Slashdot Mirror
Lionsgate Sues Limetorrents, Played.to, and Others Over Expendables 3 Leak
hypnosec writes Lionsgate, the film company in charge of distribution for Expendables 3, has filed a lawsuit against unknown individuals who shared a DVD-level copy of the movie and six file-sharing sites known to have the links through which copies of the movies are being downloaded illegally. An advance copy of Expendables 3 was leaked online in July, and it was downloaded as many as 180,000 times in just 24 hours. The movie, which is releasing on August 15, is said to have crossed two million downloads already.
In addition to the lawsuit, the Dept. of Homeland Security is on the case.
For a civil matter relating to a MOVIE? Are you fucking kidding me? What the fuck, America?
Now, everyone will have to buy the actual movie. I'm sure this will work in Lionsgate's favor. After all, suing people and websites has been very successful in making copyright infringement vanish, yes?
Make sure to sue them for billions of dollars in 'damages' (not gaining counts as damage) that you can't ever prove happened.
I'll LMAO when the reveal comes that the leaked copy turns out to have little, if anything, to do with the actual movie they release
Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you
I'm glad to know that DHS has solved all the critical security issues of our nation so that they can devote their resources to Expendables 3.
I feel safe and secure now.
"I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
Their business model is releasing crap and then suing when it hits the torrent sites.
Meh. A marketing plot of Lionsgate to promote another movie. At the same time that they victimize themselves while criminalizing their clients.
Don't mind that those dreaded pirates helps them to rake so much money from people's pockets.
Using government agencies for private investigative work. How more corrupt can you be?
And they don't even hide it anymore. People in the USA are just slaves of corporations nothing more.
And surely these evil scum will get what they deserve when they and all their loved ones are killed in a justifiable drone-strike!
Seriously, this is what a police-state looks like, there is no way to deny it anymore.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
In other words, they haven't found the source of the leak yet, but want everyone to think they have...
Worst. Signature. Ever.
Yeah. Damn tourists.
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
This is the DHS keeping us safe at its finest. After they got this licked they just need to prevent the theatrical release, DVD, and Netflix copies, and then through the writers and directors of Expendables 3 in to Gitmo.
Thanks Slashdot for seeding this!
Do you think spending Federal Dollars on law enforcement to make sure you keep the stuff in your home from criminal gangs is a good idea? Because they are preventing you from profiting from your work too.
The dangers of excessive individualism are nothing compared to the oppressiveness of excessive collectivism
By that logic no police officers should be catching burglars because there are murders who have not be caught yet.
There's not really an analogy that would show just how wrong it is for the government to try to enforce copyrights. I know I don't want my own government wasting money trying to prevent people from copying such data merely because it could mean that a corporation did not gain as much as it wanted to. So I just think that the government should not deal with such matters *at all*. The DHS is a scumbag organization, and so are many of the organizations that are under it (like the TSA).
But what's the point? You're a copyright troll.
Steven Seagal, crime fighter, will destroy the houses of the offenders with a tank.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/er...
Thank you slashdot!
Please read my Canon EOS tech blog at http://www.everyothershot.com
Wanna sue the gov't for something meaningful? Sue to get ALL of it (DHS, FBI, local cops, whatever) away from filling the welfare trough for the studio scum.
The Blu-Ray for "Under the Skin" has 11 MINUTES of uninterruptible BS before the menu (but, yes, she IS that hot). The torrent is a better product; "let the marketplace decide".
Thank god they sued people over this, I may not have known otherwise!
But Expendables 3 was pure caca! Forget straight to DVD, now it's straight to torrent and recycle-bin.
A movie not released yet only available to those who have a stake in it is released seems to me someone doesn't believe its worth it or doesn't like their boss BTW I believe a movie ticket DVD or blu-ray is over priced
Your'e all thinking it, I just said it for you
Because they are preventing you from profiting from your work too.
Copyright infringement, at most, causes you to not gain something (other people's money, which they chose not to give you); it does not cause you to lose anything tangible.
If you honestly think that the government should waste money trying to stop people from voluntarily copying movies and such using their own private property, then I think you may be a bit mentally unstable. Copyright is anti-free market, anti-free speech, and anti-real private property.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
"Full Definition of THEFT
1
a : the act of stealing; specifically : the felonious taking and removing of personal property with intent to deprive the rightful owner of it "
I'll bet that the vast majority of those who complain that their theives took their intellectual property will discover that in fact they still in actuality have it in their possession.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
While this has probably lost them some money, I have always felt that one of the reasons that the movie industry hates torrents is that it gives people such a wide choice that crappy films don't end up being downloaded. How insulting must it be when your precious darling of a film is so undesired that people won't even take it for free.
Not to mention that movies that aren't being "professionally" distributed suddenly have some traction.
That's probably why they have leaked it.
Now they use the court case to both play innocent and maintain presence in the news.
It's a win-win for them.
All hope abandon ye who enter here.
This site also makes torrents available. You can get the Expendables torrent here
will be sought out and charged with copyright infringement?
Why not use this in advertising. This moves was so anticipated it was seen by 180,000 downloaders in the first 24 hours.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
With our Military starved for funds, our schools in shambles, and our infrastructure crumbling, I can think of no better use for Federal tax dollars then to ensure that some corporation makes a profit.
How much tax does said corporation pay anyway?
That's like suing the contractor that built a freeway because the freeway was used to transport drugs. Even if, by some absurd chance, you win, there are a thousand other torrent sites out there and your movie was on them within hours. Knocking out a couple of those sites will have absolutely no effect on piracy. If you want to stop leaks go after the leaker. If you've got any sense at all, each of your DVD screeners has unique watermarks and can be traced to the person to whom it was issued. Fire that person, sue that person, and blacklist them. That at least would have a chance of reducing future leaks.
Theft of intellectual property should be a criminal matter.
Copyright infringement should be a civil matter
Perhaps it is the August heat.
But don't see any meaningful distinction here.
The geek wants to share the unlicensed movies he has downloaded with 10,000 of his closest friends on the P2P nets.
But when his own IP is threatened he will be the first to call the cops.
If they had applied a unique digital watermark to each of the DVDs they could track down the person who uploaded their copy and prosecute him. Applied consistently, this policy would be far more effective in stamping out unauthorized release of screeners.
I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
Lionsgate leaked the movie onto the Internet themselves just to sue people, because they knew how shit it was and how poorly it would do.
Got to make that money back somehow.
Tourists and their taking vacations to watch region locked content.
Or maybe someone should tell you that if they spend millions of dollars on something it is their right to sit on it as long as they want to.
How, pray tell, does giving an author this right "promote the progress of science and useful arts"?
How easy it is to ignore the fact the that the people who created this movie need to be paid.
They're paid for services rendered at the time of completion.
Not only the actors, writers, directors but the hairdressers, electricians and even the computer special effect workers.
All these people are paid just like you would pay any other contractor. They do the work, you cut them a check. They all work for a set, specified rate, not for any cut in the profits. Those who do earn based off ticket sales are usually A-listers with enough clout to negotiate for a cut of the gross, not the net. So no matter how poorly it does in the box office, these people still get a cut of whatever it brings in.
And God forbid that investors who fronted the money in the hope of a return on their investment should realize a profit.
ANY investment prospectus will tell you that "All investment carries some degree of risk." This means that when you invest in something, yes, you expect a profit. But you also have to accept the possibility that the money you put in will go up in smoke. By your logic, I should be able to sue whoever I invest with if my mutual fund doesn't give me a 500% ROI. They decided to invest in something, they knew it was a risk. Lets not forget that the investors are going to be the LEAST damaged by any of this, since one film is simply a line-item in their ledger.
That being said, downloading films in this manner IS ethically questionable. Mass downloading can make a studio earn a reduced profit. But reduced profit is not a monetary loss. The real loss is that if the profit reduction is large enough, they have less incentive to produce any more films that require actual effort. The more this happens, the more you get dreck that caters to the lowest common denominator (such as The Expendables whose mass downloading furthers the cycle), and filmmaking is reduced to an exercise in formulaic cinematography to maximize monetization and merchandising paradigms (and other such buzzword-y bullshit). THIS is the real cost of mass copyright infringement - an art form reduced to a paint-by-numbers affair where no one dares to make anything truly unique. And to me, this cost is far, FAR worse than any perceived monetary loss.
At least the Capitalists who wish to to profit from the labor of others paid for that privilege unlike simple thieves.
How many times does it need to be said that COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT IS NOT THEFT?. Theft is the taking of something tangible which deprives the individual owner of its use. Downloading a copy of some bits does not deprive the original owner of said bits. They still have them, and can still use them for their intended purpose.
"So after all this, you make my case for me. To end this stalemate, you must die..."
military starved for funds? i work for the military and there is as much waste at the end of this fiscal year as there was for any other. if they dont waste it, they dont get as much to waste next year. the military "budget cuts" are bullshit, theyre still receiving far more than they know what to do with
We are officially 100% broken.
Principles broken?
1. Check...rights of the individual subverted by corps with money.
2. Check...freedom threatened because industries can't adapt to a free market that is being disrupted
3. Check...our representatives selling our government
Rationally broken?
1. Check...2 million downloads of a bit pattern is deemed equivalent to theft.
2. Check...protecting a middle man distribution company rather than the consumers or the producers of real products.
Creatively and culturally broken?
1. Check...I mean it's a sequel of the funking EXPENDABLES for fuck's sake.
This is how it all ends not with a bang but with the sound of a million douches.
The movie is full of post-talent douchebags for the most part, and Lionsgate is truly a 'lion' when it comes to going after people for the smallest and often unintentional cases of copyright infringement...they once paid out my friend 5k for a 3D gun model he had owned that was used in a DVD cover they produced (through a 3rd party mind you) without consent. Seems they don't give a shit about their own copyright violations and pay/pressure people into tiny settlements, but when it comes to downloading their gear, they go over the top.
Here is the type of line that lets me know the movie is a piece of shit, and deserves *downloading* rather than paying way too much to see at a theatre: "Willis was offered $3 million for four days of shooting in Bulgaria, but Willis wanted $4 million". If the movie were anything other than a cash grab to rape box-office-groupies of their hard earned money, actors would _seek_ roles in the film rather than demand an extra million for *4 DAYS OF WORK*.