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.'"
I havent seen this "film". I'll have to download it and check it out now. Thanks.
I wonder why its so popular? I never thought to myself, "gee, I'd really like to fuck that girl... AS BATMAN!"
they're cuming after you.
'People don't realize that when you pirate a movie it hurts all of the people who work very hard to get it produced'
839*929
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;
You know what? Good for the porn company.
It's messed up that the EFF thinks that it's not okay to sue thousands of people at once. In my eyes, it seems like that's the best way to deal with it.
I mean, piracy is messed up. I pirate things, but I know that pirating things doesn't help the people that create it. Music, movies, books, porn, no matter what you are pirating it. The only way to sensibly deal with this in court is to deal with everyone who's committing the "crime" (I say crime in quotations because I'm not going to say if piracy is really a crime).
So I say good job porn makers. You guys are getting shafted, and it is messed up.
"Computers are useless. They can only give you answers." - Pablo Picasso
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDbj1X2V7eM
From the trailer, the costumes and the acting, may actually be above the 1960s TV Batman which it is clearly patterned after.
"'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."
No, it doesn't hurt you. Either I "preview" said film via torrent, maybe, or I don't see it at all. Now, please tell me where is the loss of sale? Oh, hurts.. well maybe that.
-Is the meaning of life vanity, or is vanity the meaning of life?
Yeah well, piracy as downloading and piracy as selling illegal copies are two different things. Downloading does not benefit anyone else but the downloader. I'm all against selling pirated stuff.
-Is the meaning of life vanity, or is vanity the meaning of life?
Fellow pirates,
I implore you to continue your campaign on Slashdot to make me feel less guilty. I know that not paying someone for their work is wrong, but if Slashdot posts enough articles bashing the RIAA/MPAA/copyright law/whatever, it's easier for me to accept what I'm doing emotionally by visualizing someone else as the bad guy. Once on the forefront of relevant IT news, Slashdot is now a lame repository of mainstream pseudoscience links and pro-piracy articles to appease a dwindling readership. I am overjoyed.
Even though the open source community is about giving back as much as it is taking, I'm just going to take. I'm a human leech with self-serving beliefs and an inability to empathize with content creators who are trying to make a living.
I don't believe John Carmack should be paid for his work. I'm going to sit on my ass while he spends years coding the next advanced 3D engine from id Software. When their game comes out, I'm going to pirate it without giving a second thought about paying John Carmack for his work. I'm just so used to pirating things now that I take it for granted. If anyone mentions John Carmack to make me feel guilty, I'll look for Slashdot articles that bolster my viewpoint, such as this one, amusingly posted in the Your Rights Online section even though none of my rights are being violated.
According to that study, it's okay to not pay people for their work because there's some vague hope that they'll make up the difference in income through "concerts and speaking tours." Artists are now forced to take time out of doing what they want to do. John Carmack must stop programming in order to make money from programming. It's genius. The study does exactly what I need it to--make me feel less guilty when I pirate. We've managed to stretch the truth so far that we're actually telling ourselves that we're helping artists by not paying them for their work. Excellent job.
I look forward to Slashdot telling me everyday who the bad guys are. Even though Slashdot has sued websites in the past for copyright infringement, and they've pretended to care about plagiarism, we're supposed to go along with Slashdot's anti-copyright agenda. I'm okay with that hypocrisy because it serves me. It makes me feel less guilty when I pirate something. Remember, I'm not the bad guy--the RIAA/MPAA/whatever is. That makes it okay for me to not pay people for their work.
EULAs and copyright licenses are wrong, yet the GPL is good. Piracy isn't theft, yet GPL violations are referred to as "stolen GPL code." I accept all of these double-standards because it serves me. I pretend not to notice when someone points out that the GPL relies on copyright law, and if I want to get rid of copyright, my beloved open source code will no longer be protected by the GPL. I don't care, because I'm too busy concerning myself with what I want for free, not about the consequences. I want to get rid of copyrights because I've been told that copyrights are the bad guy, and they are an obstacle to my rampant piracy.
Fellow pirates, let us continue our selfish leeching. Let us paint others as the bad guys to absolve us of our emotional guilt. Our goal is to convince people that piracy is something the good guys are doing in a fight with the evil corporations. Making money is wrong, even though Slashdot displays ads, and it cost me money to buy the computer I'm using to pirate stuff.
Yours truly,
A fellow Slashbot
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
'**** 'em all,' Braun told Xbiz.
Interestingly, this statement also describes the main plot line of Batman XXX: A Porn Parody.
#DeleteChrome
These guys can be real dicks.
Obviously, you're not a connoisseur of porn. You've been jerking off to plotless clips, but you're completely unaware of the vast universe of porn with plot. Go forth and explore this new world which has been opened unto you, like a giant pussy.
Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
When do we get to the part where Axel Braun gets sued for using the trademarked name Batman for a porn movie?
"I don't care about the Constitution!" --Bill O'Reilly, November 17, 2009
I am a porn star. Well, rather, I was an extra in a porn movie. I was the slightly tubby Asian dude sitting in a club with a naked chick dancing in front of me. No pay for the part, but I did get to see some naked chick dancing in front of me. Oh yeah, then she ...umm... fornicated with some redneck looking dude. Then another. Then another. Why was I there? I was a computer consultant at the time. My job was to setup a video server so that the naked chick could be broadcast all over the world. The owner of the company said, "Hey, want to be in a movie?" My first thought was that I'd get to, you know, bang some hot chick. Of course not. I was credited as Wang Dong, which was all I could think of at the time.
As for the rest of the talent? The naked chick was drugged out and pretty dried out to look at in real life, but wonder of wonders, on the final video she looks pretty damn young and pretty damn hot. The redneck looking dude was a flaming homo. He could switch from redneck with a southern drawl to flaming homo on a dime. Pretty bizarre. The other dude was just strange.
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.
'**** 'em all,' Braun told Xbiz.
I very much doubt that he said "Asterisk asterisk asterisk asterisk 'em all." I know slashdot has incompetent editors, but you could at least get the fucking quote right.
... and then they built the supercollider.
Stop charging $40 for your shitty porno and maybe people will care.
New Hollywood movies don't even cost that much on blu-ray.
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.
Off topic, but I ROFLed after reading that link - something called the "Three Prong Obscenity Test" sounds more like a porn quality control standard than a legal doctrine :)
Don't tell me to get a life. I had one once. It sucked.
How many times does it have to be pointed out: Slashdot is not a single person.
But feel free to karma whore by blatantly ignoring this point which has been raised many times before in response to posts like yours. It seems that attacking the mythical "Slashdot group think" is an easy way to get a +5 Insightful on almost any story these days.
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.
Superman is kinda bored so he just starts flying around looking for something to do. He's flying over Wonder Woman's house and sees her bedroom window is open. He stops for a glimpse and sees her lying on her bed naked. She's lying there and squirming around looking real hot.
Superman gets turned on looking at her so he decides what the hell, I can just fly in real quick, give her the ole' in-out and be out of there before she even knows what hit her. After all he is Superman. So, in he goes, wham-bam and he's out of there.
Wonder Woman knew something happened and says, "What was that?" The invisible man says, "I don't know but, damn, is my ass sore."
This same argument has been used for newspapers, tv, radio, opera, iPod, mafia, whatever and guess what they are all still here.
And as for dogging being the latest craze. Sorry, but are you TOTALLY incapable of seeing the irony in your own post? You are comparing Vivid to some guy selling DVD's in Ohio (and if he is selling them, then it ain't amateur anymore)? And the move to "amateur" is hardly new either. Gonzo mean anything to you?
What has happened over the decades is that porn, has become more mainstream. As nudity becomes acceptable in this regular movie theather, porn has had to go further to still be able to sell. And tech has allowed it, ever closer close-ups, less need for the camera to dictate the action.
And yet at the same time, the call for retro-porn, from a time when you could NOT see a girls cervix, is greater then ever. For every Dogging fan there is a guy browsing OLD magazines.
The internet has shown us just how great the diversity in the taste of porn is, but that doesn't stop some kid coming along claiming that the DVD's from some guy in Ohio are where it is at.
But don't worry. The newspapers, radio, tv, theathers, the iPod, and the mafia are SURE to take your hint and finally die off. Because YOU determined what EVERYONE else wants.
Grow up.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Alfred is the only one allowed in the Bat Cave.
The thing is that Slashdot does not have a single "group think" position on any particular topic. On the issue of copyright I have noticed three distinct groups: those that think illegally copying electronic data (e-books, movies, music) is a right which should not be infringed (slightly overstated, but elements of the group go that far), those that think that many times those that produce creative works (books, movies, music) benefit from illegally copying of their work far more than they suffer (although anyone doing so for profit should be punished to the fullest extent of the law), and those who believe that anyone who copies creative works illegally deserves whatever punishment comes their way to the fullest extent of the law (and sometimes beyond). Which group controls the mods on a particular discussion depends on who has mod points at any particular time when such a subject comes up.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
"Separation of Church and State" does not appear anywhere in the Constitution. It is a phrase coined by Thomas Jefferson.
Absolutely right.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"
Now, go promote one religion in government without stepping on several others. Can't do it, can you? You will ALWAYS upset some group if you go down that road.
So, Jefferson clarified the establishment clause with the term "Separation of Church and State". Big deal, it's what the end result has to be or you wind up with a huge mess.
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.
It was probably hard for the actresses to swallow too.
Humans are terrible replicators of Godly things.
Yes, it does. It has a US-centric view of everything, 'cause most slashdotters are from there. When otherwise intelligent people start arguing for their gun rights, frantically posting links to wikipedia and quoting the U.S. constitution, I am able to step back and realise how the rest of the world views our discussions.
Consciousness is a myth. Trust me.
Fellow pirates,
I implore you to continue your campaign on Slashdot to make me feel less guilty.
Hi there AC and Successful Troll, how's it going? This is a hell of a thread you've got here. Congraturation!
Your (yes I know it's plagiarized) post here reminds me a lot of Jonathon Swift's Modest Proposal. Just a nit pick, it is just a touch whinier and less smooth and deadly, but you know if the original you've carped needs some spackle us Pirates won't despise you for adding a little bit of effort to make it a mashup, especially if it's more effective. Nonetheless this was plenty effective, people falling over themselves talking about karma whoring and all manner of silliness. God damn. :D
In any event, I agree about (checks figures) 80% with your strawman here. I pirate. I don't give a damn who's going out of business because of that. It is, in fact, easier for me. If it weren't I might not. I guess I don't have your strawman's dissonance about that. I don't feel guilty and don't look to /. for other voices to ease my guilt. I am confident that my position is right, and enjoy describing how, if for no other reason than it's fairly counter-intuitive and I'm proud of it. And I like pontificating. :D
So if you're strawman (or, borrowed strawman) would like it's guilt eased, I'll be happy to post here about how what it's doing is perfectly moral, because if I read your post correctly what it is allegedly doing is perfectly moral and it should continue to allegedly do that. It's like I've just read Karl Marx make up a "Mr Capitalist" strawman who feels guilty about being selfish or about putting inefficient competitors out of business. It just sounds so awesome that I want to root for the puppet no matter how much the puppeteer might dislike him. :3
For the other 20%, it's mostly mild misunderstandings. The GPL, for example, I am simply against. I want to see it fail along with all other copyright instruments. I publish all of my work as CC0 as it is the closest effective approximation to ridding my work of all copyright entirely. If people wish to hide their ideas in closed source then I won't stop them. If other people wish to reverse engineer those ideas, then I won't stop them either. If I write open source code and someone wants to "steal" it away into their closed source bundle, then I encourage them to do so. Freedom, flexibility, and good publicity will always triumph over paranoia and restrictions and I'm overjoyed at every opportunity to demonstrate that in practice.
Otherwise your puppet laments over misguided concerns of the puppeteer, saying "even though none of my rights are violated" and "even though this spells doom for my favorite ad-run site" and confusing the people who manage slashdot with it's commenters. I am a commenter, and my views probably don't reflect the views of the site owners. Slashdot might sue people for stealing their content, but I would not in their stead. I do believe that preventing me from obtaining or retransmitting publicly available information is harming my rights. I do believe that retransmitting data authored by someone else does not actually harm their rights. Your puppet may or may not agree with me, but it sounds like it would at least sleep easier if it choose to agree with me. Believing in True Things tends to make sleep easier, and I recommend that to anyone.
So by all means bring your puppet back to ask any other questions it's feeling guilt about and I'll be here all week, eh? Fictional and needlessly angstful as it may be, the world would be better off if more people behaved precisely that way.
People willing to trade their freedom of expression for temporary entertainment deserve neither and will lose both.