Arrest Under New NY Anti-Piracy Law
AxminsterLeuven writes "The BBC is carrying a story on new tightened New York anti-piracy legislation: A man has been arrested, after smuggling video recording equipment into a theater showing the new Transformers movie. 'Kalidou Diallo, 48, has been charged with unauthorized use of a video camera in a cinema. Under upgraded legislation, he could face six months in jail and fines of up to $5,000 (£2,487) if found guilty,' the BBC reports."
I've never understood the appeal of these pirated works. I'm very skeptical that, as a consumer of such a bootleg, I could find the viewing experience enjoyable with the quality levels rendered by a homemade video of a movie--especially one that I could experience in a theater at a matinee showing for five to seven bucks. More than fifteen days of jail time seems excessive to me.
...probably knows a few people that could help commute that jail sentence.
I wonder if he knew Amadou Diallo.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
I cannot support anti-piracy controls that require use inside consumers homes.
DRM == Perpetual Motion Machines.
However, using some basic link-analysis to go after "well connected" nodes (in this case, the suppliers of the source) is much more intelligent and effective.
OK, MPAA. You can call it quits with anti-piracy DVD nonsense. You finally found a method that works. Leave John Q. Consumer alone.
libertarian: (n) socially liberal, financially conservative; neither left, nor right.
I'm mean, more than a he-said-she-said. They have pretty good video evidence right?
Ask not what you can do for your country. Ask what your country did to you
You are SO right. I think he should be brought up on charges. People might actually view this bootleg and think "WOW! That movie shitty! You would think a movie studio could at least get rid of all the background noise! And did they film this thin on a boat?!?!?! What's with all the shaking of the movie not to mention the horrible grainy experience!! I won't spend a dime going to watch that movie or even think of renting it!"
But more because screeners are the lowest form of piracy.
If your so desperate to see a movie that you will watch a crappy copy of something someone took with a camcorder complete with the Mystery Science Theatre 3000 audience view in the bottom of the screen then just pay for $7 or wait for the DVD like everyone else. I have a friend that does this and is always asking if I want to watch some crap movie I wouldnt have paid to see, then claims he is doing it because he is anti-mpaa. If your really anti-mpaa then you wont bother to see it at all, just the fact that someone wastes an hour downloading a poor quality bootleg proves that it has some value to them. Its hard to fight increasing restrictions on fair use when bozos like this continue to make the MPAA's point for them.
I took two still pictures during the credits of Transformers using my camera phone: one of the repeated title card, the other the first screenful of scrolled credits.
It's my new way to show that I'd been to a movie without having to hold onto ticket stubs. I did it with Spider-Man 3 (first) and with the latest Pirates of the Caribbean movie as well (as well as a shot of the "10 Years Later" addendum at the end after the credits).
It's really only for my own personal use. There's no real market for them, and I don't publish them on the web. (If I ever full-motion recorded anything in a theater and published them on the net, it would be the ads to complain how many there were.)
I just wish I didn't feel compelled to click the Post Anonymously check-button to tell you this. I'm glad I don't live in New York (tickets are cheaper here).
Seems ironic that a man gets caught carrying a camera to film a movie about robots in disguise.
:)
At least one anti-piracy law finally did the public some good
The reason it is wise to include jail time for violent offenders is that it is ultimately cheaper for society to pay for their room, board, and supervision than it is to potentially suffer another violent incident. Incarcerating violent offenders is one of the least controversial uses of tax money in modern America.
What is the justification for using taxpayer money to incarcerate a non-violent offender? Worse yet, what is the justification for incarcerating an individual who only potentially damaged a private company's profits?
Shouldn't a fine be sufficient considering only money was at stake?
Bootleggers are closely related to white collar criminals. The only impact is financial. In the case of Enron, or some other fraud situations, I would much rather have seen the offenders be forced to work the rest of their lives to repay the retirement funds they looted etc.. rather than getting what amounts to a monetary slap on the wrist and jail time. I am pretty sure the people who ended up getting pennies on the dollar out of the settlements would probably agree with me, just as I would bet most people would rather see the money spent on jailing this bootlegger spent on something like... oh... I don't know... anything that actually benefits society.
Regards.
The last thing any movie maker needs is someone taking a cheap copy and showing it to everyone on the planet, making them want to buy the high-quality version.
New Music!
Where in the USA are movies still only $7?
This one makes me mad.
'people' go out and buy that fancy 8 megapixel camera for $500 and then shoot photos at lower quality to save on memory card space.
I mean it's damn rude of the guy. If I paid good money
for tickets to see a movie I don't want some bozo in the
row ahead of me to stick his stupid movie camera in my view
of the screen. Why that's only slightly less rude than leaving
your damn cell phone on and I have to hear your stupid ring
tones though out the picture.
What about Professor Mann's EyeTap and similar devices? Closer to home, what about half the cell phones released in the past five years or so?
Robots: 1 Pirates: 0 Ninjas: ??
COP 1: He's got a gun!
DIALLO: Wait! Wait! I swear it's just a video camera.
COPS 1-4: Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang! Bang!
COP 2: Why does his gun have a rewind button?
COP 3: Crap... not again...
We always knew Comcast was corrupt, here's the proof: http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1909890&cid=34545432
Am I the only one who thinks that he should have been escorted out of the building by the bouncer, after having erased his tape/static ramdisk, and be blacklisted ? I mean, that's how it used to go.
Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
Now that the tape is probably going to be used in proceedings, will it be available for public viewing under some official information request?
Or will they just charge the Jury and Court audience $8 to view the tape?
Its like that guy who had the sarcasm truck run him over, back up over him, and run over him again and he never got a look at it and was just left banged up and not knowing what the hell just happened to him.
Unless he actually recorded the movie and distributed the movie for profit, thus being criminal copyright infringment, that is a little bit harsh for such "victimless crime". Supposing he was successful in recording the movie and distributed it without the copyright owner permission, and the copyright owner found out and sued for damages, the financial penalty would probably be bigger, but without the jail time.
I'm not very fan of this kind of deterrent law, that makes the penalty for attempt haesher than the penalty for the actual infringement.
New York legislators apparently consider production of grainy, shakey, muffled copies of Hollywood poo the moral equivalent of 2 oz. of pot. I thank God every day that our peerless statesmen are so responsive to these twin evils. It is common knowledge that copyright infringement is a gateway anti-social behavior, leading rapidly to contempt for authority, drug abuse, armed robbery, rape and murder, in that order.
illegitimii non ingravare
Actually, everyone in the jury and the court room will be charged with piracy. In each of those trials, the tape will be shown again, and everyone in THOSE court rooms will have to be charged with piracy. Eventually, the entire country will be in prison for piracy because of this one videotape. This is why video piracy is so very, very bad.
Perscription pill abuse usually accompanies other drug-issues. Its a schedule III drug, so I doubt you'd get prison time, unless you are trafficing.
Adderall abuse pisses me off because it creates an unfair advantage in academic situations. Its fukin cheating. Like my buddy who drinks all week, goes to sleep early before a test, wakes up and studies 10-12 hours straight, and usually kicks the shit out of tests. 3000-5000 level classes too (major courses for mathematically intensive shit). I study for days, and have trouble concentrating, but I still do it the honest way.
So if I'm a tourist going around town with my videocamera, then stop by to see a movie.. I can be arrested for the crime of possessing a video capture device?
What about cellphones, am I going to be arrested if I've got a cell on me that can record video?
The crime should be distribution of copyrighted works, not recording them.
MABASPLOOM!
I would like to invite you to speculate when 'normal' cellphones will be considered 'video-recording-equipment'. Because I don't think that such a law can be enforced by then.
For the perfect anti-Unix, write an OS that thinks it knows what you're doing better than you do and let it be wrong.
Most new cell phones have the capability to record video, do they count?
Because it's not only about reform, it's about retribution.
It's the same reason we have the death penalty in this country. Sure, we can remove dangerous individuals from society. Hell, it's actually cheaper than killing them. No, the death penalty isn't a deterrent. Yes, we sometimes make mistakes. But it's not about what's best in the long run for society. It's about the sweet satisfaction you get from raw vengeance. It's not about the convict; nothing, and I mean nothing, is as cathartic for us as frying them in the chair.
The same is true about locking up non-violent offenders. We don't have to, and a lot of the time (especially in cases like these), it's not the best way to reform an individual. But the industry must have its pound of flesh from the evildoers that skimmed a few pennies from their deep, deep pockets.
sigh...
I didn't say "convicted of", I said "committed".
I hope you get caught under piracy laws so that you get put next to your stupid letters and end up looking like a fool just like Limbaugh did
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
go cry me a river, Colombia. Sometimes there's -months- between a U.S. and a Europe release. Now I'm all for simultaneous releases, but...
1. cost of film is prohibitive (yes, the things travel - which is fun if you get it after 8 other countries got it - mmm specks, dust, stripes.. the real movie experience)
2. promotion happens locally. E.g. actors can't be at the opening night everywhere if it's all on the same day.
a few weeks, for Transformers, is actually pretty good, and getting a cam'd version just so you don't have to wait 2 weeks is lame. I can understand for 'months'.. though by then, get the DVD (undoubtedly released at that time) rip instead.. if you *must*.
While I think the punishment is a bit excessive (jail time is ridiculous), there is a very simple way to resolve this situation.
Don't bring a camera into a movie theater and try to tape the movie, dumbass.
More than fifteen days of jail time seems excessive? Anything more then being booted out of the cinema seems like a violation of human rights to me.
Seriously, who is this guy harming that he deserves to spend time in jail? Who's being protected?
Six months seems fair as long as it is a penalty equally applied to all lawbreakers. The warrantless FBI recordings of private phone conversations seem to be of about equal criminal value, for example. Not sure about the quality of the recordings, but the FBI ought to be able to buy decent equipment.
Intron: the portion of DNA which expresses nothing useful.
How many MILLIONS of people are already in jails and prisons in the US?
The US government(s) can't afford to send more people to jail for this kind of 'theft'
It should not be illegal to bring a camcorder into a movie theater.
It should be legal for the theater owner to throw someone out for bringing a camcorder into their movie theater.
Recording the movie with a camcorder should not be illegal.
Showing the recording of the movie to friends without an exchange of money or physical property should not be illegal.
Showing recordings of the movie to anyone for money or physical property to should be illegal.
This is the way copyright law needs to go.
can't really of any valid reasons for bringing in video recording equipment into a cinema
Having brought relatively high quality video equipment into a theater with me recently, I can tell you: How about if you're fairly far from home on a trip, were video taping a family event, and everyone wants to go see a movie? Sorry, no, I have a camera in my pocket.
Thats just dumb.
And as far as treason goes, the US Constitution defines it as:
"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."
Since, at the time of Libby's actions, we were engaged in a war against terrorism - according to Bush the greatest threat the US has faced - I could successfully argue that taking/supporting/obfuscating an action (the outing of Plame) was an act of treason because it greatly diminished our ability to gather intelligence on terrorist groups and their acquisition of WMDs. Taking out your country's ability to monitor the enemy during war time seems like a treasonous act to me. YMMV.
We now return you to our regularly scheduled discussion - getting busted for videotaping movies in a theater....
Your mind looks a little cramped. Why don't you stretch it a little?
With the crappy lenses on some of those things, that's not actually a bad idea! :)
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
They are called MOBILE-PHONES. If they want us to come inside with our phones, the let must let us use it.
NOT GUILTY
Read and Comment at my BLOG
!!!
Damn, thats horrible. Is he alright?
"What about cellphones, am I going to be arrested if I've got a cell on me . . ."
No, but if it rings during the movie you're going to be shot.
I like the way you think. I suggest mounting the device in the lens of a WWII gas mask to heighten the effect.
Oh! So that's where the idea for The Ring came from!
Remember, open source is free as in speech, not free as in bear.
Incarceration doesn't provide anything good except to keep the offender from harming others. For non-violent criminal activity, we should submit them to community service. This accomplishes three things.
1st, it's humiliating.
2nd, it keeps them from leaching our tax dollars.
3rd , it provides something productive for both the criminal and society.
Most important overall, it teaches a lessen you wouldn't forget. If your set to rot in jail however, it becomes a non-reforming way of life and ultimately punishes society as a whole.
Life is not for the lazy.
Seriously though, I hate to watch those awful DVDs with people coughing and others standing up in front of the camera.
They manage to bring into my home everything I loathe about going to the theater: the presence of other people.
I believe he deserves a couple of months in the pokey to teach him better.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
knowing this dangerous criminal has been arrested.
Of course from the perfect framing it is clear most of the copies on the internet are probably tripod mounted and taken from the projection booth.
I predict a copy of the movie (hell multiple copies) will be on the torrent networks within the week. It will be about 700mb and have muddy video and sound quality.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
Oh well, I guess they can early release another child molester or other criminal to make space for these dangerous individuals.
It's only paranoia if your wrong...
our government cares about people illegally recording movies than the FBI illegally recording our phone calls? It just kills me to see the priorities of our country.
I think they should have strict penalties for this sort of action.
I do not think that downloading a movie from the internet is illegal. That's not how the law works.
The simple fact is, uploading is illegal.
They're using their grammar skills there.
Bah. All you *really* need to do is give 'em a razor and make them watch a bootleg copy of "Transformers."
They'll take care of it themselves.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
Despite what all the little previews before your overpriced movie tell you, videotaping a movie (or downloading a bootleg, etc) IS NOT THEFT. IT IS COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT. This distinction often gets left out, because it benefits the **AA to be...forgotten.
Imagine you walked into a Kinkos with the latest NYT's Best Seller under your arm. Should they tackle you there? What if you put the first few pages into a copy machine? Should Kinko's call up a task force specially put in place to protect the 'creative' works of corporations?
Copyright Infringement laws traditionally kick in when the infringer has "profited materially" from the sale or distribution of copyrighted works. The act of making a copy doesn't constitute a material gain, so prior to NY's "special" laws, this would have been "Attempted Copyright Violation" - a crime so minuscule that it wouldn't be tried except by a massive organization with lawyers to spare.
By sponsoring legislation (more specifically, legislators) that would push through harsher punishments for something that can cost a company potential profits (note: this is not the same as a loss) the MPAA has successfully made it really easy to punish the wrong people. I promise you that this guy in NY was not going to be the one copy that makes it onto the internet. No, that'll happen when some organized crime group has one of their lackies either swipe the reel after the theater has closed for the night, or just snags a DVD from one of the many pre-releases that are distributed.
These new laws will be about as effective at stopping piracy as busting homeless crackheads is at stopping drug abuse. Sure, they can pat themselves on the back and remark what a great job they've done, but they're really just taking out the lowest hanging fruit. Good work, MPAA!
I watched "Star Wars Episode 1" on my PC using a cam recording.
One of the reason was that I was in France at the time. I think the movie was released in May in the US, but it would have been October in France. I could not wait. I think now this is fixed with simultaneous worldwide releases.
Another reason is that it was exciting new possibility. At that time it was a lot harder to get those movies. This was mostly downloaded through IRC channels, you had to "trade" with other people etc... I didnt do it myself, but other students on the campus were doing it and sharing movies on the local network.
With every new technology (eg: bittorrent) people get excited, want to do ground-breaking stuff, etc...
But in the end off course it was not worth it for the movie itself...
I hate to break it to you, but there have been people who have been able to get away with exactly the sort of academic strategy you describe since long before we had 'concentration' pills, so this 'unfair advantage' is nothing new. All students are not nor have they ever been created equal. Some people just learn some subjects way easier than other people do. If somebody is trying to pop some pill in order to get ahead, they are likely paying for that in some other way, so it changes exactly nothing about the balance of the world.
The theatre I saw Transformers at wasn't showing it on film.
How long do you think it'll be before we start seeing scene releases ripped from the theatre's own digital distribution system?
--- Do you believe in the day?
Why do people pirate movies that aren't that great?
The Rapture is NOT an exit strategy.
Experience. Expertise.
The possibility of "living the rest of your life in a pain amplifier" is much more interesting consequence than being deprived of even all of your worldly posessions. Now that's just the end result of physical damage. Psychological damage adds an entirely other layer to the whole situation.
That's why burglary was always a crime even before white collar crime existed.
Taking your wallet is not quite the same sort of attack on your soul as rape or bludgeoning.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
I'm as anti-*IAA as everyone else here, but what you've described is worse than no copyright. If I'm a distributor and a competitor has the rights to a successful movie, I just make copies of it and give them away for free to kill off their revenue. At least with no copyright, I have a motivation to sell my copies at a price, thus ensuring that the original creator can still sell his copies.
Why are we getting a report about New York laws from the BBC? I have a hard time believing that they were the first to the story, so why not skip the telephone game and get it from the original source?
Sure he is. It went right over his head.
Assuming the retcon definition of "third world" meaning a highly developed country, I don't know. But if the projection film is digital in the developed world, I don't see any reason why a major studio feature film can't be released theatrically in one region per week, even with actor appearances:
Heck, they could just open the film on the same day throughout the anglophone world and have different members of the cast show up in US, CA, UK, NZ, and AU.
"Arrest under New NY Anti-Piracy Law"
I thought New New York only existed in Futurama?
- RG>
Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
Yeah, but there'd never be enough women with walkie-talkies to organise all the brain-dead interviews.
The worst part is that the most common sized LCD I see out there are 17", followed by 19". These have a 5:4 aspect ratio to accomodate the oddball 1280x1024 resolution, which means that if you run it an any other resolution you also stretch the picture vertically. Just plain ugly.
I really wish that manufacturers would start selling high DPI desktop LCD's. A 1600x1200 resolution 15-17" LCD would be totally awesome.