Slashdot Mirror


Porn Maker Sues 7,000+ For Copyright Infringement

This summer, we discussed news that the producers of The Hurt Locker had sued 5,000 people for sharing the movie over BitTorrent. Reader suraj.sun writes with word that a porn company is now following suit, filing a complaint targeting 7,098 people for illegally sharing one of their films. Quoting: "Axel Braun Productions filed the complaint Friday in US District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, alleging that the defendants illegally shared the adult film Batman XXX: A Porn Parody. The film was written and directed by Axel Braun and distributed by Vivid Entertainment, one of the country's best known porn studios. ... '**** 'em all,' Braun told Xbiz. 'People don't realize that when you pirate a movie it hurts all of the people who work very hard to get it produced — from the cast to the production assistants to the makeup artists. So we are going after every one of them who pirates our content.'"

8 of 374 comments (clear)

  1. Intellectual Property by Phroggy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Is DC Comics getting royalties from this film?

    --
    $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
    $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
  2. Re:Havent seen it. Let me go Download it... by gustgr · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The interesting thing about this flick is that it actually has a history -- weak as it may be, I've seen worse in regular movies. The DVD even includes a 30 minutes long non-porn version of the movie in which all the porn scenes have been cut off.

    This non-porn version is probably just a reordering of the DVD chapters by excluding the porn chapters, but nonetheless it's pretty interesting, it really captures the spirits of the original series.

  3. Re:Wait... what? by compro01 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There is a plot. Almost always a mindlessly superficial plot which people ignore and wish wasn't getting in the way, but is included to get around the Miller test, but it is a plot.

    --
    upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
  4. Re:Havent seen it. Let me go Download it... by rtb61 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Now technically as the movie can not demonstrate the ability to "promote the useful arts and sciences" under law it is not entitled to copyright protection. So for those who can stand the embarrassment of public admitting sharing that film, there is always a US constitutional challenge, bonus if you win you will strip the movie of it's copyright protection and challenge the whole MPA*/RIA* industry. What makes it interesting is that it will all be from a definitively conservative basis, it would be interesting to watch Republicans publicly attempt to defend copyright protections for pornography.

    --
    Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
  5. panicking pornographers by stimpleton · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Pornography and its consumer's behaviors are changing, and traditionalists like Axel Braun and Vivid entertainment are worried. Their style of film is declining. In the 90's it was Porn star actresses and a fairly small pool it was too. There were plots, stories, romance.

    Only now in the last 5-10 years have producers realized that the market wants none of this. Guys (as consumers) want a new girl each in each scene and subsequent film. Porn Stars are now only tolerated because they have some special trick.

    And its changing still again, where people arent subscribing to the main stream "porn Pros" but to niche amateurs sites and marketers. An example is the "dogging" films (women engaging in sex at car parks etc), which originated in Britain. A guy in Ohio has picked up this phenomonon. His DVD's are selling very well thank you. And the old Skool pornographers don't like it. One bit.

    --

    In post Patriot Act America, the library books scan you.
  6. AIDS by Burnhard · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This is the same Vivid that has had to stop production due to one of their performers being diagnosed with HIV? No wonder he's having a hissy fit and throwing all of his toys out of the pram.

    If the porn industry wasn't rogering customers with stupidly expensive website fees, piracy wouldn't be a problem for it.

  7. Re:Havent seen it. Let me go Download it... by tmosley · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The funny thing is, you probably think Democrats DO.

    If you want REAL change, how about we dump the two corrupt parties that got us into this mess. EVERYONE should vote third party. Don't worry about "throwing your vote away", because the two parties are the same, and things just keep getting worse the longer they stay in power.

  8. "Previewed" it, but would not buy it by ethicalcannibal · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Sign me up as another voice that watched it, but would never spend money on it. My DL of it would never translate into a sale.

    Not because I don't spend money on porn. More because if I am going to put my cash into a porn film, which I have many times, it has to be more female friendly in the sex scenes. Don't get me wrong, the Batman XXX film is great in all the costuming, and details, they put in to mirror the old series. I was a happy at all details put in.

    However, being female, I really try to put my cash towards porn that acknowledges females get off, and are not just props that fake orgasms for the male actors in the film. That means, I would have never paid for this film. The movies that do achieve that get my cash. Even if I don't think they will be watched more than once because I want to support an industry that does things that way.

    This means my download would not have been a sale. This also means I would never have paid for it at all, unless I got to see another owners copy for free. It's far easier to assume a porn film will not fit my standards than to put money towards endeavors that don't.