Slashdot Mirror
MPAA Bans Google Glass In Theaters
An anonymous reader writes: The Motion Picture Association of America, along with the National Association of Theater Owners, have banned Google Glass and similar devices from being in movie theaters. They said, "As part of our continued efforts to ensure movies are not recorded in theaters, however, we maintain a zero-tolerance policy toward using any recording device while movies are being shown. As has been our long-standing policy, all phones must be silenced and other recording devices, including wearable devices, must be turned off and put away at show time. Individuals who fail or refuse to put the recording devices away may be asked to leave." This is a change from the MPAA's stance earlier this year that Glass was "no threat" in terms of copyright infringement. A spokesman said the ban is geared toward combating more sophisticated wearables in the future.
I don't like people being able to surreptitiously record things; I don't like the MPAA or RIAA on principle alone (they're leaches sucking blood from the artists.)
So I've no sympathy for either side in this debate. I think they're both wrong.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
So I can't use Google Glass, but I'm free to bring in my smart phone, which has an HD camera and likely better quality? Good work there, MPAA.
Waiting half an hour to buy a ticket for about ten bucks, then suffering for 3 hours in 100+ degrees heat to ensure you need to buy something to drink, sitting and standing in the leftovers of the previous show and getting to choose to either not understanding any dialogue or getting a tinnitus from explosions and music (or rather, having that choice being made for you)...
Seriously? Anyone still masochist enough for that "authentic experience"?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
They could have embraced new technology by releasing a multi-language subtitles glass app. Instead, they further alienate people to combat an unrealistic threat. Early gadget adopters may not be numerous, but they have outsized influence in creating trends. In this case, trends towards not going to movie theaters.
Yeah, fuck them! How dare they try to protect themselves from theft on PRIVATE property that no one is REQUIRED to go to. Fuck them indeed.
Disclaimer: My opinions are my own and do not, in any way, reflect the opinions of my employer or university.
Other recording devices have not had perscription lenses.
"I am sorry but you have to take off your glasses to see the movie."
"If I take off my glasses, I can not SEE the movie!"
Yet another reason to watch movies at home.
Perhaps they shouldn't have forked out for a pair of glasses they knew were banned from movie theaters?
And if you can afford google glass, you can spare set of prescription glasses without the built in recording device.
And I'm happy for the glassholes to be watching movies at home, easier for them to keep up on their social media from there as well.
Since I live in Austin, and visit the Alamo Drafthouse, I would argue two things:
1) Their "popcorn money" isn't sold until the bill is cashed out (15 minutes before credit roll, usually). Thus they have more supervision, assuming people are using that somewhat expensive service. This model will never be "normal".
2) They tend to ignore you unless you're disturbing someone, or else the manager happens to be filling in for someone on break.
The only person I've ever seen thrown out was a) being a blatant asshole and b) made such a huge scene and distraction at being tossed that they ended up giving out free passes to everyone.
While I don't object to why that person was tossed out in the least, if I were tossed out for Google Glass I would basically require them to call the police. They would lose as much money as I could arrange. I'm willing to sit quietly and silence anything on me that is making noise or light, but the rest is fascist bullshit.
Fuck you for conflating the terms "theft" and "copyright infringement". Fuck you indeed.
Copyright infringement is not theft.
Stop referring to it as such.
Or the terrorists win.
You didn't keep your regular glasses when you received your Google glass?
Maybe you should purchase a pair for a backup anyway?
These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
Wait you could afford a $1500 Google Glass but you cannot afford a set of normal frames? You sir have screwed up priorities.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
You dissapointed your sons over a bottle of water? When there are signs saying no outside food or drinks?
You might be an asshole.
So instead of politely putting your google glass in your shirt pocket and wearing normal glasses, you'd rather make an ass out of yourself and get the police involved? I may be able to see your point if they just arbitrarily picked you out of a crowd, but if they went through the trouble of placing signs up at the entrance informing you of their restrictions then I'll have to side with them.
By having the sign out front saying no recording devices, you made an educated decision to use the theater instead of looking for a different theater that is more lenient or waiting for the movie to come out for home viewing. You making an ass out of yourself won't change the theater's policy, but loss of admissions will.
These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
Troll much? I disagree with this statement.
Suppose that your vision is such that, like many people, you require corrective lenses in order to see properly. Now suppose that being one of those many people who requires corrective lenses, you also wish to use Google Glass as a lifestyle choice. Why would you desire to purchase a second pair of glasses which does not have the extra features which you use?
For reference, I am not a Google Glass user, but I am near-sighted and do wear eyeglasses all the time, even as I'm writing this post right now. I only own a single pair in my current prescription. I also own a computer which technically I don't need which cost a lot more than my glasses. Are my priorities also screwed up?
This has been posted 10 times probably in this thread, but ideally an eyeglass wearing Glass wearer would just have one pair of glasses on their person most of the time. Most of us who wear eyeglasses keep a spare pair in the glove compartment if our prescription is severe enough, and you'd think that a Glass wearer would understand the social issues around Glass enough to keep another pair nearby, but if I went all-in on Glass, I probably wouldn't have another pair in my pocket - and despite allegations to the contrary, I don't carry a murse.
The idea behind Glass is that you just wear them. They become the norm.
Look, I'm with you. I agree that you should have the foresight to put on your normal glasses when you go to the theater - the same sort of foresight that says, "Hey, 3D movie, maybe I'll wear my contacts today, because 3D glasses." - but if you're all-in on Glass, you've probably just adapted to the fact that they're just your glasses.
Perhaps they shouldn't have forked out for a pair of glasses they knew were banned from movie theaters?
Because I base all of my life choices based on what is (currently) acceptable in movie theaters... (smh)
let's ban people too! , movies are being recorded by their brains
I do not believe a single Google glass wearer is surprised that they may be asked to remove them at a theater, bar, or restaurant. It's been all over the news since the thing was first released. I place these google glass wearers in the same category as smokers who are surprised that they have lung cancer.
These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...