one or another form of technology control measures. Does anyone wonder if controlling and restricting citizens' access to technology is the real purpose of all this parading?

Re:Agreed

[flibuste]

Does anyone wonder if controlling and restricting citizens' access to technology is the real purpose of all this parading?
Modern technology enables access to information.
Information is power.
You can complete the equation...

Interestingly enough ....

[gstoddart]

Interestingly enough, the movie theatres here in Canada are already claiming it is illegal.

When I went to Spiderman 3 the other week, they had a sign up in the lobby that said something like "for everyone's safety end enjoyment, we remind you that recoding devices are illegal".

I was quite surprised by that, as I knew it wasn't yet in law.

That, and I have no idea how my safety is affected by such things. Once again, the fear card gets played -- "OMG, we could all die if someone has a recording device".

Re:Interestingly enough ....

[textstring]

Well I'm certainly not sure about your safety but if I'm not mistaken, isn't it illegal (in the US at least, maybe Canada) to record someone without their knowledge/permission?

Re:Interestingly enough ....

[bentcd]

That, and I have no idea how my safety is affected by such things.

Obviously, if no one brought a recorder, they won't have to send in the SWAT team with guns blazing in order to eliminate the terrorist :-)

Re:Interestingly enough ....

[Opportunist]

Are you kidding? OF COURSE cell cams are dangerous in a crowded theater. Just imagine:

Someone recording the movie with his cell, and because his arm falls asleep, he drops the damn thing. Next thing you know is him going to search for it, just as his cell starts to ring, with his ringtone being some song he downloaded from the net, which happens to be in Arabic and goes along the lines of "kill all the infidels, all of them, bomb them away...", which he doesn't know 'cause he doesn't understand a word (but the song sounded cool), playing happily during a rather quiet moment in the movie while he's rummaging underneath the seats.

This is when someone who actually happens to understand it, sees the guy fiddling under the seats and goes "Oh no, get out now, that guy has a bomb and is gonna blow us to hell!"

Stampede kills 10.

No... wait, Canada, not US... Umm... but there's gotta be some kinda way a cell can be dangerous. I mean, think of all the times when one of those damn things rang in the middle of a highly intense scene and you wished those things had some kind of cord to strangle the guy with.

Re:Interestingly enough ....

[Anonymous Coward]

No, not in any jurisdiction in any country. In some places it is illegal the record someone who has a reasonable expectation of privacy.

Re:Interestingly enough ....

[Deadplant]

'For your safety'?
Sounds like a threat to me...
Have you reported this to the police?

How Hollywood Got the Movie Piracy Bill

[Anonymous Coward]

This Youtube video - titled the Power of Lobbying: How Hollywood Got a Canadian Movie Piracy Bill in Under Six Months - pretty much says it all.

Re:How Hollywood Got the Movie Piracy Bill

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice 2:37 video. Thanks!

Already illegal in the UK

[Rik Sweeney]

well, you can be prosecuted if you're caught filming a movie in the cinema.

What I've always wanted to do though is very obviously erect a camera with tripod in one of the aisles and then continuously tell people off for eating too loud / whispering / getting in the way of the shot.

"Guys, will you keep it down! I'm trying to film this!"

Re:Already illegal in the UK

[Opportunist]

Now you'd be due for faking a crime.

They started doing that in Toronto..

[Anonymous Coward]

I refuse to go to a movie theatre that searches people. I used to go 30-40 movies a year, I don't go at all anymore since they started this practice, and I've made sure they know exactly why I'm not attending.

Token Legislation

[Wolvie MkM]

This is simply lip service to shut up some of the MPAAers who have been on Canada's back trying to use us as a scapegoat. I'm sorry I've never seen anyone with a camera in the theatre ever, I don't know why anyone would like a copy like that.. a 5$ crappy DVD on the streets of NYC or spend 4 more dollars and see the proper version of it in a theatre. If you really want to buy it wait 2 months after it comes out on DVD and buy it for 6-12$ at BestBuy.

I'm no doubt stating the obvious when it just seems that the "Industry" is crying wolf on a phantom problem.

But keep your eyes on Bev Oda... This MP will be a problem...

Movie Piracy Needs To Happen!!!

[Enkrypter]

I applaud consumers who let producers know their product/service sucks. Movie piracy exists by the hand of the movie industry itself! If they didn't make so many crappy movies maybe the public would not feel ripped everytime they walk out of a theater.

I can't fault anyone for pirating a movie... I'd lean more twords encouraging it, as I am personlly sick of feeling like I have had my intellectual property, my brain and an average of 2 hours of my life, stolen everytime I see a bad movie.

Piracy minimaly affects the sales of good movies. Look at LOTR, The Matrix, and Star Wars... All were released far before their theatrical debut and all did extremely well!

Re:Movie Piracy Needs To Happen!!!

[gsslay]

Yes, that's right. Because the movies are so crappy, people actively seek out even crappier camcorded versions, so that they can waste their time watching them on crappy tiny screens at home. That'll show 'em! Yup, that makes perfect sense.

I look forward to your proof that the public feels ripped of everytime they walk out a theatre. Or could it be your argument is a large amount of arm waving aimed at justifying what you know to be wrong?

In your bizarre version of logic, if it's not a big budget film that meets your approval, well, it deserves it. Amazingly, not all good films make massive profits and not all good films will meet your approval. If you end up watching as bad movies as you claim, well guess what that says about you. Never heard of a movie review? Not learnt your lesson from the last "The Rock" action film? Stop going to see movies aimed at 14 year olds!

Re:Movie Piracy Needs To Happen!!!

[lmnfrs]

He's right, movies suck. The cost of admission has consistently gone up throughout my life (it's _increased_ by about 200% now) and the experience has gone down.

While there are many crappy camcorder copies out there, some are of decent quality. Because of those decent copies, I don't think a theater has any real advantages. The screen is larger and the sound system is better. But I don't really care how many feet the screen is, especially since the projected image isn't very good (not much better than one of the decent pirate copies). And theaters don't seem to care about you viewing experience after you've paid. Last time I went (my first theater experience in a while) they wouldn't remove the shouting guy after multiple complaints. Why should I spend almost $10 for that? All I'm really getting is loud speakers.

The simple, easy solution: download pirated copies to avoid mediocre theater experience with incompetent ushers, then buy the optical disc when that's released.

P.S. Dear Regal Cinemas & MPAA,
Why isn't shouting foul language and claiming to be extremely drunk and stoned, while at a popular family movie, then threatening violence on other patrons grounds for getting your ass kicked out?

Re:Movie Piracy Needs To Happen!!!

[gsslay]

The cost of admission has consistently gone up throughout my life (it's _increased_ by about 200% now)

Unbelievable! And all the same time everything else has become cheaper! Hasn't it? Wait...

and the experience has gone down.

In your opinion.

Pirates working at the DVD factory are scared now!

[denis-The-menace]

The movie industry doesn't have a "Piracy" problem.
They have a "Security" problem.

How else can you explain "DVD rips" of a movie WEEKS before it comes out?

Great Solution

[Baavgai]

For, say, 1990. Seriously, what decade are these people living in?

Pirated copies don't come from some idiot wielding a camcorder, they come digital copies usually leaked from within the industry itself. "Review copy" only means "my kid will be torrenting this in three hours, here it comes."

And the minimum wage salary surf shining a flashlight on people fondling each other is now a also a policeman? If a guy holding an illegal recording device looks able enough to abuse a baby seal and isn't bothering anyone, what possible incentive does a theater have to confront them?

This type of legislation is a cry for help on the part of the legislator. It's a sign they're so out of touch it's not even funny.

Re:Great Solution

[mightybaldking]

The minimum wage salary surf (sic) will now be able to call the cops and have the seal abuser arrested. The seal abuser will then go through six months of court time, pay a fine and be set free. Kind of makes it not worthwhile, doesn't it? My only worry is that if I have a camcorder in my backpack (Tourists?) can I be arrested for attempted piracy or possession of piracy tools?

Re:Great Solution

[c]

> This type of legislation is a cry for help on the part of the legislator.

Nope. This legislation is 100% in response to a very intense and focused lobbying operation by the United States. We're talking about threats from the movie industry, US Senators, the freaking Ambassador to Canada, you name it. Nobody in Canada wants this silliness, and it's not going to do a damn thing. If we're lucky, it's not even going to pass into law.

In reality, this is probably the thin edge of the wedge to try to force Canada to adopt DMCA-like stupidity; we've already for a FTA with the USA (which they ignore when convenient, but that's another story), so they can't sneak it in that way.

Canada, as you may have heard, is retaliating with a new Celine Dion album. And if the DMCA stuff happens, we've got an entire province of French Canadian adult contemporary crooner wannabes just lining up at Canadian Idol. Consider it fair warning.

c.

Re:Great Solution

[Vegeta99]

Shit. I have a lazy eye. Can I get arrested for possession of pirate tools for my eye patch?

Re:Great Solution

[necro2607]

Yeah, this is actually awesome. I can't wait to hear the complaints about peoples' nice relaxing moviegoing experience being totally ruined by police rushing in and apprehending some random guy sitting at the back with a camcorder (or even better, some person who doesn't even have a camcorder but rather some other kind of electronic device that the movie theatre employee thought must be some high-tech video recording device)... Woooot just another reason to make people pissed off at the movie industry - not only do they already feel ripped off paying $15 to see some rehashed piece of Hollywood crap (that looked great in the trailer), but now their trip to the theatre will be interrupted by authorities rushing in and apprehending the 15 year old kid next to them.

Canada is a client state

[Scrameustache]

How big of a deal is this, really? Camcorders? Not big at all.

A foreign cartel forcing a supposedly sovereign nation to change their law according to their whims, THAT is a big deal.

Re:Canada is a client state

[Martix]

I agree with you on that and there more to it like the DEA here... WTF....Harris is giving in not surprised...hes an ass and is out next election. hope were smarter and don't vote him in for the 2nd time ;)

At one point I thought this country was worth fighting for but our elected keeps bowing down...so I guess not in the end i'm realy dissapointed in the whole system....our MP's are jackasses to.

What I would realy love is a wall up and barb wire half starved rabid dogs mines etc ( just teasing ) ;)
But we need to think for our selves

P.Fn S. sorry for the rant but things like this get under my skin

pps I don't care about the typos

We were already subjected to random search...

[FreeKill]

We were already subjected to random search at every movie these days. Check out this flyer that now hangs ever 2 feet and above every ticket counter at every theater I've been to lately:

http://img161.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cineplexs earchconsentwr9.jpg

This will do nothing more then make the big theater chains more afraid and implement more ridiculous policies that in the end only make non-pirates stop going !

Re:We were already subjected to random search...

[Wolvie MkM]

10$ to get felt up? Still cheaper than the strippers... ...Wait... They use male security? That's not cool...

Re:We were already subjected to random search...

[kwandar]

The theatre owners actually don't make much from ticket sales, so their real incentive to feel you up is to check your bags for snacks (where the margins are 500%). Their nice little sign is totally non-effective. Just say "NO" to searches. At worst you'll get your money back, or an opportunity to make their life painful (and win) by taking them to small claims court for breach of contract. Since Cineplex seems to be so stupid about these things, I think this could be fun. Their tickets don't limit damages, and I know that a sign in the lobby is far less legally binding than even a click through EULA is.

Re:We were already subjected to random search...

[kent_eh]

Protecting the Canadian movie industry, my ass.

Since when did Cineplex show Canadian movies on their screens?
Movies using Canada as a set piece, sure, but an actual Canadian movie?

anyone

anyone

Buhller???

Re:We were already subjected to random search...

[necro2607]

What, are you for real? Holy fuck. I have not seen these in western Canada (Vancouver). Makes me want to go see a movie, and then ask them what the fuck law they think gives them permission to search my shit.

Considering, just posting a random sign with tiny text that says "Oh hey guys BTW when you buy a ticket you're also giving us permission to look through your pockets/bag/purse" doesn't actually make that an even vaguely binding contract of any sort... I mean, if this was the case, they could say "By purchasing a ticket, you are consenting to us beating your ass down and throwing you into a pit of angry wolves", or something.

Just because some random fucking piece of text is written on the wall next to you doesn't mean you legally agree to it whatsoever.

Yeah, next time I see a movie I'm bringing my digital camera with me. It's not a camcorder, but it can record 640x480 video at 30fps. Hmm altough at the same time, if they've gone through some action to be aware that I'm even carrying it (it's only 1cm thick and I keep it in my pocket), I'll have a lot more to complain about than simply being disallowed entry. If they ask to see what I have I'll most definitely have to show them the camera alongside, you know, my car keys and pocket change and all that good stuff. Ahhh this is sounding more fun the more I think about it. OK guys I'm off to see a movie, later !

Re:We were already subjected to random search...

[FreeKill]

The actual theater I got this from was the big Paramount in downtown Toronto across from Much Music. The same day I saw it, they had ushers stationed at every single theater door doing random bag searches of film goers. Just unbelievable, since when was going to a movie on par with going to a rage against the machine concert??

Europe, land of glove puppets!

[fantomas]

"Once when in high school, when living in Europe, the only way we got to see some movies was camcorder rips of U.S. screens"

Ah yes, Europe, that mystic medieval land in the East, where people gather together to watch glove puppet shows of an evening in the public squares by the castles...

So what were these movies you couldn't see when you were here? you mean you have secret US only releases of the good movies and you just ship the crap over to us? Damn I knew there was a yankee conspiracy going on but I just couldn't place it... ;-)

Sorry, Friday afternoon. I am sure you meant something different but the phrasing was nice and funny... :-)

Re:Europe, land of glove puppets!

[Maxo-Texas]

Actually- it works both ways. You get Battlestar Galactica about 6 months to a year before us. I watched BG on the computer from europe before it came to cable.

Likewise, lots of movies come out in the US, the months later in europe- then up to a year later (or Never!?!?) in australia.

Re:Europe, land of glove puppets!

[chill]

Let me elaborate, as times have changed.

It was 1983-1986, long before the Internet and DVDs. The video tape was high in popularity, and trading them was a major pastime. This was also when there was a distinct separation of Eastern and Western Europe. The Berlin Wall, Iron Curtain, Warsaw Pact, etc. was all in full force. Czechoslovakia was one country and Germany was two.

My father was in the U.S. Navy and stationed in Spain. There was one theater and one drive in on the naval base, and movie selection was limited. There weren't a lot of theaters in the area (off base), and those that were had limited selection of U.S. films. The Spanish gov't was absolutely convinced the Russkies were coming over the Pyrenees any minute now, so were overly paranoid about some things.

The primary source of new movies was people who rotated in from countries that had newer films released and had recorded them to tape from a drive in or theater. Some of us had gotten together to write "tape library" software for the C-64 and Apple II so we could keep track of who had what tapes, etc. I know some people who had several hundred VHS and others with several hundred Beta.

Things have changed in 20+ years. :-)

Re:Europe, land of glove puppets!

[fantomas]

cheers for the context. We had a similar sort of scene on am uch smaller scale for mad art films and stuff banned in Britain (like Clockwork Orange).

The historical geographical bit, that's ok, I was a teenager living in the UK at the time, I remember my geography lessons. We were pretty worried in Europe at the time, we had the Soviet army a few miles away not 3000 miles away and your president was going on air and cracking jokes about declaring war and the bombs starting to drop in 5 minutes when he though the mike was turned off ... sure we were worried, we were between two of the mightiest forces in history and they both appeared to be run by lunatics.

I'd guess there weren't many US films in Spain not because of fear of Russians but because there was less of a demand for foreign language films (e.g. English), and the foreign language subtitling and dubbing business was less well established then. Can any Spanish folk comment? Certainly in the UK in the mid 80s the only place you'd get a foreign language film was an arthouse cinema, I was at university and thoroughly got my mind opened up in Newcastle's wonderful Tyneside Cinema.

Re:Europe, land of glove puppets!

[chill]

Politics in Spain at the time were touchy.

The Communist Party was still pretty big and had some clout. The way the Spanish kept 'em in check was to keep things on an even keel. There wasn't a lot of American stuff because as soon as they did, the Communists clamored for equal time.

The Naval Base took forever to get a radio station and television station. The TV station was cable, with 2 channels and even that was a point of contention.

Word at the time was the Communist Party was big in Spain because they threw a hell of a party. Free beer, sangria, food, etc. But when it came time to vote... they swept their entire circle of friends. Always a dismal showing at the polls and the existing gov't wanted to keep it that way.

When we wanted decent software (C-64 & Apple II), it was either mail order or head on over to Gibraltar for some English-language stuff. Damn Brits didn't know what the hell a floppy was! Everything was still on cassette tape at the time. :-)

Double Standard

[Yvan256]

Funny how the music and movie industries want all the protection and laws they can get, yet we as customers don't get squat.

Don't like that music CD? Sorry, most stores don't offer refunds, only a replacement for defective discs (let's not talk about copy-protected discs here, it's not the issue).

Didn't like that movie? Sorry, you can't get a refund for that $10 movie ticket.

Everything else in the world comes with a warranty. You can return products within a reasonable amount of time and get a refund.

But not with the RIAA and MPAA. No sir. They are the law, you owe them money even if their products suck so bad that you think you wasted both money and time.

Re:Double Standard

[shark72]

I've gotten refunds at the movie theatre several times... but maybe that's just in my area.

Agreed that it would be nice if there were a law stipulating that record stores must issue unconditional refunds. Then we could all just rip, rip, rip away and build our music collections for nothing more than the time it takes to buy the CD and then return it. If human nature changes (particularly among one of the biggest music-buying segments, teenagers) and the honor system is suddenly more popular, then a law like this might be feasible. Of course, if this change in human nature occurred, we really all would be using BT to trade those Linux distros like we say we do.

Re:Double Standard

[vux984]

I've gotten refunds at the movie theatre several times... but maybe that's just in my area.

Its like anything else, people are much more willing to refund if you return the product largely un-comsumed.

If you stay for the full 2 hour movie, your pretty much consumed what you paid for, and even if you didn't like it, they delivered what you paid for. If you decide its not worth watching after 20 minutes, I find people are pretty amenable to issuing a refund, or letting you watch one of the other shows.

Honestly, I'm all for this legislation

[Anonymous Coward]

Anything to help keep cam quality vids off Torrent sites.

Are they?

[untaken_name]

However, people are skeptical that this will make little difference in the amount of pirated movies available.

So they believe that it will make a large difference? Or did you mean to say, "...people are skeptical, and believe that this will make little difference..." I know I'll get flamed for this, but I'm really just trying to help people communicate better. No insult intended.

Re:Are they?

[fondacio]

You're right, but I'm skeptical that this will decrease the number of people who understand what the submitter intended to say.

Re:Are they?

[untaken_name]

You're probably correct, but I see that as a negative thing. When people stop using the common, agreed-upon meanings for words and phrases, they might be understandable for now. However, over time, it becomes more difficult to communicate because different people will use different words to mean different things. Eventually, this can lead to situations where many or most people can't understand what is being said. That's what I'm trying to avoid.

Not possible, I go to the movies after work...

[Anonymous Coward]

and I have my laptop bag, and potentially sensitive documents in it. There's no way in hell anyone but the police (with cause) gets to go rummaging through my bag. Period. End of Discussion.

I'm not being a whiney ass, I refuse to allow random cocksuckers to go rummaging through my belongings. If they want my money, they can treat me like a human being, not a criminal.

SO they're not getting my money, and they know WHY they're not getting my money. And if they keep it up, I'll be closing my accounts with the bank that now owns the naming rights to the theatre, and they'll also know why I'm no longer doing business with them.

Re:Not possible, I go to the movies after work...

[tomstdenis]

Question: Why do you need a laptop at the theatre?

Tom

Re:Not possible, I go to the movies after work...

[Anonymous Coward]

Question: Why do you need a laptop at the theatre?

I can't speak for other folk, but since I worked right next to a movie theatre I would occasionally pop in to see a movie after work, rather than go home and make another trek to get to another cinema. As a result, I often have a bag or briefcase with me when I catch a movie.

Re:Not possible, I go to the movies after work...

[MikeBabcock]

Do you people all just go to one place a day or something? "Don't bring that, you don't need it" cause you know, he wasn't at work 15 minutes before the movie started, or downtown price comparison shopping, or whatever. Some of us carry stuff with us cause we're more busy than that.

Re:Not possible, I go to the movies after work...

[adona1]

If the movie gets dull, you can watch some pr0n?

Wasn't this already illegal?

[MobyDisk]

This should already have been illegal: it's copyright violation, right? Is this one of those redundant laws like it is illegal to sell illegal drugs to a minor, when selling illegal drugs is already illegal? Or it is illegal to commit a "hate" crime against someone of another race or ethnicity, but it is already illegal to commit a crime against anyone at all? More charges don't solve the problem.

Re:Wasn't this already illegal?

[DeeKayWon]

Yeah, but my understanding is that this makes it criminal. Copyright infringement is normally a civil matter.

Never Happen.

[arthurpaliden]

Minority government.

Election coming sooner rather than later.

It will die on the order paper if it ever gets there.

Re:Never Happen.

[Baraka]

Exactly. This retarded legislation will never make it past the Senate. The Conservatives are bitching about bills that STILL haven't been passed by the upper house after languishing in there for over a year. Without Senate and Supreme Court support, Harper has no real power. Just as it should be. :) *knock wood*

Re:Never Happen.

[quantaman]

Minority government.

Except that the biggest opposition party, the liberals, haven't expressed any reservations about moving towards US-style copyright legislation,

Election coming sooner rather than later.

Probably not, Harper no longer has the power to arbitrarily call an election after passing the fixed election terms law. The only way an election can happen now is at the expiry of the term or if the government is defeated in a confidence motion.

The only confidence motion I see coming up before the next budget is the conservatives environmental legislation, and while the opposition parties don't like it I think it's just strong enough that they don't want to risk the fallout from defeating it.

We already got one reprieve from DMCA style legislation when the liberals fell, I don't think we can hold it off much longer :(

Cosplaying fans will be pissed.

[DrYak]

And suddenly thousands of Starwars fans dressed as Darh Maul, or LoTR fans dressed as elfs, or Harry Potter fans cosplaying... all cried and then suddenly shut up.

Making camcorders forbidden will not only have no effect at all on proper piracy, but will piss off all users who have brought one for perfectly legal reasons. Like wanting to film all the dressed up fans queuing up on a world-wide première.

I WANT to be able to make movie and/or pictures of friends cosplaying, even if it is only for the ridicule they'll get later once I show those pictures (...at their wedding or something).

Can we PLEASE

[Trevin]

Stop calling it "intellectual property theft"? It's copyright violation. "Property theft" implies stealing someone's tangible goods (or ideas) and passing it off as your own, which is clearly not what's going on here. It's an unauthorized reproduction (and possibly public display or sale) of an artistic work.

Re:Can we PLEASE

[Anonymous Coward]

who cares, you are still taking stuff that isn't yours, and are at best a leech, at worst a thief. redefining the words doesnt excsue what's going on. If you want to see a movie for free, go buy a fucking camcorder.

Re:Can we PLEASE

[shark72]

"Stop calling it "intellectual property theft"? It's copyright violation. "Property theft" implies stealing someone's tangible goods (or ideas) and passing it off as your own, which is clearly not what's going on here. It's an unauthorized reproduction (and possibly public display or sale) of an artistic work."

I was going to post a similar rant against metaphorical use of the concept "theft," but you stole my thunder.

Somebody should just make some black t-shirts to sell at DEFCON and elsewhere that read "It's only theft if the GPL, or somebody I sympathize with, are involved."

Seinfeld episod

[ch-chuck]

This reminds me of a Seinfeld episode: "Jerry and Kramer attend the film with Brody, who makes a bootleg tape. Brody gets sick and has Kramer take him home, leaving Jerry to finish making the tape. Brody likes Jerry's camera work and asks him to do more films.... After Jerry refuses to tape anymore movies for Brody, George takes on the challenge, but gets arrested."

Oh, poor babies!

[iminplaya]

The MPA says that in 2005, piracy cost U.S. studios $6.1-billion (U.S.). In Canada, the CMPDA estimates its members lost $118-million the same year.

I feel your pain. I believe the only thing left to tell these people is "Piss off!"

The two most popular camcorded movies...

[mrroot]

...are Death Blow and Cry, Cry Again. Although the ending sort of falls apart at the end of Cry, Cry Again... there is this lone dancer who appears to be injured.

And *I* have the right to be a jerk.

[Valacosa]

Just because one has the right to do something does not mean it should be done. For instance, I've read your responses to some of the other comments in this thread:

You could, you know, not bring a bag with you. Or stop being a whiny ass. It takes three seconds to open a bag to show there is no camcorder in there. If you want to bitch about anything try the low selection of quality films, or the $15 small popcorn.

I have the right to call you an asshole. Should I?

On another note, I carry a camera with me where ever I go. It's a still camera, but I can see movie theatre people making a stink about it. Do you think that, when I get dressed in the morning, I'm going to say to myself, "Oh! I might go to a movie tonight! I'm going to leave the camera at home." Do you think I'm going to let a pimply faced teenager confiscate a several-hundred dollar piece of personal electronics just so I can watch a damn movie? They have the right to try it, but they are not entitled to my patronage.

(I also usually have a bag with me. If happen to go to the movies, should I just leave it outside? You yourself said you usually have a bag, yet you're telling others they could just "not" bring a bag with them. Isn't that a tad hypocritical?)

Would you still go to a movie theatre that searched your bags, and confiscated your snack food? It's private property, they have the right to take away your bottle of coke, offering only to sell you the exact same beverage for three times what you paid for the original.

They could be assholes, but they shouldn't be assholes. Being an asshole is terrible for business.

Re:And *I* have the right to be a jerk.

[tomstdenis]

This is why not living 20 miles from the theater is a good idea. Or just planning better. I mean when I do go to the show, it's usually after supper which means I've been home from work first.

In my case I don't go because I hate the other patrons. Stupid annoying loud mouth teenagers with no respect for others. If I wanted to be that rudely treated I'd just go get my teacher degree and then try and teach a general level English course in a high school.

Tom

I love minority gov'ts. Nothing gets done!

[Valacosa]

I love minority governments. Nothing gets done, and thus nothing gets fucked up!

All praise Canada's multi-party system!

all publicity (and sod off MPAA)

[Anonymous Coward]

is good publicity. This has been true for previous decades and is probably even more true now.

Every "artist protectorate" organization going out of their way to "defend" artist' rights are just keeping the momentum going on the ongoing PR bandwagon that is consumer f&*kn life.

Sod off MPAA.

There are bigger problems then you.

How many people have now caught AIDS in Africa due to the inattention of the world?

How many have died in Iraq and Darfur because we have no decent leadership in the world to stop this kind of bullcrap.

I'm really starting to get pissed of with these kinds of issues when we keep hearing about the 'poor MPAA'.

So someone downloads a pirate copy 3 months before official release date.

BIG - F&*KING - WHOOP.

Calm your corporate asses down. The same person who was dying to download a crap quality cinema video cam copy of a movie will also be the first to buy the DVD, and buy the "extra special, deleted scenes" copy too.

Get the hell out of my face.

There is soo much more important stuff going on right now in the world, yet to keep hearing of the 'poor MPAA' and 'strong legislative changes' against copyright infringements makes me want to puke.

Yeah great, global bandwidth sucking big time in the past few decades drove the creation of temporary middlemen. That is not the case anymore, and yet movie companies still expect to be able to extract every 1st tier, second tier and super deluxe special edition tier premiums off every different market out there. As mentioned before, SOD OFF.

What was once true, isn't. The world changes - AND SO SHOULD YOU.

Life holds so much more, and we should be looking at more important stuff then this - to make people focus on this is worse then criminal.

People will pay what they can; when a poor uni student, I would have downloaded every tv show I could have. Now that I'm older, I'll buy it since I prefer better quality. Stop being the pretend community ethics citizen you're making yourself out too be. All you care about is money; PR deparments either selling 'green fields' or 'evil consumers' are a tad bit old.

Get over it... we have had to. Every single day we see another crap-tack-tactical commercial, either reminding us lowly consumers of our responsibilities to you mega greedy corps or telling us how hard you're working it further reminds every on of us lowly citizens of how little you give a rats arse for us.

So again, 'S-OD, OFFFFF'. The MPAA is a corporation. Corporations have no obligations except those to shareholders. They do not give a rats arse about your mum dying of cancer, they do not give a rats arse about anything... except increasing profits. So, Sod Off you evil sonsofbiatches. No wait... Sod off you no soul sonsofbiatches who work in these companies; Keep working hard to 'get that share price up'... one day people will remember that a revolution is not always a bad thing. Summing up: Sod the hell off. Leave me the hell alone - and the next organisation who threatens a $200 crime (shoplifting) with a $60,000 'we will destroy your gene seed to 3 generations' offence will receive the full attention of my mighty, creationist, 'sod the hell off' stick. So one last time (maybe we could get everyone around the world to join hands?): SOD THE HELL OFF;X

Finally!

[JoeDuncan]

It's about time. I mean seriously, who wants to download a movie only to find out it's a cam that some jerk posted?!?

I say jail 'em all!

That way we can be sure the movies we download are genuine DVD rips and not have to worry...

Land of the free

[Dachannien]

In Ohio (one of the United States, for those unfamiliar with the term), it's illegal to turn on a camcorder anywhere in a commercial building where movies are being shown. That includes movie theaters - even out in the lobby - and presumably retail stores where camcorders are sold alongside movies. Moreover, the store/theater/whatever workers have the right to detain you until the cops show up to arrest you.

Local TV news crew doing an expose on the poor health code compliance of a theater's concession stand? Busted.

Family testing out a camcorder at the local big-box electronics store where a movie is coincidentally being demo'd nearby? Busted.

And what makes matters worse is that we already had laws to cover copyright infringement, but the content cabal decided that somehow that just wasn't enough.

Ditto

[phorm]

I've had cases where I'll be in a particular area (sometimes not in town) and decide to see a show. As I'm a hobbyist photographer, in many cases I tend to have a camera with me, which I suppose would have the capabilities of recording (crappy) video if I had a really big card in it. Now I *could* choose to leave my camera in the car and worry about having it stolen, or I could bring it with me, and leave it in the case rather than being a dork trying to make a crappy cam of a movie.

So far I've had little problems with the latter, but if the theatres start giving me grief that will change rather quickly.

Re:Cool! A Minnie Driver/Anne Hathaway love scene.

[amuro98]

That's one way to solve the overpopulation problem in China and other parts of SE Asia, Russia, and Eastern Europe...

God damn tourists!

[billcopc]

So that's why there were so many goddamned red-plated Volvos in my neighborhood...

Seriously though, am I the only guy who's sick of Stephen "American Wannabe" Harper ? Last time I checked, the US economy was in steady decline thanks to Dubya's persistent efforts to vilify the country he's supposed to be leading. So then why the hell is the Canadian premier kissing American ass ?

Canada already has laws that already outlaw camcording in theatres, it's all part of a big concept we call Copyright. We don't need to specifically target camcording, we just need to enforce the laws that are already there. That starts with the imbeciles that man today's mega-movie-plex-odeon-eramas, as they're the first line of defense to stop clandestine taping. The problem is these kids earn minimum wage, and have little incentive to do the right thing. Blame it all on the bloated film industry, whose ridiculous budgets and ticket prices have squeezed every last bit of life out of the market. By alienating its customers and even its business partners, the film industry has created a huge gap in the market, one that modern technology can easily fill. Don't feel like paying $12 per ticket for the film, and $20 for popcorn and soda ? Then stay at home and download it for free, drink your $0.20 can of soda and your $0.50 bag of popcorn.

Where there is such great demand, inevitably someone springs up to fill the void.

Full text of the bill

[Pig Hogger]

Here is the full text of the bill:

BILL C-59

An Act to amend the Criminal Code (unauthorized recording of a movie) R.S., c. C-46

Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada, enacts as follows:

L.R., ch. C-46

1. The Criminal Code is amended by adding the following after section 431.2:

Unauthorized recording of a movie

432. (1) A person who, without the consent of the theatre manager, records in a movie theatre a performance of a cinematographic work within the meaning of section 2 of the Copyright Act or its soundtrack
(a) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than two years; or
(b) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.

Unauthorized recording for purpose of sale, etc.
(2) A person who, without the consent of the theatre manager, records in a movie theatre a performance of a cinematographic work within the meaning of section 2 of the Copyright Act or its soundtrack for the purpose of the sale, rental or other commercial distribution of a copy of the cinematographic work
(a) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than five years; or
(b) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.

Forfeiture

(3) In addition to any punishment that is imposed on a person who is convicted of an offence under this section, the court may order that anything that is used in the commission of the offence be forfeited to Her Majesty in right of the province in which the proceedings are taken. Anything that is forfeited may be disposed of as the Attorney General directs.

Forfeiture -- limitation
(4) No order may be made under subsection (3) in respect of anything that is the property of a person who is not a party to the offence.

Published under authority of the Speaker of the House of Commons

Re:Full text of the bill

[Pig Hogger]

The kicker is that nothing prevents the manager of a moviehouse to copy the film for himself, or to allow the manager to have an employee or anyone else do so...

What I would do

[PMBjornerud]

After the law is in effect, find somehwere that 100+ people that care can meet.

Choose an obscure film, preferably from some indie project that will be happier for the press coverage than for this horrible 'piracy'.

Then have the 100-strong group go see the movie, bringing videocameras. 100 cameras rolling, while they watch. Preferably, call the police yourself and tell them that you're going to break the law. Be open about it.

what I find sad

[vuffi_raa]

The thing that I find ironic and sad is that the same people here that constantly talk about "free enterprise" and "competition" are constantly bowing to lobbyists who are pushing pro corporate laws in our country and beyond our borders. If these people really did support an open marketplace then things like DMCA wouldn't happen because corporations and conglomerates like the **AA should be using competition with P2P and youtube and other sources to generate a more enviable product or a reason to purchase the product rather than changing the criminal code to force consumers to use content as they see fit. Open source applications haven't shut down the software market and linux hasn't crushed microsoft they are still thriving because their business model takes into account that there will be a certain amount of loss and they instead make logical b2b supported deals and try to make a more appealing product to consumers if they are using legit products (even though vista right now is a piece of crap). I am a musician and last night I was going over this with a couple of other independent musicians over dinner- the possibility of creating a not for profit centralized online distribution service that you could purchase or DL music for free as well as selling related merchandise with the focus being that if you don't want to purchase a CD- go ahead and download the tracks but if you can afford to spend something you can pretty much put more $ in our pocket by buying a shirt or some other item and get more out of it- hoping to build consumer support by expanding what we deliver at no real cost to us since in the long run we know that it will end up on p2p anyways and by not exploiting the fact that will be, we close off potential customer base for expanded products.