It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Woman arrested for trying to record 'Twilight' on digital camera

page: 2
9
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 06:39 PM
link   
The film industry has a powerful lobby and they are some of the richest companies and individuals, at least in the U.S. They have a right to protect their creations from thieves just like anybody else. If the woman was a thief she should pay like anybody else. However from the reports it seems like it was just a dumb mistake.

As many have noticed dumb mistakes account for more than half our prison and jail populations and they have become an industry themselves from the uncaring non-thinking cops (I don't write the laws I just enforce them) following bad regulations to the overpaid judges who do nothing but process people like cattle into the system, to the overpaid mostly undereducated morons (guards) who abuse, torture and indoctrinate people into becoming lifelong convicts.


I understand the reason for these laws, as there are parasites all over the world looking to take a piece the action while contributing nothing. Jailing the small timers like this woman though is the same as jailing drug users and treating them as major distributes. I expect if she doesn't get let off there will be a backlash against Hollywood and their extremely overpaid beautiful & talented people.


[edit on 5-12-2009 by verylowfrequency]




posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 07:03 PM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 


I found this on Bitlaw, and would say she would have had grounds for appeal based on what is stated in 3 and 4 below:


Although the doctrine of fair use was originally created by the judiciary, it is now set forth in the Copyright Act. Under the Act, four factors are to be considered in order to determine whether a specific action is to be considered a "fair use." These factors are as follows:

1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

2. the nature of the copyrighted work;

3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

Fair Use in Copyright


As for recording in cinemas in the UK, I found this which states that the UK does not have legislation covering the use of recording equipment in cinemas, this was apparently correct as of May 2008, this may have changed by now.

[edit on 5-12-2009 by Koka]



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 07:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Koka
 


There is apparently a section in the new Fraud Act (I have yet to read the exact phrasing though) that covers recording a copyrighted film, but you're right, there is no specific law barring recording equipment in a theatre.

I believe the woman will get off, if this goes to court. it appears, on first glance, that this was just a silly mistake and not an actual attempt to record a film. It would be a tough Judge to give her the maximum penalty, which I believe is $250k fine and 3 years in prison!

I suspect it would be thrown out as here in the UK, it wouldn't "be in the public interest" to seek a prosecution and you guys have the same sort of thinking don't you?



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 07:48 PM
link   
reply to post by stumason
 





it wouldn't "be in the public interest" to seek a prosecution and you guys have the same sort of thinking don't you?


Only with the truly "good" prosecutors

Too many are just interested in the "Win"

I wish there was more consideration for public interest. I have tried to drop charges on people before for various reasons, to include, mental stability, youthful first offender etc; only to have the prosecutor raise heck because he wanted a win...

Semper



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 08:05 PM
link   
And this is one of the problems with the justice system you have too many people that use the letter of the law to murder the spirit of the law. From what the article seems to say is she caught snippets of the screen while filming the participants of the birthday party, a total of maybe four minutes worth of the film which also included parts of the previews,hardly the type of "criminal" the law was intended for.



posted on Dec, 5 2009 @ 08:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Firstly, I'm not "dude."

Secondly, did you have something substantive to add to the discussion?

[edit on 2009/12/4 by GradyPhilpott]


I do. Thank goodness for this thread and your post. It is about time that someone stood up for the thieves and pirates that are the reason I have to pay 11 dollars to go to the theater today!

Yay for you!!! More criminals should be excused because you think it was not that bad no matter what the aggregate cost to the industry and it's HONEST CUSTOMERS.

Are you serious with this thread?

P.S. I did not spend any time in jail. I paid to see a movie and watched it without directly violating a federal law that is well advertised. It is easy to not get arrested for bootlegging a movie. DO NOT RECORD ANY OF IT.

[edit on 12/5/09 by Lillydale]



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 04:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lillydale
I do. Thank goodness for this thread and your post. It is about time that someone stood up for the thieves and pirates that are the reason I have to pay 11 dollars to go to the theater today!

Yay for you!!! More criminals should be excused because you think it was not that bad no matter what the aggregate cost to the industry and it's HONEST CUSTOMERS.

Are you serious with this thread?


This thread is not about the impact of video piracy on the cost of cinema tickets but down to a common sense approach to law interpretation, but I will ask what percentage of your $11 do you believe equates to the projected costs of countering video piracy?

Your $11 equates to £6.67, when I go to the cinema it costs me between £10 and £17.50 which equates to $16.47 and $28.83 respectively (at present exchange rates), is this variance due to video piracy?

Do you pay any more or less for your cinema ticket dependent on the production costs of the movie?


Originally posted by stumason
I suspect it would be thrown out as here in the UK, it wouldn't "be in the public interest" to seek a prosecution and you guys have the same sort of thinking don't you?


I can only speculate on what would happen in the US as I am located in the UK, but would tend to agree on it being thrown out for the reason you give.

[edit on 6-12-2009 by Koka]



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 04:31 AM
link   
And there was me thinking that this person was sat on a porch filming in the twilight hours, and possibly videoed a spotting of Nibiru.....lol....I jumped into the thread with too much excitement



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 05:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Koka
This thread is not about the impact of video piracy on the cost of cinema tickets but down to a common sense approach to law interpretation, but I will ask what percentage of your $11 do you believe equates to the projected costs of countering video piracy?


This thread is about cheerleading for someone who broke the law. What defense is there for what she was doing? It was only a few minutes?

Who decides how many minutes of the film make a crime? If it is not 4 minutes, how about 15? 30? When does it become a crime exactly? See in society, we need to establish these sorts of things.


Your $11 equates to £6.67, when I go to the cinema it costs me between £10 and £17.50 which equates to $16.47 and $28.83 respectively (at present exchange rates), is this variance due to video piracy?

Do you pay any more or less for your cinema ticket dependent on the production costs of the movie?



That is really the stupidest thing I have ever read. Let me try to put it very simply for you. The movie industry loses billions of dollars a year to piracy. The first and best solution they have is to negotiate higher rates with theaters who then pass the price along to you and me.

If you are still confused, please let me know.

The post underneath mine reminded me

It is also a huge annoyance to pay 11 bucks for a movie and have to be distracted by people's lcd screens. Phones, cameras, whatever it is. In polite society people knew how to behave in a movie theater. It used to cost almost nothing and be enjoyable.

Ok, I get it now. reading this thread thouroughly has taught me that I am way off. I can go to the pharmacy tomorrow and steal 5 or 6 of each of my meds because I usually buy 90 at a time so it is just a tiny proportion, they should let me go. I can then go to my bank and steal about a thousand dollars. After all, that would be a reallllly small portion of the banks worth. Then I can go to the grocery store and steal just enough food for dinner tonight because that is a tiny proportion of the amount of dinners I have eaten and will eat.

Someone please tell me what I am missing.


p.s. all of that aside...cool avatar and sig!

[edit on 12/6/09 by Lillydale]



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 05:34 AM
link   
sad woman , that movie will be found shortly in any gas station which has a bargin dvd bin.

not to mention a grate way to spoil a movie experience.



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 05:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 


how can you loose money in an industy which makes billion dollar profits yearly ?

that piracy loss number is based on hypotetical incomes from hypotetical customers which dont exist , its just "make belif profits" .


a movie which makes 170 mill profit on its opening night can only go minus in profits if the owners of the movie license go broke and it has nothing to do with watching a free video on the net, the profit was made day 1.

having artists that make millions yearly on a record lable crying piracy is hypocritical

spending 12 million on a studio session to cry piracy when a promo is "leaked" out just cries epic fail.



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 05:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by zerbot565
reply to post by Lillydale
 


how can you loose money in an industy which makes billion dollar profits yearly ?

that piracy loss number is based on hypotetical incomes from hypotetical customers which dont exist , its just "make belif profits" .


Because they make lots of money, they cannot lose money? Huh?



a movie which makes 170 mill profit on its opening night can only go minus in profits if the owners of the movie license go broke and it has nothing to do with watching a free video on the net, the profit was made day 1.

having artists that make millions yearly on a record lable crying piracy is hypocritical

spending 12 million on a studio session to cry piracy when a promo is "leaked" out just cries epic fail.











Wow. You obviously have NO CLUE what you are talking about. Apparently it costs nothing to make movies where you come from. Studios do not bank on one movie for opening weekend. They expect their "twilight" to make enough money to make a profit but FIRST GET THEM OUT OF THE RED because of the 100s of crappy movies they already blew money on. I could go on and on but I really need to understand why I am arguing against a thief anyway. I still do not see any good defense for her here but at least people like you are willing to jump up and spit your ignorance all over the place. None of what you said makes any sense in the actual industry. It makes senses in your little bit-torrent basement world. Get a real job and go buy your games and pay for your movies like an adult.


p.s. When did I mention the recording industry? Music is a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT BUSINESS MODEL. Apples and oranges.



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 06:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 


if they make a movie which costs lets say 100mill and they make a 170mil on opening night theyve made 70 mil profit and every cent they make after that is profits , now if they start to loose money from the profits theyve made its then their own fault not the make belif audience.


and acturly most of the so called best sellers in the musicindusty have been made on a very low budget compared to what the "industy" puts on its artists these days and most bands are not "bands" they are corporations
working for other corporations who might work for a corporation which owns all three prior corporations .

making claims that people who ve made millions on their products would go bank rupt because of internet piracy is insane as is to claim imaginery people are not making imagenery payments because of loss in make belif profits.



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 06:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by zerbot565
reply to post by Lillydale
 


if they make a movie which costs lets say 100mill and they make a 170mil on opening night theyve made 70 mil profit and every cent they make after that is profits , now if they start to loose money from the profits theyve made its then their own fault not the make belif audience.


You did not read my reply. Movie studios do not work that way. They do not bank on one movie. You do not understand the economics of the film industry.



and acturly most of the so called best sellers in the musicindusty have been made on a very low budget compared to what the "industy" puts on its artists these days and most bands are not "bands" they are corporations
working for other corporations who might work for a corporation which owns all three prior corporations .


Again, when did I mention the recording industry?

You obviously did NOT READ THE POST YOU ARE REPLYING TO.


making claims that people who ve made millions on their products would go bank rupt because of internet piracy is insane as is to claim imaginery people are not making imagenery payments because of loss in make belif profits.



Your understanding of the motion picture industry is as lacking as your ability to spell.

Fine, instead of actually paying attention to what I already said, see if you can follow along.

1. If this is fine then how do we decide what would be stealing? 8 minutes? 20 minutes? How much would she need to record before you feel it is a crime.

2. What other industries should this standard apply to? How much of what can I steal?


p.s. Bonus question just to see if you understand any business. Do you know why black friday is called "black" friday?

[edit on 12/6/09 by Lillydale]



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 06:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 


nice to see that personal attacks are used and false assumptions.

to me its very clear you have no idea of the "entertainment industry"

so now your saying they make music / movies on imagenery money to ?



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 06:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by zerbot565
so now your saying they make music / movies on imagenery money to ?


What? Stop talking about music. Do you need me to say film industry each time so that you understand I am not talking about music. I see that I said film or movie industry over and over and over again. Where did I say "entertainment?" If I did, how did you miss all the clarifications? I thought telling you I was not talking about music 3 times would suffice.

What are you talking about with this imaginary money crap? That is exactly the opposite of what I am saying. Apparently you think they use imaginary money. What do you suppose the studios use to finance all the duds that lose money?

I will try to explain this slowly.

Paramount and Paramount subsidiaries put out 100s of movies a year. How many of them made 100 million dollars in profits last year? Can you name them all? The studios lose money all the time on movies. They gamble so that every once in a while they get their hands on a "twilight" and make a profit. If that movie makes 100 quadrillion dollars in profit, the studio still has vast expenses above and beyond that film such as...the hundreds of movies that either lost money or were simply shelved at a loss.

[edit on 12/6/09 by Lillydale]



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 06:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lillydale
This thread is about cheerleading for someone who broke the law. What defense is there for what she was doing? It was only a few minutes?

Who decides how many minutes of the film make a crime? If it is not 4 minutes, how about 15? 30? When does it become a crime exactly? See in society, we need to establish these sorts of things.


I assume you didn't bother clicking on the links provided in my initial post?



Originally posted by Koka
Your $11 equates to £6.67, when I go to the cinema it costs me between £10 and £17.50 which equates to $16.47 and $28.83 respectively (at present exchange rates), is this variance due to video piracy?

Do you pay any more or less for your cinema ticket dependent on the production costs of the movie?



That is really the stupidest thing I have ever read.


Then you should read more threads


Let me try to put it very simply for you. The movie industry loses billions of dollars a year to piracy. The first and best solution they have is to negotiate higher rates with theaters who then pass the price along to you and me.


And I asked a simple question, which you have yet to answer and will state again, what percentage of that ticket price do you equate to countering video piracy?

Could you also supply some links so I can verify these billions of dollars you speak of?


If you are still confused, please let me know.


Only with regard to your attempts to insult me.


The post underneath mine reminded me

It is also a huge annoyance to pay 11 bucks for a movie and have to be distracted by people's lcd screens. Phones, cameras, whatever it is. In polite society people knew how to behave in a movie theater. It used to cost almost nothing and be enjoyable.


This is something I agree with wholeheartedly, which is the reason I am forced to go to the cinema in Central London and pay such exuberant prices.


Ok, I get it now. reading this thread thouroughly has taught me that I am way off. I can go to the pharmacy tomorrow and steal 5 or 6 of each of my meds because I usually buy 90 at a time so it is just a tiny proportion, they should let me go. I can then go to my bank and steal about a thousand dollars. After all, that would be a reallllly small portion of the banks worth. Then I can go to the grocery store and steal just enough food for dinner tonight because that is a tiny proportion of the amount of dinners I have eaten and will eat.

Someone please tell me what I am missing.


That's called theft or stealing and there are other laws that cover such a pastime.


p.s. all of that aside...cool avatar and sig!


Thank you

[edit on 6-12-2009 by Koka]



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 06:52 AM
link   
With all of the compact technology available these days recording movies in theaters isn't even considered a "sport" anymore. When I was a kid, the the challenge for those willing to take the risk was trying to conceal a Beta cam or JVC VHS camera just enough to get into the balcony of a TWO screen theater. That was sport
Gotta love those old Anorak coats.

Now in defense of the movie industry, compact HD cameras can inflict some pain on the industry profits if used improperly. As for the woman who recorded the clips, it is well known that doing what she did is illegal. Granted she only had a couple of short clips. Fine her and be done with it. Copyright laws are in place for a reason.



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 06:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Koka
I'm assume you didn't bother clicking on the links provided in my initial post?


This was not a response to your initial post but a question that I felt needed to be asked all over again because the discussion belied the point. Sorry if I asked for some clarification but thank you for failing to provide it.





Then you should read more threads



Ok, you got me there.


And I asked a simple question, which you have yet to answer and will state again, what percentage of that ticket price do you equate to countering video piracy?


I do not honestly have an answer. I guess that means it is 0% then?


Could you also supply some links so I can verify these billions of dollars you speak of?


Really? You need links to see if the movie industry loses tons of money every year? You are not serious are you? I will see what I can dig up. Until then, feel free to call me wrong or lying about it.


Only with regard to your attempts to insult me.


That is because I am mean when I have to repeat myself over and over because people respond in a manner that seems to show they either do not or cannot read the posts they click reply on.


This is something I agree with wholeheartedly, which is the reason I am forced to go to the cinema in Central London and pay such exuberant prices.


So you go out of your way to pay more money to go to a theater that should have less chance of someone ruining your movie experience? You are willing to pay more to put yourself out because it should be ok for people to whip out there phones and digital cameras during the movie? I am confused as to your point here.




That's called theft or stealing and there are other laws that cover such a pastime.


LOL. Uh yeah. There are also laws about recording copyrighted material without permission. They are both theft and both against the law. What are you talking about?



posted on Dec, 6 2009 @ 06:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 


so now your saying its their gamble and loss, which way are you gonna have it ?

just because they make a "bad movie" that dont profit is no excuse to shout piracy is behind the loss of their failur to produce profit.

its just bad economics or frankly put a bad investment far away from terms like theft.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join