California Makes Recording in Cinema a Crime 558
Maharet writes "According to this article in the Sacramento Bee, recording devices will be outlawed and you will be able to make a citizen's arrest if you observe someone recording a movie. I don't advocate piracy, but this just looks to me like industry pressure (although the MPAA, et. al. are not mentioned). What if my cellphone has a camera? My favorite quote from an LA city attorney: 'If you carry one of these into a movie theater, you have to ask yourself, "Do I feel lucky?"'"
The real question here is... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:The real question here is... (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't think we should be promoting vigilantism so studio bigwigs can rake in huge salaries. I especially object to this law because it's based on the fallacious belief that recordings made in movie theaters are the source of most illegal copies. After all, didn't the MPAA try to ban all screeners [slashdot.org] because of piracy? And don't forget about the study [hollywood.com] which said that 77% of all pirated movies came from industry insiders.
So... why are we encouraging citizens to possibly harrass or harm others for something that is not the primary culprit in economic losses?
Can I make a citizen's arrest of tech CEOs who outsource jobs?
Huh? (Score:3, Insightful)
I hate when Slashdotters pull this. It's the excuse for everything. MP3 piracy? The RIAA should adapt a more realistic business model! Studios putting out movies in theaters but--heaven forbid--don't want people filming it to put on the Internet? They need to adapt to a more realistic business model!
This is really a non-story. Yes, filming a movie in the theater to put online is wrong. No sane person should be arguing against this, unless you w
Re:Huh? (Score:3, Interesting)
Music swapping will probably never die, but it also was around before the industry was making a big stink. I remember having about 200 cassette tapes, none originals back when I was a kid. About half were radio rips and the rest were copies from friends. Back then, a radio copy was about the same quality as a store bought cassette. Not that we c
Re:The real question here is... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Woot! Police state coming along nicely (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Woot! Police state coming along nicely (Score:5, Insightful)
now, i don't like the mpaa as much as the next guy but... i don't get the outrage. i mean, if you go to a concert and record it on a reel-to-reel hidden in yr trench coat (i admit i'm thinking of the 70's here) you can be charged.
remember how the grateful dead were conidered "radical" because the permitted "bootleg" copies of their shows? they were radical because the standard response to recording a concert was to charge the bootlegger.
how are movies any different? how is this response "new"?
Re:Woot! Police state coming along nicely (Score:3, Interesting)
Lets compare it to a musical performance. The music in concert sounds very different than the studio tracks. The movie? Its the same every time. If you appreciate the difference between studio/live, this makes a concert bootleg a very different product. A bootleg theatre reco
Re:Woot! Police state coming along nicely (Score:3)
Well, just how long do you think it will be before such a law is quietly extended such that cinema includes home theater?
Well... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Well... (Score:4, Funny)
That in and of itself is a crime.
Another well thought idea (Score:5, Insightful)
Okay, first off is this really wise? I mean do you really want people make citizens arrests over movie recording. I mean if I saw someone with a cell phone equipped camera chatting during a movie I be tempted to citizen arrest them to shut them up.
Then again maybe this is a good idea.
Re:Another well thought idea (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Another well thought idea (Score:5, Funny)
Cell Phone } baling, baling, baling...
Rent-a-cop w/ gun } blam, blam, blam...
Innocent bystander } shriek! faint.
dewd, pass me the popcorn, this is getting intense.
Re:Another well thought idea (Score:5, Funny)
HTH HAND
Re:Another well thought idea (Score:5, Funny)
This is California we're talking about after all...
-B
drive (Score:5, Funny)
Re:drive (Score:2)
Re:drive (Score:3, Funny)
Something like this [centurytheaters.com]...when the Californians aren't losing their shirts in the casinos, they can head up to Rancho & Carey and cam a flick. :-)
Re:drive (Score:4, Funny)
You got the car? I got the road rage. (Score:5, Insightful)
Fucking dots, more bullshit, for what, for nothing. No one records movies at the movies anymore, least of all in the US. And even if they did, no one would want their ass copy because it's so easy to get a better one.
And then the fucking ad campaign. Give me a break. Never in the histroy of film has a set dresser, gaffer, or best boy electric ever recieved back end points for their contribution to the film making process. Everytime I see one of their grossly dishonest emotional pleas it makes me want to pirate movies on principle! They should all be shot in the head for being lying sacks of shit. And their children should be sold into prosititution. I consider myself a 'moderate.'
Re:You got the car? I got the road rage. (Score:4, Insightful)
I think you are taking that concept a little too literally.
Every time a media product is pirated takes away some of the incentive for the production company to make more. If they *do* make more, they will likely employ the same people who did a good job the last time around. If they don't, those people have to find something else to pay their bills.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:You got the car? I got the road rage. (Score:5, Insightful)
You ARE ripping off the company. If you really weren't going to buy it or weren't interested, you wouldn't even use it/hear it/listen to it. The way you are using your argument (claiming that you never buy stuff) is nothing more than an excuse. If anything, you are simply behaving the way you do because the technologies that permit you to share/enjoy exist. For instance, if you couldn't copy/download a movie, or song, or whatever, you wouldn't even be using it.
Consider the following example. I'll never buy a Ferrari. But let me just take it out for a spin. I'll return it in the same condition.
Or how about software? Do you extend that view to software too? Should anyone be paying for ANY software?
The fact is that a download does not constitute a lost sale. It *may*, but it does'nt necessarily mean a sale was lost.
Yes, some sales WILL be lost; some won't. Yes, the record companies exaggerate their figures. But it doesn't change the point.
One last point: the main effect of pirating movies and lost revenues that may occur from it will be a reduction of top-tier movie stars. Regardless of what these bozo's in the ad campaigns tell you, there jobs are not really at risk. You need light guys, you need sound guys, you need reel guys, stunt guys, etc. You *have* to have them. You do not need to pay an actor $25-million instead of $22.5 million, or $20 million, or $10 million.
That is NOT true under capitalism. Everyone will be impacted. Remember, any wage is permitted under capitalism (although government intervention and worker movements impact this somewhat via minimum wage laws, etc). If a company loses money, they won't just cut the high salary personnel! They generally do across the board cuts. Layoff people, make them work harder, lower their wages, etc. Have you looked at other industries? Who loses when a company struggles? Do CEOs lose their jobs, or get their wages cut?
In fact, if I knew that my pirating would induce a Tom Cruise or Bruce Willis or Susan Sarandon to lose a few million bucks over a course career, I'd be doing it for sport.
Apart from the fact that you are either cruel or jealous (like the latter), you can already do that. If you pirate movies, you WILL impact these actors (along with countless other workers). Of course, you need to get a movement going but it is quite within the power. There are already many right-wing anti-Hollywood movements that boycott.
Sivaram Velauthapillai
Re:You got the car? I got the road rage. (Score:3, Interesting)
I'll also tell you that I consider those who pirate the garbage more honorable than those who pay money into the coffers of the RIAA and the MPAA.
Those who corrupt the legislatures, those who buy their own laws without heed to the damage they do to others, they have no moral right to live, much less to earn a profit. Of course, by the time you can afford to buy your own laws, you don't worry excessively about morality. You've
Re:You got the car? I got the road rage. (Score:3, Insightful)
When you get into the electronic medium, things are simply different. The fact that you say 'I wasn't going to pay for it anyways' doesn't excuse theivery. Hell, MOST thieves who break into cars/houses aren't really going to actually buy any of the stuff they steal either. That's why their STEAL
There's a good reason! (Score:5, Funny)
In Aahnold's Calleefoneeah, tha cinema should record yoo!
Re:There's a good reason! (Score:5, Insightful)
Case and point, he's severely pissed off many in Vancouver (BC, Canada) because he's decided to pump "local jobs in the film industry," "keeping it American blah blah."
Creating jobs might not be a bad thing, but anything to do with movies from an ex movie-star certainly seems to be something of a prejudiced agenda.
p.s. Any chances the RIAA helped fund Ahhhnold's campaign?
Re:There's a good reason! (Score:4, Insightful)
Well, duh, let's see. Arnold is worth several hundred million dollars, which presumably funded his campaign. Where did that enormous amount of money come from? Could it have come from his movie career? Salaries from movie companies?
P.S. The RIAA is music. MPAA is movies.
Re:There's a good reason! (Score:5, Informative)
"What if my cellphone has a camera?" (Score:5, Funny)
But what about PDAs? (Score:5, Insightful)
(although the MPAA, et. al. are not mentioned).
Wow, do the SUBMITTERS not read the story anymore? I quote from it:
The effort is aimed mainly at camcorders, which account for 92 percent of all illegal copies of films that appear for sale over the Internet and are sold on street corners, according to the Motion Picture Association of America. The MPAA is seeking to enact similar laws in other states and is backing an effort to make the illegal taping of a film a federal felony.
Heh.
And a final note, I've
Re:But what about PDAs? (Score:3, Informative)
I'm not sure about over the internet, but in many a major city in China you can find them for sale (cheaply) without too much trouble. Some are screeners, some theatre rips.
Re:But what about PDAs? (Score:4, Funny)
If you are not watching the ads at the beginning of the move YOU ARE STEALING. We'll just have to strap you down and tape your eyes open.
Re:But what about PDAs? (Score:5, Informative)
3rd generation iPods (recording feature is part of the rom.)
Pretty much every PDA manufactured after 1999.
All cellphones (if you use the transmitter interpretation that I put out above.)
In other words, it's ALREADY illegal to use a camcorder to tape a film, if they tell you to stop (duh.) So what is this new law going to do?Very interesting to note (from the text of the bill [ca.gov]):
[State-mandated local program meaning a law that requires enforcement, the cost of which may or may not be reimbursed by the state - this bill offers no such reimbursement] In this instance, a recording device is defined as:
I think we need a new law protecting the citizens of California from MORE LAWS.
Good (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Good (Score:5, Interesting)
"The law, which was signed by former Gov. Gray Davis, was written to also include future technologies and could be enforced against people recording all or parts of a film with a tape recorder, handheld computer or even a cell phone."
Reading the article = good
Re:Good (Score:5, Interesting)
Now I'm hearing one camp that says I'm a criminal and another camp that says it should be ok to merely poses the camera phone and not use it. Where's the camp saying, hey, this is not significant copyright violation and I should be able to do this?
I don't feel any more a criminal than guy using a VCR at home to tape HBO. I captured a few frames of a film for my own personal use. I payed to see the film. My recording was done in a way that didn't bother any of the other patrons (very important to me). This is fair and it should be legal.
People should stop buckling under this "no use is fair use" mentatlity hoisted on us by large copyright holders. Stand up and demand your right to fair personal-use copying!
TW
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
I think it would be preferable for the industry to attempt to alter the law in a more straightforward manner. Penalties could be set, or certain types of infringements could be made felonies. This way, there would be debate about whether it was the right thing, and the end result would be a more consistent system. Instead, we're adding a new special-case law with little real discussion. The result is probably the same, except the laws become more complex.
Re:Bad (Score:5, Insightful)
Consider the following. I know from first hand experience that many people visiting NYC carry those digital video recorders wherever they go, because they want to record the sights and sounds of the city. I also imagine that many people touring the city in such a manner would like to see a movie while out on the town without having to return to their hotel or apartment. This type of law would turn a common tourist into a common criminal.
Just another instance of law-makers not fully thinking through the laws they are creating.
Good - for what? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Good - for what? (Score:3, Insightful)
The simple extension of this is: everyone is born a criminal and deserves to be locked up. Based on some arbitrary sliding scale, those people who are more criminal than others at any given will actualy be sent to jail.
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
What happens if you got off a train in a city, went to a camera store and bought a camera that you couldn't buy in your upstate store and then went to see a film. Are you guilty of anything? No. This law says that you are. If you recorded the film while you were there and left with the media, then yes, you are guilty of copyright theft, but the law should not suppose criminality on otherwise legal behaviour (by definition).
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
Movie theaters are private property and the mangement can remove anyone at will.
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
- do some daytime shopping. Hey cool, new video camera. Just what I want. Thanks. I'll have it.
- go see the latest film with my friend while I'm here (carrying new video camera still in box, with receipt in plastic bag).
I'm now committing a crime. What the FUCK's up with that??Still, if I leave with a camera fill of copyright protect material then yes, I'm breaking the law. But how many rights do we have to forfeit before the MPAA are happy?
Re:Good (Score:2)
False (Score:4, Insightful)
And of course, carrying a camcorder (small ones typically weigh a pound or so) is somewhat geeky now, but what happens when they become the size of cigarette lighters? Panasonic already has a solid state one the size of a cigarette pack [panasonic.com], though it records only 10 minutes of DVD-quality video so it won't hold a whole movie. That 10 minute limitation won't last, and it can already hold a whole movie at lower resolution.
There's a simple cure. They should have security checkpoints with baggage X-rays at every movie theater, just like at airports. That will really solve the MPAA problem once and for all, since ticket sales will drop to zero.
Re:Good (Score:5, Insightful)
the cams that are made for sale(in _real_piracy_) fashion are done by folk that work in the cinemas anyways(and most likely in asia area). not by some random movie goer.
Re:Good (Score:3, Funny)
1) Politely ask people not to record a movie. If you catch someone doing it, remove and seize the film (or erase the flash card/HDD/whatever) and may be ban that person from your theatre.
2) 10 million dollar fine and 5 years in jail for bringing a recorder into the movie theatre. Death penalty for repeat offenders.
One course of action is adequate, another one is not.
Talk about FUD (Score:4, Insightful)
Regardless of where one stands on this issue, stupid comments like this one only diminish the arguments of those who agree with the parent. So WHAT if your cellphone has a camera ? Unless you're USING YOUR CELLPHONE TO RECORD THE MOVIE, there is no problem. But I guess it sure sounds good. Yet another example of how FUD can come from BOTH sides of an argument.
Re:Talk about FUD (Score:3, Insightful)
Overused quote without recognition of its meaning (Score:3, Informative)
Here comes the quote, from _The Media Lab: Inventing the Future at MIT_ by Stewart Brand (1987):
"Information wants to be free because it has become so cheap to distribute, copy, and recombine -- too cheap to meter. It wants to be expensi
Re:Talk about FUD (Score:2, Informative)
True. For now. But that's the danger of this and all slippery slopes. When they start banning all cell phones in theatres, and losing them mysteriously when you check them in, you might be as pissed off about this as this person is now.
Re:Talk about FUD (Score:5, Informative)
According to the article (but who reads that?) mere possesion of a video recording device in a theatre is sufficent to create the possiblity of arrest and prosecution.
So, as another poster asked, what happens if you forget to take your camcorder OUT of your car when you go to the drive-in (and yes, there are still drive-ins in California)?
Welcome to the NFL (Score:4, Insightful)
There was a Canon commercial for a high end digital camera and the guy taking pictures at a football game. Pretty bad advertising considering that very expensive camera would be confiscated if you took it anywhere near an NFL game.
It's not surprising they're cracking down in the same manner on theaters now.
"So, as another poster asked, what happens if you forget to take your camcorder OUT of your car when you go to the drive-in (and yes, there are still drive-ins in California)?"
You explain to the nice security guard that you had no intention of using it to film anything and if they ask, you hand it over to them to hold it for you until you're ready to leave.
Same as they do with sports games.
This is a non-issue.
"is sufficent to create the possiblity of arrest and prosecution"
That's a definite maybe.
If you're in such a situation, don't be an ass and cooperate. They're not out to get you. They're out to prevent you from recording anything. Big difference.
One involves a box in the office to hold your phone while you watch the movie. The other involves a judge and 12 of your new friends.
Ben
NEW LAW!!! (Score:3, Funny)
I might be being facetious... or not...
'bout time (Score:2, Interesting)
Citizen's arrest (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Citizen's arrest (Score:2)
So I don't see this as an incentive to not report them. If they have the money to throw around on the ridiculous cost of movies, and wanted to watch it in the cinema rather than a poor cam job, then I'm sure they would rather the DVD anyway.
I am totally supporting this initiative (Score:5, Funny)
Thank goodness eDonkey won't be flooded with these crappy versions of movies anymore. Straight to DVD Screener rip, baby!
Bring your hand-gun instead (Score:3, Insightful)
Xix.
What if I have a photographic memory? (Score:5, Insightful)
An Actor as Governor (Score:3, Interesting)
Quality (Score:5, Insightful)
And please stop talking about cellphones with cameras. Those usually have cheapass cmos image sensors and optics, they can barely catch a face right.
Re:Quality (Score:4, Funny)
Oh, wait...
Screw Your Neighbor (Score:5, Interesting)
My point? There are many opportunities to copy the films, and if one small, low-tech method is cut out, it will serve to make the other avenues more lucrative.
The more important point, what's with the "turn in your neighbor to the movie cops" deal? That is one sick society.
-cp-
President Bush to Liberate Alaska [alaska-freegold.com]
"Do I feel lucky?" (Score:5, Funny)
Star Wars - The Elden Days... (Score:5, Funny)
It wasn't a microcassette recorder either - it was the BIG honking black Radio Shack model - the one that doubled as a data storage unit for the TRS-80. Amazing I got away with that.
Years later I could still recite pretty much the whole movie by heart. Thank God for those T-120 tapes!
Re:Ok there, "Rerun" (Score:3, Funny)
Bounty (Score:2)
(Hopes no MPAA people read Slashdot)
The Body Electric (Score:4, Interesting)
The bill text (Score:5, Informative)
Re:The bill text - Seems Reasonable (Score:5, Insightful)
similar bill passed in Ohio (Score:5, Informative)
Either way, sounds like the MPAA is lobbying hard....
HB 179 [state.oh.us]
Sec. 2913.07. (A) As used in this section:
(1) "Audiovisual recording function" means the capability of a device to record or transmit a motion picture or any part of a motion picture by means of any technology existing on, or developed after, the effective date of this section.
(2) "Facility" includes all retail establishments and movie theaters.
(B) No person, without the written consent of the owner or lessee of the facility and of the licensor of the motion picture, shall knowingly operate an audiovisual recording function of a device in a facility in which a motion picture is being shown.
(C) Whoever violates division (B) of this section is guilty of motion picture piracy, a misdemeanor of the first degree on the first offense and a felony of the fifth degree on each subsequent offense.
(D) This section does not prohibit or restrict a lawfully authorized investigative, law enforcement, protective, or intelligence gathering employee or agent of the government of this state or a political subdivision of this state, or of the federal government, when acting in an official capacity, from operating an audiovisual recording function of a device in any facility in which a motion picture is being shown.
(E) Division (B) of this section does not limit or affect the application of any other prohibition in the Revised Code. Any act that is a violation of both division (B) of this section and another provision of the Revised Code may be prosecuted under this section, under the other provision of the Revised Code, or under both this section and the other provision of the Revised Code.
Movie pirating is mostly harmless. (Score:2)
Finally, an answer! (Score:5, Insightful)
you will be able to make a citizen's arrest if you observe someone recording a movie
I woke up today and was wondering to myself, "How can I work for the MPAA for free today?" And here it is.
So if I see someone recording a movie, I'm supposed to incur the massive legal risks involved involved in having them arrested as a citizen. Got it. Ri-ight. And if the charges don't stick, oh yeah, I'm the one slapped with the false arrest suits.
That's a pretty good deal, but I think I have a better one: How about I give them the finger, and they pay their own damn business expenses?
I often use my brain as a recording device. (Score:5, Funny)
Remembering is copying. Copying is theft.
RTFA (Score:4, Interesting)
The law, which was signed by former Gov. Gray Davis, was written to also include future technologies and could be enforced against people recording all or parts of a film with a tape recorder, handheld computer or even a cell phone.
So no matter how rediculous it is now to think of someone trying to record a movie with a cellphone using today's technology, this law makes it illegal to carry your cell phone into the theater.
The new law, which takes effect Jan. 1, allows moviegoers to make a citizen's arrest if they see someone in a theater with a recording device.
Note that all you need to do is be CARRYING a recording device such as a cell phone, and you are breaking the law. It's a dumb law. Our legislature run amuck. Terrible, terrible restriction on our freedoms.
I may hate when you carry a cell phone in a theater, but I will fight for your right to do so.
Re:What "right" would that be? (Score:4, Informative)
"You check your rights at the door." No, you give up no rights when you enter a private establishment. In fact it would be illegal for someone to require you to. However, the owner of said establishment reserves the right to expel you as they wish (although use of force is a crime, often abused and often overlooked).
This situation is different. It does infringe on your rights as a public citizen and goes far beyond expulsion from private property - it involves expulsion from public life: imprisonment.
Considering... (Score:3, Funny)
Arms race (Score:3, Funny)
Next up: camera eyepatches with the storage hidden in the included stuffed parrot. Arrrrrr mateys!
--
Won't reduce piracy (Score:5, Informative)
Besides, if people are recording the movies in theatres, then won't the large reddish brown spots that flash in the middle of the picture [slashdot.org] make them useless and unviewable?
Camcorders? Get real (Score:4, Insightful)
Who do they think they're kidding? The professional duplicators work from the highest-quality originals they can get (be they original movie reels, DVDs, whatever). The amateurs might be sneaking a camcorder into a theater, but given how easy it is to get a good copy online, there's little point.
In short, I call shennanigans on this theory that there's an army of pirates armed not with swords but minicams, poised to destroy the industry.
Besides, copyright infringement is already illegal (that's the 'infringement' part). So what's the point of passing this new law? To produce the illusion of doing something, at the expense of everyone involved, as far as anyone can tell.
Yeesh... (Score:3, Funny)
Who needs a camcorder? (Score:5, Interesting)
As a proud and canny dumpster diver, I reached in and grabbed an entire reel of 'Road to Perdition' w/ Tom Hanks.
It's currently sitting in a Hefty bag, not ten feet from me right now.
What to do with it? I don't know. I thought about eBaying it, but a pal told me it's illegal to even have it. Anyone know?
I'd like to off it, but I don't know what to do with it. As it's not Tom's earlier work (Bosom Buddies, Mazes & Monsters), I don't care too much.
I may just light it on fire, and watch the SOB flashburn. Or, maybe I'll needle the MPAA somehow. Any ideas?
I'd love to kill two birds with one stone, and strangle Jack Valenti with it. That would be the ultimate irony, and make great 'Must See TV' as well.
What the law actually says (Score:3, Informative)
Question - did anyone actually bother to read the bill [ca.gov]? Quoting:
Every person who operates a recording device in a motion picture theater while a motion picture is being exhibited, for the purpose of recording a theatrical motion picture and without the express written authority of the owner of the motion picture theater...This does not cover talking on a camera-equipped cellphone, working on a camera-equipped PDA, or even having a camcorder in your purse. The law only prohibits pointing the camera at the screen while a movie is being shown. It's a very narrowly tailored law that addresses what it seeks to address - piracy.
Speaking of which - take a look at VCDQuality [vcdquality.com] and note the number of movies that show up as "CAM" or "Telesync" first, and then tell me camcording in a movie theater isn't occurring.
Then, skip on over to VCDMovieBox.com [vcdmoviebox.com] and note the movies being offered for sale that are obviously camcords (Master and Commander, Brother Bear, Elf, etc....
WE NEED MORE LAWS! (Score:4, Interesting)
One wonders how many more crimes can be invented by ambitious politicians.
Is there a petition somewhere out there which proposes an immidiate freeze on all penal-code legislation? What would Slashdotter's opinions be on such a petition?
Arnold's Response... (Score:5, Funny)
I think that says it all.
Citizen's Arrest (Score:4, Informative)
Camera phones (Score:3)
Then turn it off and keep it in your fucking pocket. I don't believe that this law is going to mandate pat downs and strip searches.
When I went to see Freddy Vs. Jason some asshole kept sending and receiving text messages. He kept right on doing it for about 20 minutes until I had enough and yelled at him like he was a child in front of a theater full of people.
Yes, I too have a cell phone. Yes, I too have a PDA. You know what I do when I am in a movie theater? I turn them the fuck off! Have a little consideration for everyone else.
LK
Broadcasting is OK? (Score:3, Interesting)
A short range video transmitter with a mini 3CCD (or even one chip) camera is *not* a recording device. Recording video image from the receiver outside theater can be morally questionable. Some good people in CA might be thinking that they can finally make a good use of X10 security cam.
Look to the future (Score:5, Interesting)
Errr... (Score:3, Insightful)
Feeling lucky"? (Score:3, Funny)
If you are too young to understand this quote, you need an education in Clint Eastwoodisms. Fire up Kazaa and download all the Dirty Harry films.
why I'm conflicted over movie piracy (Score:4, Insightful)
This is the best argument [nytimes.com] I've seen about the idiocy of modern day copyright.
(I found the link via google's news portal and they have some sort of agreement with the NY Times, so you shouldn't have to register to see the article.)
I agree that going into a movie theater and taping a movie is wrong. However, I don't like idea that Joe Moviegoer gets to play cop. That's scary. What happens if I go to a party and someone plays a DVD or rented movie for their friends? What if new laws get written that allow a guest to place the host under citizen arrest? Is this the future? Will the MPAA|RIAA grant them police rights as well? That's why this is a real dangerous slippery slope. Oh but wait, you say that's silly. My point is that MPAA|RIAA isn't going after movie pirates because it's morally wrong. They're going after movie pirates because of money. The movie industry threw a fit about libraries and movie rentals as well.
From the article:
Clutching a palm-sized camcorder in one hand, Delgadillo paraphrased the movie character "Dirty Harry," portrayed by actor Clint Eastwood. "If you carry one of these into a movie theater, you have to ask yourself, 'Do I feel lucky?'"
This is the kind of bravado that scares people. I mean, why don't you take this same effort and track down some serious criminals. It's the same argument against public cameras, data mining personal info, and extensive airport security. No one likes having big brother watching them. Most people probably have been hassled by someone who has taken trivial laws too far (i.e. zero tolerance in schools run amok). Apparently, kids are supposed to run in the other direction if someone starts a fight with them in school. The school has a right, if not a "duty" to hand my a kid a condom, but if I send them to school with Tylenol well, I've practically commited a felony
The article I've linked to makes the point that the battle over copyright law is nothing new. The reason they "get away with it" is because they essentially have a special privilege/ protection to do so. There were a lot of similar arguments about VCRs destroying the future of the movie industry. It didn't.
I guess that's why I'm so conflicted about this. I agree that file sharing is wrong, but I hate RIAA|MPAA because they're lobbyists with deep pockets who have done nothing but hock extreme violence and excessive sexuality. I don't like the fact that we live in a country where corporations write law. Yet these lobbyists manage to get more legislative action than people seeking things like education reform. Sorry, if I don't feel like helping the MPAA|RIAA do it's dirty work.
Re:I don't understand how this can be. (Score:2, Informative)
No right to record everything you see... (Score:3, Interesting)
As to the issue of cell phones with camera's, I think they are a horrible idea. The are prime to invade the privacy rights of others. I can just imagine horny teenage boys taking photos of women in dressing rooms. Or in locker rooms. Someone can pretend they are chatting on the cell phone, and then the moment you turn you back on them, ZAPP they get a picture of your rear. Or jelous girlfriends. The possibilities of humiliating photo's ar
Re:No right to record everything you see... (Score:3, Insightful)
When a camera costs $0.05, takes a megapixel frame, 30x per second, and a week of media costs only $0.05, why wouldn't you record just about everything around you?
Assuming Moore's law continues, (and it has for 30 years!) we're only a decade or two from that point!
There's an interesting article [wired.com] which for me was the first the make it all clear. Privacy as we once new it will cease to exist in
Re:I don't understand... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:...if I carry a cell phone with a camera ... (Score:3, Insightful)
So the guy was an asshole and made some noise in the theatre, and now he's a felon.