my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » New laws regarding videotaping in a theatre (Page 1)

This topic comprises 5 pages: 1  2  3  4  5

Author Topic: New laws regarding videotaping in a theatre Jeff Joseph Expert Film Handler Posts: 131 From: Palmdale, CA, USA Registered: Jun 2000 posted 11-13-2003 01:47 AM                        A new bill is being introduced in Congress that mostly has to do with file sharing (such as Kazaa and so on). But it also has a provision that states that anyone who videotapes a movie off of a theatre screen would be committing a felony punishable by up to 5 years in prison. I do agree that such videotaping is morally wrong (and already legally wrong as well), but: 5 years?? Really? Here's the article from CNET: --------------------- Share 'True Crime,' do the time By Declan McCullagh Staff Writer, CNET News.com http://news.com.com/2100-1026-5106684.html Story last modified November 12, 2003, 4:20 PM PST A forthcoming copyright bill backed by key U.S. senators would place file swappers in prison for up to three years if they have a copy of even one prerelease movie in their shared folders. In addition to the prison term, the Artists' Rights and Theft Prevention Act would punish making such movies available on a public "computer network" as a federal felony with a fine of up to $250,000. It would not require that any copyright infringement actually take place. Senators John Cornyn, R-Texas, and Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., plan to introduce the legislation at a press conference in Washington, D.C., on Thursday. Joining them at the event will be actress Bo Derek, Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) President Jack Valenti, and Mitch Bainwol, chairman of the Recording Industry Association of America. Hollywood studios have fretted for years about Internet distribution of prerelease movies, meaning films that have not appeared on DVD or in theaters. Footage of "Star Wars: Episode II," "Tomb Raider" and "The Hulk," has reportedly surfaced on peer-to-peer networks before their commercial distribution. In September, the major studios responded by halting their normal practice of sending DVD "screeners" to Academy Award judges. A copy of the bill seen by CNET News.com, marked "Discussion Draft," represents one of the fiercest attacks yet on peer-to-peer networks from copyright holders' allies on Capitol Hill. The threat of a three-year prison term kicks in when anyone makes an illicit copy of a movie "available on a computer network accessible to members of the public," when the film "was intended for commercial distribution but had not been so distributed at the time." Once the film is commercially distributed, the felony penalties appear to no longer apply. An aide to Cornyn said it is designed to expand the 1997 No Electronic Theft Act, which already makes many forms of copyright infringement a federal felony. The draft bill will "help law enforcement pursue those who are already violating the law by establishing, by presumption, that if someone willfully puts out a pre-release file you have reached the economic harm threshold, which is standard under the NET Act," the aide said in an e-mail message. The aide said the prison terms are "already the law, and if someone distributes a pre-release today and the Justice Department can figure out when that person did it and how, they can (be prosecuted). This legislation simply makes it presumptive that if someone distributes a pre-release that it reaches that level, facilitating law enforcement. The punishment does not change." Peter Jaszi, a professor at American University who teaches copyright law, said he is "deeply troubled" by the wording of the draft legislation, because it does not say any actual copyright infringement must take place--only that the file be available in a shared folder, Web site or FTP (File Transfer Protocol) site. "It says we don't care if anybody got any of these copies," Jaszi said. "We're going to conclude that at least 10 people did. It relieves the copyright owner of having to prove that any violation of their rights actually happened." MPAA spokesman Rich Taylor said "this legislation will go a long way toward targeting one of the most serious contributors to piracy right now, which is the practice of camcording motion pictures. It's the first time the U.S. Senate has had legislation that specifically addresses the threat of camcording." "Piracy for too long has been high-reward and low-risk," Taylor said. "Legislation such as that being introduced tomorrow will go a long way toward changing that equation." The Cornyn-Feinstein bill also creates another federal felony, punishable by up to five years in prison, for using "an audiovisual recording device" in a movie theater to make a copy of a film and boosts civil penalties available to MPAA member companies when suing over prerelease movies placed on the Internet. Sens. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., are co-sponsors of the bill. A related proposal has been introduced in the House of Representatives. It covers surreptitious recording in theaters but does not include the three-year prison term for making a prerelease movie available online.  |  IP: Logged Daryl C. W. O'Shea Film God Posts: 3977 From: Midland Ontario Canada (where Panavision & IMAX lenses come from) Registered: Jun 2002 posted 11-13-2003 01:57 AM                        You're right Jeff, 10 years would be more appropriate. That way when good behaviour and all that other crap is factored in, somebody might actually serve some time.  |  IP: Logged Jeff Joseph Expert Film Handler Posts: 131 From: Palmdale, CA, USA Registered: Jun 2000 posted 11-13-2003 02:04 AM                        Um, I actually meant that I thought this was way too much. Sorry for the misunderstanding. Jeff  |  IP: Logged Thomas Hauerslev Master Film Handler Posts: 451 From: Copenhagen, Denmark Registered: Aug 2000 posted 11-13-2003 02:17 AM                        This can only take place in God´s own country! Studios must review their release policy. Days of cinema-only release is over, and must be exchanged with a day and date multi platform release including internet, DVD, VHS, file sharing AND cinema etc. I bought a R1 DVD of "Finding Nemo" 10 days ago and have no intention of going to the cinema to see it when it opens in Denmark tomorrow. The kids have seen it at least 5 times already. That´s 10 tickets for the price of one DVD!  |  IP: Logged Carl Martin Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1424 From: Oakland, CA, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 11-13-2003 03:47 AM                        oooh, we can't make this problem go away on our own so we'll have mommy and daddy government take care of it for us. maybe tomorrow they will guarantee all our movies will make $50 million because someone must have done something bad if they don't. assholes. carl  |  IP: Logged Mike Olpin Chop Chop! Posts: 1852 From: Dallas, TX Registered: Jan 2002 posted 11-13-2003 03:50 AM                     Sorry, Jeff. I disagree as well. 5 years seems like an appropriate punishment for this type of theft.  |  IP: Logged Daryl C. W. O'Shea Film God Posts: 3977 From: Midland Ontario Canada (where Panavision & IMAX lenses come from) Registered: Jun 2002 posted 11-13-2003 04:01 AM                        You're right Carl, shoplifting shouldn't be illegal either. Individual store owners should have to deal with it themselves. Same goes for any other property owner.  |  IP: Logged Adam Martin I'm not even gonna point out the irony. Posts: 3686 From: Dallas, TX Registered: Nov 2000 posted 11-13-2003 04:18 AM                     Five years sounds appropriate to me. Moving this to Yak sounds appropriate as well.  |  IP: Logged Nate Lehrke Master Film Handler Posts: 396 From: Denver, CO Registered: Oct 2002 posted 11-13-2003 04:40 AM                     I think 5 years is fair, knowing that they will be out in 1 year anyway. They should also be banned from using the Internet & seeing any movie ever again! But in all realality, why keep putting people in our jails that aren't a physical threat to anyone. Fine the hell out of them and take away all there computer and video equipment. Touchy subject though.  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 11-13-2003 06:37 AM                        What if the movie is public domain? Does the five-year penalty still apply? If so, that's crazy. Five years seems a bit harsh, considering that we already have existing laws that provide for civil and criminal penalties for copyright violation. If these were enforced, there would be no need for additional laws. I'm as much opposed to piracy as anyone, but a first-time copyright volation doesn't seem to merit this much jail time, particularly when compared with the extra-short prison terms given to those who commit violence and other much more serious crimes.  |  IP: Logged Steve Guttag We forgot the crackers Gromit!!! Posts: 12814 From: Annapolis, MD Registered: Dec 1999 posted 11-13-2003 06:47 AM                     I think Jeff hit upon the key problem with the legislation regardless of ones views on the actually theft and its punishment.... That is...one can prosicute another without actually proving that they have violated anything. It is presummed that you broke ones copyright. In an "Innocent until proven guilty society...it really smacks as wrong and probably unconsititutional. I too feel that if you did really steal a movie by videotaping or outright duping another form of the product that you should suffer the consequences...including jail time. The idea behind the joil time is that it not only will take your money but deny you the opportunity to do anything productive for yourself for a while. Merely taking the money from someone wealthy would not be a deterrent or real punishment unless you were to write the law such that the financial penalty is a percentage of one's wealth measured in all forms derrived. And then you would have a real sticky anyway as assets would have to be frozen to avoid them leaving the country. This is not a perfect world. If it was, people just wouldn't steal in the first place. Steve  |  IP: Logged John Pytlak Film God Posts: 9987 From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922 Registered: Jan 2000 posted 11-13-2003 09:33 AM                        IMHO, a non-violent economic crime is best punished with a fine and restitution, not prison. If you deliberately hurt or threaten someone physically, you belong in prison. If you hurt them economically, you owe them complete restitution, even if you have to pay them back for the rest of your life. And with a felony conviction, you will pay for the rest of your life, one way or another.  |  IP: Logged Jeff Joseph Expert Film Handler Posts: 131 From: Palmdale, CA, USA Registered: Jun 2000 posted 11-13-2003 11:52 AM                        We really want our tax dollars being spent on prosecuting this stuff? And jailing non-violent offenders? I'm NOT defending videotaping movies in a theatre; I agree it is wrong for all sorts of reasons. But I think our Federal legal system (the FBI, the courts, the U.S. Attorney, prisons) can be put to way more productive use. Especially in an era where there ARE bad guys who want to blow people and buildings up. I think in the long run, copyright is over. Fighting against it will wind up doing what it's done for drugs, prostitution, gambling, and so on. I'm not "for" any of these activities... but I think passing laws and jailing people does not work to stop these activities either. Anything that can be digitized, WILL be digitized. And be available on the Internet for free, more or less. Maybe not today or tomorrow, but at some point. Content providers will fight this (can't say as I blame them, either), but this is a losing battle. One idea: Open big titles world wide on the same day (such as was done with the new "Matrix" film) AND... sell the DVD in the lobby of the theatre for a very low price. Say if you buy 2 tickets to the movie, the DVD is $9.99 That'll stop the video pirates. Why would someone buy a pirated copy when you can get one legit right now for very little money? Later, they can sell the director's cut DVDs (with all the extras) and make still more money. I guess what I'm saying is that content providers have to wake up and realize the world has changed. New laws won't do squat. Jeff  |  IP: Logged Richard Fowler Film God Posts: 2392 From: Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA Registered: Jun 2001 posted 11-13-2003 12:06 PM                     I have a friend who is a film and video distributor in his country and he is now doing a judgement call on some of the titles he releases by offering legal VHS copies in his cinemas, day and date, with the releases.  |  IP: Logged Bill Carter Expert Film Handler Posts: 162 From: Minneapolis, Minnesota Registered: Sep 1999 posted 11-13-2003 12:41 PM                     In an odd way, Copyright actions have always been unique in that you are basically "guilty until proven innocent". If you are sued for copyright infringement, the burden is on YOU to prove your claim of fair-use, public domain, etc. The rights holder doesn't have to demonstrate that your use was improper.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 5 pages: 1  2  3  4  5

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.