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.'"

1 of 374 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Justifying piracy. by watookal · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Great post. I have no mod points, so please, somebody, mod this post +1 Insightful on my behalf?

    People seem to misunderstand the fact that yes, piracy may not be black and white in YOUR case, but unfortunately there can't be a special law for each individual's circumstances. There must be ONE law. One without 100 exception clauses.

    Pirates seem to expect that the law should read something like this:

    Unauthorised copying of this work is prohibited, unless:
    1) The infringing party pinky-swears that he wouldn't have bought the copyrighted work had it not been available illegaly
    2) The infringing party pinky-swears that he was only going to use the unauthorised copy of the work for the purposes of deciding whether or not to purchase the work
    3) The infringing party is a teenager with stingy parents and therefore was unable to purchase the work
    4) The work in question has already sold millions of copies and therefore the author is already stinking rich and doesn't need any more money
    5) The work in question is the music of a performing artist, in which case he or she will make enough money from live performances without the help of the infringing party
    6) etc. etc. etc.

    That said, even I occasionally download illegal music, movies, etc. But I know it's wrong, and I also have my own ways of justifying it to myself, but I am not ridiculous enough to expect the law to tailor itself to my personal value system.

    It's wrong, and if I get caught I will get punished, and I will not be surprised or indignant.