Man Accused of Uploading Wolverine Movie Calls Charges "Ridiculous"

61

Comments

+ Add a Comment
avatar

zNelson24

...

avatar

aznyron

I do not agree with the FBI because once it hit the internet in any one game 

I personally would not buy any pirated software all though I live in Thailand

buying a original copy is to expensive so I buy on line from amazon.com & have my sister send them to me  as for software no way will I buy that crap I only buy original with a license 

avatar

willychamp36

After reading all this I've come to one conclusion.....Snapple is a pure moron.  You listen to Rush Limbaugh don't you Snapple you dog you.

avatar

Wingzero_x

   Some of these comments really make me hope 2012 is real, because I hate to see how far stupid the human race can become. Seriously do you people have no common sence? Even bad movies cost money to make, and for that matter what exactly is a bad movie? Is 300 a bad movie? (It is for me.)How about Avatar? (Ughh!) 28 Days later? (Zzzzz) Godzilla movies? (?!?) Star Wars? (I actually thought the Phantom Menace was the best of the Prequels) The new Star Trek? (Spock from the future?) Lord of the Rings Trilogy? (Better than the books, in places.) Alexander? (movie about one of histories greatest warriors without many of his greatest conquests?) Gladiator? (Historically inaccuate, but I was "entertained" Hell I've heard this Twilight thing is popular. Point is we all love or hate movies, music and books others don't, but we have to respect the rights of those people that brought that media to us. 

   Fact is this guy broke copyright law, he's not accused of stealing the movie from the source. However his actions did cost the studio possible revenue. Revenue that would go back into the studio to make more movies, sometimes even good ones. Ever thought of the consquences of when they can't pay the good directors, Actors, Producers, etc.

  Also the guy that brought up software, bad/incomplete software is released all the time. Why do you think they have all those updates and patches! If you want a preview of a movie there are a ton of "trailer" sites out there as well as a ton of review sites.

avatar

Slamhammer

However, the Wolverine movie was leaked and there was still "Green Screen" in it, CGI had not been added yet.

Someone's actions  from the Studio itself, or the CGI House cost the studio possible revenue, because the guy himself "bought" it from a "street vendor" selling the movie.

Should the guy have uploaded the movie? NO

Did the guy Pirate the Movie? NO, someone else did that when they "leaked" it from the studio or CGI house.

Should they prosecute the guy and leave it at that? Yes and No

They should prosecute him, however they should do an in depth investigation of both the Studio and CGI house, and find the original "leaker" and Prosecute the living hell out of that person for making it publicly available in the first place. They need to stop Piracy at it's Source. 

It was a few years ago where a copy of a movie was making its rounds on the Internet, back when piracy had been going on for a while, and the MPAA watermarked all the videos sent to Academy Award Judges with a watermark of "For Award Consideration only", but IIRC they also had a unique serial number, and the MPAA and FBI were able to trace the Leaked Video back to Carmen Caridi, (he was in the Movies, Ruby, Bugsy and Godfather III and played a detective in NYPD Blue)

Now, Carmen Caridi's excuse?

"I gave the videos to someone who put it on the Internet without my knowledge, If I would've known that he was going to do that, I would have never sent them to him. I feel the only thing I did wrong was dishonoring the pact I had with the academy by giving the screener to another person. I got my punishment from them -- they kicked me out after 22 years."

So, Carmen thought handing out copies to his friend was A-OK, and that it was the other guys fault for uploading them to the Internet, However, the "Other Guy" wouldn't have had access to them if Carmen Caridi didn't give him copies of the movie. (Another thing Caridi denies is making copies of the movies, yet duplicating machines were found in his house along with VCR to DVD converters.

 

So Carmen Caridi was ordered to pay $600K (Which I don't think he has, because he said he had initially ignored the lawsuit because he couldn't afford a lawyer), and he was also kicked off of the Academy Award voting committee.

MPAA chief Jack Valenti told representatives of several film and community organizations that of 52 movies sent out for awards voting last year, 16 of them ended up being pirated.

So why isn't the FBI looking at 16 more Award Voters who received "Screeners" to vote on?

 

 

avatar

ready4war

If I have a fav movie on dvd I would Use dvd fab!! its free!

avatar

Silk1001

I would think most people that download would be the ones that are not going to purchase a ticket or a DVD or a CD. These are the people that would just do without. So where is the lost? On the other hand if they spread the word that this is a great CD of Movie and on that two thumbs up a friend goes out and purchase should that downloadet be paid for his endorsement

avatar

snapple00

Kaboom@! (Your brain attempting logic)

avatar

Silk1001

Intresting comments but I'm wondering if i want to share a large collection of photos with my family do i use an ftp server and require my family to install and learn to use the client. And when i need a Linux distro or other large program fast, do i depend on the slow download from some server? The point is not all torrent traffic is illgeal. Torrents are very useful these days with files becoming so larger. I broke my windows 7 disk but i still have the key. Do I pay for a replacemant to come in the snail mail drive to the store or download a copy and use my legal key?And by the way to outlaw torrent sites probally violates the constitution. Remember that thing?

avatar

snapple00

How about you use torrents for all of those things? (Except you breaking your Windows disc.. That's what you get) Your point is...?

Did you read the article? Do you know what the issue is? The answer is no, you don't.

P.S. Outlawing torrent sites that provide means for stealing doesn't violate the constitution. Spell check.. Remember that thing?

avatar

sswam

the guy said "They took my PC. Now (they're) building a fed case on me for the same thing. Copyright Infringement...So I guess I'll (be) made an example of."

I think in the case of copyright infringement / "piracy", where probably every second person you might see on the street does it, the police / copyright holders should not be allowed to charge just a couple of people at random.  It should be all or nothing, if they are going to bust people for this stuff they should have to go after every grandma who tapes something off the TV also.  Otherwise, it is discriminatory, and could be used for blackmail like "give me money / sleep with me or else I will see that you get done for copyright infringement".

Of course the copyright holders don't want to go after everyone who copies stuff, because there are too many people, and they will alienate the public and lose most of their customers.  Are you going to buy a CD of some artist when your brothers / friends are in jail or lost their house to pay fines for copyright infringement?

Mega-bullshit. I hope the guy fights the charges and I hope the pirate community can support him so he won't be hurt by this.

avatar

snapple00

Lol. Was this a serious post or are you that stupid?

avatar

Slamhammer

People are ignoring the bigger picture about this story, and I'm not advocating piracy, but here goes....

There were copies of this movie floating around the internet where the CGI hadn't even been added yet, so a lot of scenes were in front of a green screen. This information can be googled easily.

What does that tell me?  

Someone who worked at the studio, or CGI place was "leaking" this movie, I DO think it's a waste of time to go after the guy who uploaded, because they are going after someone very far down the "food Chain" of how this movie ended up on the street and on the internet.

There is also news stories of movies being uploaded that say "For Award consideration only" along the bottom of them.

Who is releasing those to the public? The people releasing those are the ones who get sent a copy of the movie, for viewing to vote for Oscars and Academy awards, even one actor a couple of years ago was caught releasing a "For award consideration only" movie, and he got a slap on the hand, but they go after little guys like this for the big bucks.

Why that actor didn't receive the same consequences as "Pirates" for his actions I'll never know

Other movies have been leaked that have still had the SMPTE timecode on the screen, which says, someone in the editing department released the movie.

If they want to stop Piracy, they need to stop it at it's SOURCE, obviously there are people inside the industry who are leaking these movies. 

Constantly prosecuting little guys like the one in the story is like patching the tiny holes in a Dam while ignoring the huge crack in it. 

 

If the movie industry wants to recoup their money, then they need to start treating their employees as pirates also and not just the public.

The FBI should also try to "Track Backwards" up the food chain, OK so if this Guy got the movie from some Korean guy for $5, find the Korean Guy, find out where HE got it and so on and so on.

Going about it the way they're going, they are just getting the little fish and ignoring the 30 foot shark.

I'm willing to bet once they did this, they'd find out that the majority of the movies being leaked are coming from inside the industry. 

 

 

 

avatar

corona63976

listen until they completely get rid of file shareing people will download files and burn them to cd`s or dvd`s.i think any type of torrent client should be illegal.utorrent,bit torrent and the rest make it too easy for the f.b.i.internet providers are on top of that stuff so people if you dont want the time dont do the stupid stuff.use your head you cant out smart the government.by the way putting people down to make your self sound good is simply childish.if your an adult act like one if not keep your comments to your self!

avatar

Slamhammer

In a nutshell is what I am saying is they keep going after the small time Drug Dealers and Ignore the Drug Lord.

They can lock up thousands and thousands of drug dealers, but until you remove the SOURCE of the Drugs, the Drug Lord, then you'll never stop it. 

Banning Torrents won't stop piracy, that has been going on BEFORE Torrents were ever thought up.

avatar

snapple00

I don't think your analogy makes sense.

'They' DO go after drug lords and also don't ignore small time dealers. 

And again, 'they' are going after the big guns, sites that make it possible for the 10 year old to steal thousands of movies, and people uploading these movies/media. They are also going after normal people downloading them, perhaps with unfair punishment.

No one is arguing a case for ending all piracy. Of course it will forever exist. But once Joe Layman can't download the new blockbuster that just hit the big screen, we won't see piracy rates as ridiculously high as they are. (Google them)

avatar

Slamhammer

Here's why I disagree, taking down the big sites just makes it move somewhere else, all they are they are doing is destroying a spiderweb.

What they are IGNORING is HOW the big site got a hold of the movie in the FIRST PLACE, especially (in the case of the latest Wolverine Movie) where it was Blatantly leaked from the Studio or the CGI house because some scenes still had Green Screen and the CGI hadn't been added yet.

SO yea, they can take down a big site, and that site will pop up again in a few weeks somewhere else, and they'll have the new movies because someone higher up in the food chain is releasing the movies to them.

If they want to stop piracy they need to cut off the movie leaks from the source, and in the case of the Wolverine Movie, that means someone in the Studio or CGI house, they also need to watermark any video released to the people who review the movies for award consideration (Academy etc) as a LOT of movies that are pirated also have that notice on them, but each movie would have an individual watermark for each person it is sent to, so when a copy pops up on the Internet they know who to go after.

But, I guess ignoring the SOURCE of the leak and just suing Granmda and other random people makes them a whole hell of a lot more money, and seeing as that they can more than quadruple their losses with a court case here and their, it's in their best interest to let the movies leak.

Thanks to the DMCA pretty soon the MPAA and RIAA will have their own Police Force that can break down your door at any hour of the night, welcome to the 1600's, Salem Witch Trials anyone? 

avatar

snapple00

Meh.

There is a difference between the movie leaking out of the studio and the guy uploading it on a popular website for the whole world to download..

And I don't believe you when you say a new torrent site will pop up after one gets slammed by the authorities ad infinitum. Too hypothetical.

Bottom line is, the guy uploaded it onto the website. Should we get to the true source though? His mother?

avatar

BaggerX

"And I don't believe you when you say a new torrent site will pop up
after one gets slammed by the authorities ad infinitum. Too
hypothetical."

How many times does it need to happen before you accept that it is what happens?

"Bottom line is, the guy uploaded it onto the website. Should we get to the true source though? His mother?"

Why is that the bottom line?  Why isn't the bottom line that someone at the studio or effects house is at the root of the leak?

Hell, does anyone even consider a crappy version that is missing a bunch of scenes and effects a substitute for the actual movie?

avatar

snapple00

"How many times does it need to happen before you accept that it is what happens?"

Ok... How many times has it happened? (I don't actually expect an answer..)

"Why is that the bottom line?  Why isn't the bottom line that someone at the studio or effects house is at the root of the leak?"

Because the guy at the studio didn't upload it to a website that is dedicated to stealing? Movies have been leaking like this for years and years. Only now, millions are downloading it for free and not paying money to watch it. 

You act like this guy was destined to upload this movie and it wasn't his fault...

DO YOU STILL NOT SEE THE DIFFERENCE? 

avatar

Slamhammer

I'm talking about STOPPING Piracy, and currently the way they're going about it is not going to stop it.

Say you have a garden hose that springs five leaks, you go to patch those leaks and ten more leaks show up in the hose, so you patch those and and more leaks show up and you patch and so on and so on.

Why not just turn the Faucet off? Problem solved.

 

Seriously how hard would it be to question the people at the Studio or CGI house where this was leaked from and FIND THE SOURCE? 

I am NOT saying the guy uploading it is innocent, but it sure sounds like you're saying the person who leaked the movie from the Studio or CGI house is. Don't forget,  the guy who uploaded it, bought the movie from some guy SELLING it on the street. Any news about THAT guy?

And WHERE did the guy selling it get it from?

That's my point, they keep arresting the small fish and leave the bigger fish alone, doing it the way they're doing will guarantee that piracy will never be stopped.

You are being myopic about the entire thing and focusing on just this one guy, while he IS guilty, prosecuting and/or suing him for hundreds of thousands of dollars doesn't solve the problem at all, it just stops ONE PERSON from doing what they did.

 

 

avatar

snapple00

Alright. This is above your level of understanding.

But your right. They should go after the source. Question everyone at the studio. 24/7 monitor their lives. Search them every day, spend millions and piracy will be stopped! (So easy!!)

Or.. Go after the 'big fish' who uploaded it on a popular website dedicated to piracy for millions of others all over the world to steal.. And of course, this only stops one person because when others get news of jail time and a massive fine, they will go right on and upload movies also...

Stop making analogies. They don't even make sense and they are confusing you.

(P.S. Using the caps lock key to emphasize every other word only emphasizes that you are an idiot.)

avatar

Slamhammer

Snapple you are just a troll, and when you are losing an argument you obviously need to resort to name-calling and insults.

As you said "Question everyone at the studio. 24/7 monitor their lives. Search them every day, spend millions and piracy will be stopped! (So easy!!)" 

Funny how you want exactly that to be implemented on the American Populace.

The guy who uploaded is not a big fish, suing myriads of people down the food chain is easier?

The studios can implement a program where the person has to "Sign out" the copy of the film or whatever, it's actually easy, even Vocational schools and High Schools implement systems like this to keep track of tools, books and whatnot.

Yet you seem hellbent for leather on persecuting the small guy while shrugging your shoulders that "Piracy will never be stopped" and all the while I've been suggesting possible solutions.

I'm a musician, and I think the RIAA are a bunch of crooks, they get Hundreds of Thousands of dollars in settlements because they "Care" about the artists, but I have yet to see myself, or my musician friends (who have had songs pirated) see any of this money that they are collecting for us artists.....

 

avatar

snapple00

"Funny how you want exactly that to be implemented on the American Populace."

Nope. Never said that..

"The guy who uploaded is not a big fish, suing myriads of people down the food chain is easier?"

What? The guy who made it available to the world is not the big fish? Man, the FBI must be full of pure idiots... 

"The studios can implement a program where the person has to "Sign out"
the copy of the film or whatever, it's actually easy, even Vocational
schools and High Schools implement systems like this to keep track of
tools, books and whatnot."

And this would stop piracy how...?

"Yet you seem hellbent for leather on persecuting the small guy while
shrugging your shoulders that "Piracy will never be stopped" and all
the while I've been suggesting possible solutions."

Really? You haven't suggested one solution yet. You just fail to see how your solution instantly is not practical, nor would it work..

"I'm a musician, and I think the RIAA are a bunch of crooks, they
get Hundreds of Thousands of dollars in settlements because they "Care"
about the artists, but I have yet to see myself, or my musician friends
(who have had songs pirated) see any of this money that they are
collecting for us artists....."

Proof...? Sounds like a rant to me. You do realize that big music loses money on the majority of its clients? Google the info, you need to learn how to research.

 

I'm sorry that you think you are winning some sort of argument battle. But seriously, try to follow logic through what you are proposing.. Just take a moment to think about it...

Good luck buddy. You'll need it.

avatar

nekollx

 let's make this easy for you Snapple

Their are, what, 30 pre final tape in the world, Period. 

Just period.

Wolverine came from one of them,

They are ment for review NOT, i repeate, NOT public consumtion.

Ergo, better tracking of these pre-finals would have prevented it from ever been uploaded or sold on the street.

Period.

------------------------------
Coming soon to Lulu.com --Tokusatsu Heroes--
Five teenagers, one alien ghost, a robot, and the fate of the world.

avatar

Slamhammer

What you "think" you are is someone who has gained some type of "cred" on this site and feels you can constantly abuse and attack anyone who doesn't agree with you.

 You are an Internet Bully.

I have posted time and time again, how my idea, (if actually carried out MIGHT work), but you on the other hand have posted how "Piracy cannot be stopped". 

Apparently I have to put this in ALL CAPS for you to understand.... 

As I have said....I AM A MUSICIAN, WHO RELIES ON THE RIAA TO COLLECT MY MONEY, HOWEVER, WHEN THEY SUE PEOPLE FOR THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS THE RIAA DOESN'T SEND ME ANY OF THAT!!!

avatar

rockntrumpet

This guy is making an example of himself.  An example of how much idiocy runs rampant in his genes.  Sometimes people really do get what they deserve.

avatar

lien_meat

what if I watched movies in theater, and offered to act them out with puppets, plays, or some other means so that other people could get an idea of what the movie was about or whatever for free, so they could decide if they wanted to watch it in the theaters or whatever.  Now, I'm sure the dcma would cry foul play, and I'm sure I would be sued out of house and home, but for what exactly?  Obviously it could potentially detract from the sale of tickets to the theater, especially if I somehow got a reputation for doing good reenactments of the movies...

I just find it odd that the FBI can justify spending time and money going after some guy who says he bought a bootlegged version of some movie, and uploaded it.  Maybe he is the source of the bootleg, maybe not.  If so, I can understand...but if not, well, then this is just a silly waste of money in my opinion.

I agree he was wrong to upload it, I'm just surprised that it's become such a big deal that the fbi is dealing with it...that's all. 

avatar

snapple00

You'd be sued for being such an idiot for thinking up such a dumb hypothetical situation.

Its a big deal because of the rate at which people are stealing media. Go look up some numbers.

I hope this asshole goes down.

avatar

Havok

 I second that snapple00!

 

 

CLICK.

avatar

pastorbob

Sorry guys, he blatantly commited a crime. I am a strong believer in fair use rights and I think we all have the right to make backup copies of our DVDs, CDs and software. But we don't have the right to make and/or distribute illegal copies of anything. I really am at a loss to understand the logic of those who say "Doesn't the FBI have better things to do ... The entertainment industry is just ripping us off anyway ... Hollywood just makes a lot of crap .... blah blah blah." Usually those kinds of rationalizations are used by the same people who think shop lifting is okay because the retailers can afford the losses (several billion dollars a year). But the end result is higher prices for the goods we buy. Yes, copyright law is a mess and enforcement even a bigger mess. The DMCA was a travesity and a joke overall. But sometimes theft is just theft and that is where this case falls. He knew it was illegal but he chose to do it anyway.

avatar

kw13tl33tg33k

That if Shoplifting miraculously ended tomorrow the retailers would just benevolently lower all prices across the board? You are sorely sorely mistaken and quite obviously drinking the tainted Koolaid they are forcing down John Q. Publics throat. FACT: When Compact Discs for Music came out those same retailers SWORE that the prices would come down once everyone had them because of the low price of cd manufacturing and and blah blah. Guess what? They NEVER DID. It wasnt until Napster changed EVERYTHING that they finally lowered prices SOMEWHAT and even still today if you dont get a CD on 'NEW Release Tuesday" You can still find CDs for upwards of 15 bucks. This DESPITE the unmitigated fact that it costs a mere nickle to make a cd and the artist if he is LUCKY gets maybe 75cents a CD. Where is the rest of the 15 bucks? The fact is that they could have charged 10 bucks a cd for years and still would have gotten RICH. They just wouldn't have gotten FILTHY RICH. But you just keep on siding with Big Ol Corporate. They steal from us its called "record setting profits" But when we allegedly steal from them its "piracy".

/end rant 

avatar

Chuckles

Try some basic economics.  You give studio something of value, i.e. $$$ for something you want, i.e a cd.  You can decide at your discression weather the $$$ is worth the cd.  If it isn't, don't by it.  Nobody is forcing you, and it certainly isn't something essential to your survival.  I wish Ferrari's were 30K, but they're not, and I dont acuse them of "stealing" from their buyers.  You sound like some whiner who wants everything revolving around you.  Don't like the price, try Pandora or the radio or whatever....want the convienience of listening to the exact song you want when you want, fork over the $.

avatar

snapple00

Yep. He did the crime, now he is crying about the consequence.

Too bad that he thinks stealing is no big deal.

 

avatar

lunchbox73

All these comments about Hollywood making nothing but crap movies is stupid. Movies are completely based on individual opinions. The best movie in the world to one guy may be the worst movie in the world to another.

avatar

xecutable

 When you go to the store, for clothes, do you try them on and then buy them, or do you buy them and then try them on? With the load of crap Hollywood is producing now days hell I wanna check out the movie before I decide whether i will buy it or not!

 

 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Whatever you are looking for,is also looking for you

avatar

Havok

 Maybe if you 'borrowed' the clothes for a few months from the store, then went back and payed for the ones you liked, then it'll be the same. Damn, even if Hollywood released no good movies for 10 years, it still isn't right to take someone else's "property", intellectual or physical, just to see if you like it first! Read what others say! Check out the trailers! Only YOU can prevent dumbassery!

 

 

CLICK.

avatar

pastorbob

buy a ticket at the theatre when it's released, watch the movie and then decide if you want to buy it. How does the desire to "preview" a movie make ripping it off valid?

avatar

Carpnter

That is what reviews are for, let some other sucker see it first then get their opinion on it.  You can also wait until it comes out on video.  You have the Redbox and Blockbuster kiosks for dirt cheap and there is also Netfix .  If you are so afraid of it being a crappy movie, surely you can wait until it is available on DVD.

avatar

Danthrax66

The point I was making is if a movie is good it won't effect it by having someone leak it and if it's bad like so many movies coming out today are then it no one will go see it that is how it should be. So lets say microsoft releases windows 8 with no beta or rc for people to test then when you install it your hdd becomes corrupt or every 5 minutes it restarts its the same principle they could even use the feedback to make it better, if they would make good movies none of this would matter. 

avatar

w2ed

There's a huge difference between software and movies.

Software gets one huge benefit of beta testing that movies don't get:  no matter what the program is, no matter if it's a game, a 3D CAD/CAM program, a word processor, or an operating system, chances are that people will forgive the bugs in it - may not be immediately, but if the person needs the functionality of said program bad enough, they will eventually give it another try. Combined with the number of different combinations of hardware and software, it's a necessity for most companies to put beta versions of their software out to the general public, to make sure that the final product they buy works as it's supposed - and usually a company will go under if it doesn't.

Movies, on the other hand (and in some ways similar to games - more on this in a second), don't get that benefit of the doubt.  Part of this is due to the cost of making the film, which, while it has come down, is still considerably expensive to make, takes a lot of time to shoot, and would cost a lot more money to beta-test and reproduce.  Even if you could beta-test this, you'd have to come up with a system that effectively works, and even then is not guaranteed to make everyone happy.  To top it off, not many people are as forgiving on films as they are on software - if they don't like it, chances are it won't get a second chance, no matter how much of the film is redone.  (You do notice, for example, that remaking "Highlander 2" years later didn't help change many opinions...)

The similarities between the two come at the point of games - Games have the benefit of software in that they can and do often have people beta-testing the software before it is released, but they have the same weakness of Movies in that if the story and elements - characters, background, etc - fail to impress a wide audience, it's not going to matter how much you perfect the program, it's going to fail.  Since the story is part of the selling point to many games, it's critical to have that nailed down the same way the story in a movie has to be.

As for effect, it actually will matter - a lot.  A good film being released early to the public, as you suggest, will lose some customers because they won't need to go to the theatre - hey, just got this free download that I've burned to disc, I don't need to shell out the money to pay for the ticket, the popcorn, the soda or anything else the theatre brings, I could just watch it at home!  As for buying it on DVD, some of those people may get it then because they want the extra features or "Just plain want to be honest" - but some people who already downloaded it won't care about any of that and will keep the copy they have.  Granted, a good film will lose less business than a bad film, but over time that business would erode, which would result on movies that cost less to make being made over big-budget films, without the guarantee of any improvement in the most important elements of the film - and in some cases, made worse, because some people won't be able to do as they needed to do to make the film better.

The movie wasn't released as a beta, it wasn't ready for the big screen when it was released online, and because of this what Sanchez did was a crime.  It doesn't matter that he didn't make money off of it or that he got it from someone else - he chose to put it online, and he got caught.  It doesn't matter whether the film was good or bad, what he did was illegal.

(On a side note, maybe the movie industry SHOULD come up with a beta program for the public - that way, the money spent producing a film is spent wisely, and less arguments like this would have to happen.) 

avatar

johnny3144

it's not completely his fault. the people who downloaded the movie and watched it illegally are at fault as much as he is. all he did was uploading the movie onto the internet, it was the downloader's choice to download the movie and watch it free. if he's claim is true about he isn't the source of the leak, then he isn't sololy responsible for the leak and the damage it caused.

 

 

btw... i would actually believe he bought it from some dude on the street.

avatar

lostcause64

What really gets me about this is that no matter what side of the copyright laws you're on, shouldn't the FBI have better things to do than this? You know, things like finding terrorists, child kidnapper/molesters, murders, and crooked politicians. Oh, wait, silly me! That might help the general public, not overpaid private interests...

John

Have you ever wondered why intelligence can normally be found in an individual, but runs screaming in terror from a group? Though, there are exceptions...

avatar

w2ed

No, Sanchez, you're wrong on many levels.

First, if you did buy it from some Korean guy on the street, don't you think the Feds would have tracked that source by now?  Usually a movie made in or for the US is released in the US first before spreading out to other countries.  Even if the guy got it in the U.S., a month is usually too early for them to get it through a video camera in the theatre, as most theatres won't have it.   As for downloading it, don't you think the feds would have found that?  After all, they found you.

As for you not making money on the film, do you really think that matters?  Your upload took away sales from the film - probably not as many as the studio would have you believe, but enough to make a noticeable dent in final ticket sales.  The reason why stems more from WHEN you did it as opposed to the fact that you did it - The studio hadn't released the film yet, so what were you doing with a copy of it? There may be bigger fish to fry, but you're among the biggies because of this.

You're even wrong on being made an example of -  You broke the law, and you did so to a noticeable extreme.  I'd get used to the assraping you're going to get daily from your bunkmate Shebobo, because it's probably the most entertainment you're going to get for a while.

avatar

Foto

w2ed,

  So from what I can tell from your post, you are against movie piracy...but in favor of daily prison rape? Also, I don't know about anyone else, but I couldn't help think of a clown with a name like "Shebobo", and that just makes for a disturbing mental picture.

avatar

Tekzel

Bullshit, what hurt Wolverine's sales was the fact that it was a terrible movie.

Sure, the guy broke the law. It is a law that should carry a minor penalty, not an "assraping from Shebobo daily". It isn't even clearly "stealing" as some people claim. It was copyright infringement. I deny that that equals stealing.

Don't like my opinion, great. This is an awesome world we live in where people have different ones.

avatar

highsidednb

..because the Wolverine movie was a travesty. It was horrible.  Perhaps if there were more "early releases" like this the movie studios would finally learn their lesson and stop making such horrible pieces of excrement.

 As far as the FBI tracking down the Korean guy on the street...LOLZ!  w2ed, perhaps you've never seen the street corner vendors in places like New York City, who show up spontaneously with a blanket wrapped around bootleg dvds.  They drop, spread, and sell their wares for a few minutes, constantly looking out for cops.  After a few minutes, they pick up and leave.  Do you really think the FBI, with all they have to do, would be chasing street corner ghosts?  Get real.  Even if he didn't buy it from a guy on the street there are plenty of critics screeners out there well before a movie's release.  

 I for one believe the guy-he bought it from a dude on the street then uploaded it.  He shouldn't be punished for the uploading.  He could be punished for buying stolen goods, but even that is a stretch.  w2ed, Puritanical Holier-than-thous like yourself need get a sense of humor and relax. Really.  Your bad prison joke in your last paragraph doesn't constitute humor.  

 

avatar

w2ed

Sorry you dislike the joke - I never guaranteed it'd be funny.

I've met a few vendors before, not in NYC, unfortunately, but definitely while on the street.  Most of them don't tape the films directly - they get it online, just like others do.  Shances are, given that the film was NOT released in theatres yet, and was not going to be in theatres for at least a month prior to its "internet release," it couldn't have been recorded in a theatre, as a lot of movies pirated on the net usually are.  It's possible he could have gotten it from a "critics screener" as you suggest, but I would think they'd have some way of tracking that info as well.

He's being punished for the right thing, whether or not you choose to believe it.  He uploaded an unfinished movie onto the internet before it was to be released - that cost the studio money and was, in fact, stealing.  The argument of how much or where he got it from does not matter - what he did with it and when does.

I don't justify either the RIAA or MPAA going and suing people most of the time that they do, usually because most of the time they take it to the extreme.  I do, however, believe in a creator's right to finish and release their projects when they feel they are ready to, and feel strongly that one someone - be it the studio or company, or some halfwit off the streets - pushes the project onto the street before it is done, they should be punished for it.

As for being "Puritanical-holier-than-thou", you're way off the mark.  I'll admit that most of the time that I try to be funny I fall flat, but I do try.  As for relaxing, I'd love to - but I seriously doubt you have the money to give me to do so.  Thanks, but no thanks.

avatar

Havok

 W2ed, I would gladly have your back on this one. Dumbasses who think that piracy is ok, or torrenting a "bad" movie is ok are, well, dumbasses. How low do most peoples moral code go? For goodness sakes even my little 4 year old cousin knows thats wrong!

 

 

CLICK.

avatar

Tekzel

The funny thing here is you seem to indicate that copyright infringement is the lowest point a moral code can go. I think that is a pretty clear reading on the way you worded your reply. I would think there are a LOT of lower points. Stealing physical items. Rape. Murder. Physical assault.

I guess some people are taking gigantic swigs of big media's koolaide.

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.