Man jailed for recording a movie in a cinema

Raekwon

Ouch! Two years in prison and a fine of $24,730 (€18,170)!

Do people think this was a harsh punishment or do you think that it is fully justified and will serve as a huge deterrent to other people who record movies then sell them on?

I'm leaning towards harsh myself......

A man has been jailed for two years after illegally recording The Dark Knight in a cinema.

Henderson pleaded guilty to criminal copyright infringement after he recorded the film on June 18, 2008.

A US District Judge sentenced Robert Henderson of Grandview, Missouri to two years in prison as well as ordering the man to pay $24,738.:

"This is an appropriate sentence for a very serious crime, and we hope it will serve as a warning to would-be movie thieves that they will face severe consequences for engaging in these activities," said Motion Picture Association of America senior vice president of content protection Mike Robinson.

Link

Mitch Connor

cinema caps suck anyway.

Blackhorse Slim

Depends on the case. For recording a movie it seems a little harsh. For recording a movie and selling it as a bootleg, fair enough.

Kiith

You break the law, you serve your time. Thankfully i havent been caught yet :pac:

rant - Its a shame that some of the thugs in this country can commit serious violent offences and get off with less time then this though - /rant

major bill

poor feck doesnt stand a chance in the showers with that conviction!!!

Hagar

"This is an appropriate sentence for a very serious crime, and we hope it will serve as a warning to would-be movie thieves that they will face severe consequences for engaging in these activities,"

Why so serious?

jaykhunter

Kiith wrote: »

rant - Its a shame that some of the thugs in this country can commit serious violent offences and get off with less time then this though - /rant

Couldn't agree more. The sentence and fine is more of a message to media-pirates rather than a just punishment. Hopefully he appeals and gets both the sentence and fine reduced.

krudler

People have gotten less time for rape ffs , the fine , well deserved, the jail sentence? bit over the top

Anakin.S

He got what he deserved, illegally coping and distributing a movie is IMHO a direct insult to the director, producer actors and anyone else who has worked on the film.

The sentence for rape is a discussion for a different forum not a film forum.

I have never watched or downloaded an illegal copy of a movie and I never will

jhegarty

He should have robbed a copy of the film with a gun , would have got less time.

xoxyx

The jail sentence is a bit much, but I think a heavy fine is about right. Piracy is costing the film, and, more so, the music industry, mega amounts of money. A lot of people think that these movie makers and performers are making enough money that they can stand to lose a few bucks, but it's getting way out of hand and harsh measures will have to be taken to counteract it. I wouldn't be surprised if a zero tolerance approach will be taken in the future for this kind of thing with a precedent set for a large fine, and perhaps a jail term (although I think any jail time should be reserved for those found to be selling or distributing infringing material rather than those who may just be recording for their own use).

WIZE

Meh

He will be out in a couple of months maybe even weeks . Made pay the fine over a couple of years and he will never do it again

Duggy747

Heh, probably wouldn't have been as serious a punishment if he just stole the reel / HDD.

A harsh example made out of him, unsuprisingly, but he won't serve the 2 years.

Still, he knew the implications of camming the movie...........

Region 5 FTW!

krudler

Anakin.S wrote: »

He got what he deserved, illegally coping and distributing a movie is IMHO a direct insult to the director, producer actors and anyone else who has worked on the film.

The sentence for rape is a discussion for a different forum not a film forum.

I have never watched or downloaded an illegal copy of a movie and I never will

Hows the weather up there on your high horse? So you've never downloaded an mp3 or watched an episode of a tv you missed on youtube? or viewed a clip of a movie on there?

BopNiblets

The only sensible way to live in this world is without rules.

Don't get caught next time dude, some judge making an example of him obviously.

Ridley

Raekwon wrote: »

Ouch! Two years in prison and a fine of $24,730 (€18,170)!

Do people think this was a harsh punishment or do you think that it is fully justified and will serve as a huge deterrent to other people who record movies then sell them on?

Deterrent? No way. Harsh?

"Maximum penalty of up to five years in prison and/or a $250,000 fine."

Only if more severe crimes are below that.

Galvasean

I know everyone is trying to be funny etc. but think about the Films Forum Charter before posting guys. Anyone who says they download content illegeally from now on is getting the ban.
Might seem harsh, but it's the rules.

Wolflikeme

Anakin.S wrote: »

He got what he deserved, illegally coping and distributing a movie is IMHO a direct insult to the director, producer actors and anyone else who has worked on the film.

The sentence for rape is a discussion for a different forum not a film forum.

I have never watched or downloaded an illegal copy of a movie and I never will

It's relevant to an argument when you're asking if the punishment fits the crime.

No talking to people like you.

Maybe if the thread was moved you...nah you still wouldn't have a decent argument I bet.

bonerm

major bill wrote: »

poor feck doesnt stand a chance in the showers with that conviction!!!

He'll be alright. He just has to 'copy' (har-har) this scene from the previous movie.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f1j6q4RrYv8

Galvasean

Harsh? A bit. But, let's be honest they have warnings plastered all over the place about what teh possible punishment is. The lad has nobody to blame but himself.

Not The Real Scarecrow

As far as I'm aware the guy was well known for this kind of thing and was into a fair bit of other dodgy stuff.Think he was part of one of the p2p groups so reckon that could explain the big sentence.

pinksoir

Seems about right. Nearly as long as yer man who killed his wife out in the ice planet of Howth. Severity-wise they are comparable crimes...

jaykhunter

I imagine the problem people have with his sentence is that he's being punished for theoretical losses in sales to money that goes to a big faceless organization. You can't prove he was going to give it to the internet. Or that he's bootlegging it. (Unless you raid his house and find said evidence). It's not like he robbed from a person (where you can see the losses).

Just another point I'd like to bring up is that everyone that worked on the film (actors, prop dept, and caterers etc) have been fully paid before this guy brought a camcorder into the cinema. So it's the faceless studio execs and shareholders that are down on this theoretical cash.

pinksoir wrote: »

Nearly as long as yer man who killed his wife out in the ice planet of Howth.

And I thought they smelled bad...on the outside

Galvasean

jaykhunter wrote: »

Just another point I'd like to bring up is that everyone that worked on the film (actors, prop dept, and caterers etc) have been fully paid before this guy brought a camcorder into the cinema. So it's the faceless studio execs and shareholders that are down on this theoretical cash.

Just being pedantic here, but that's not entirely true. Actors, directors and a few others also have royalties for big films. Heck, in smaller budget films pretty much everyone is on deferred payment until the film starts making money.

jaykhunter wrote:

And I thought they smelled bad...on the outside

And can that be the last of the poor taste jokes on said subject?

seanybiker

hope its not axxo.
It is a bit harsh but as some of ye already said, he knew the implications of what he was getting into before he done it. He is being made an example of now in the hope of deterring other people.

jaykhunter

Galvasean wrote: »

And can that be the last of the poor taste jokes on said subject?

You got the Star Wars reference, right? Made me laugh :pac::pac::pac:

Anakin.S

Wolflikeme wrote: »

It's relevant to an argument when you're asking if the punishment fits the crime.

No talking to people like you.

Maybe if the thread was moved you...nah you still wouldn't have a decent argument I bet.

You can't compare rape to movie piracy. Movie piracy is theft so you could compare movie piracy to car theft.

Everyone who has watched a movie either at the cinema or at home on DVD or VHS has seen the warning about illegally coping and distributing films. The person in question was obviously aware of what he was doing, he was aware that it was a crime and he still did it. The piracy warnings before every film states the maximum fine and / or prison sentence you can receive as punishment for stealing the film.

He was caught breaking the law and was punished within the guidelines stated.
Comparing his sentence to that of a car thief, he probably got more time, but more than likely that is because the studio has allot more money to prosecute the thief to the full extent of the law than a normal person would.

I may not have put my argument over well but its better than ‘No talking to people like you’, what do you really mean by that?

Galvasean

jaykhunter wrote: »

You got the Star Wars reference, right? Made me laugh :pac::pac::pac:

Of course I got the Star Wars reference. I'm a big fat nerd who moderates a film forum! :cool:

Just, y'know, certain boards posters know the people involved, so let's just leave it at that.

Ouijaboard

I find comments about how the 'poor' music industry and 'poor' movie industry are so hard up due to counterfeiting to be teeth grinding bull**** of the highest order.

How many years have we paid €25ish euro for a new release DVD or 16ish euro for a new release cd? they've raped us with an obscene markup for decades...a dvd should be about 6-8euro new and cd 4-5 euro. The greedy industry is the real criminal.

Funny aswell I find that many people who download 'cough' illegal stuff are invariably big fans of music and movie in general and they are largely the ones who actually own a large amount of legitimately bought discs aswell simply because they are fans and tend to accumulate bought discs more than 'non' fans who couldnt be bothered downloading or buying!

krudler

Thought this was quite funny, and true:

epad.ie

Ouch, two years is a bit stiff. But in the States, all crimes are taken more seriously than in Ireland. If you were caught here you would be just thrown out of the cinema. Not that you would even to it anyway as with the huge amount of torrent sites out there that give you free movies to download, movies that by the time they reach Ireland they are already out on dvd in the States you would have to be some dumb fella to be recording movies in Irish cinemas!

candy-gal1

Really harsh tbh, being kicked out of the cinema and a small fine might be okay tbh, but seriously its not a huge crime or even a small crime really.
Hes not interfering with anyone so whats the problem?!

epad.ie

It just goes to show you how much pull the film industry have. They are losing billions from piracy and nobody is going to the cinema anymore. People are just stying in watching dvds and I saw a programme recently called blackmarket Ireland and they said that 50% of all dvds people own are copies! Scary stuff!

Mickeroo

If he had a joint on him he would have got life imprisonment knowing what the states are like.

Jail time is ridiculous in fairness, fair enough piracy shouldn't happen and all that but the fact that TDK is one of the most successful films of all time just shows how little piracy actually impacts on the box office.

It's a very serious crime, what he did is in stealing. It's no different than had he broke into your house as you slept and stole your DVD collection. The arguement that the Dark Knight was so successful that piracy didn't hurt it is flawed when it comes to debating the sentencing, should for example someone caught recording Mars Needs Moms get a heavier sentence due to the fact that MNM is a massive financial failure.

Auvers

Anakin.S wrote: »

I have never watched or downloaded an illegal copy of a movie and I never will

ffs :rolleyes:

johnny_ultimate

Just heads up that this thread is actually from 2010.

Auvers wrote: »

ffs :rolleyes:

That's not particularly helpful. What's wrong with someone having some sort of moral stance on the matter? I don't download either, and the only thing that would persuade me to resort to downloads would be if a film was unavailable commercially, but these days that's a rare enough situation.

Zillah

cougar1 wrote: »

How many years have we paid €25ish euro for a new release DVD or 16ish euro for a new release cd? they've raped us with an obscene markup for decades...a dvd should be about 6-8euro new and cd 4-5 euro. The greedy industry is the real criminal.

Do you have the slightest notion of how much it costs to make a film? How in the name of God did you arrive at those numbers?

People put their money into films because they want to see a return. Many films already fail in that regard as it is, and production studios become more and more conservative to ensure their survival. Who is going to pour millions into film production if the profit margin gets slash even further, you?

Auvers

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

That's not particularly helpful. What's wrong with someone having some sort of moral stance on the matter?

I was responding to the arrogance that Anakin.S spewed, its like the poster was actually happy to see someone deprived of their freedom for two years for breaking copyright, punishment does not fit the crime in this case

my own personal view is if I go to the cinema and if I liked the movie, when it comes to Blu-Ray, I download the .mkv as I wont pay for the same thing twice

where is the moral issue in this?

I don't have any qualms whatsoever

Solair

Channel 4's The IT Crowd summed it up best with their spoof anti piracy ad:

Search IT Crowd + Piracy on YouTube. It's mildly rude, so I won't stick it up on boards at this hour!

johnny_ultimate

Quick mod note: An important discussion, but keep the topic general without referencing your individual downloading activities - it ain't allowed on boards!

The system at the moment is certainly imperfect, and the price of brand new DVDs and Blu-Rays can be ludicrously high, often best to wait a month for the price to drop. I personally don't have an issue with cinema costs since I avoid the overpriced popcorn, but I admit for a married couple with children a night in the cinema can be a surprisingly heavy expense. Reality remains, though, that an awful lot of people don't pay for a film in any form, content to simply watch it on a laptop screen. That's the reason IMO why there should be a relatively hardline policy on piracy. Unfortunately, the studios go about it the wrong way, seemingly punishing those of us who pay for films with their embarrassing anti-piracy ads - they'd often persuade me to download just to skip the blasted things on DVD :pac: While I don't agree with their 'hard labour' stance, at least the Japanese ad has a sense of humour about it (sorry for posting this again):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nT7ijnOHEDs

The systems imperfect, especially in Ireland where we don't have well priced legal alternatives like Neflix available to us. But piracy, and apologies for the cliched sentiment, isn't helping anything, barring hopefully giving the studios a bit of cop on to do something useful about its ever increasing prevalence.

filmbuffboy

Whats harsh is the prices cinemas charge these days for tickets & food. No wonder piracy has flourished!!!

i personally still prefer the big screen to bootlegs copies, but I see why people have opted for the latter in droves in recent years.

If cinemas charged FAIRER prices from the get go then mabye piracy wouldnt be the mega issue that it is now.

Feel bad for the guy, but at the same time, he knew what he was doing was wrong, and he got caught. He took the risk, hes made his bed so now he can lie in it!

Goldstein

epad.ie wrote: »

They are losing billions from piracy and nobody is going to the cinema anymore.

It's a shame noone goes to the cinema anymore alright.

indough

Yeah just think, if they made that much money after piracy, then how much was lost to those who not only knowingly steal from hard working artists, but also think they have the right to pick their punishment when they get caught doing it?

CrackisWhack

Anakin.S wrote: »

He got what he deserved, illegally coping and distributing a movie is IMHO a direct insult to the director, producer actors and anyone else who has worked on the film.

The sentence for rape is a discussion for a different forum not a film forum.

I have never watched or downloaded an illegal copy of a movie and I never will

Ye the poor directors, producers and actors, I feel terrible that they probably only get $30 million dollars a movie, as opposed to the $85 million they deserve.

Simian!

I can't believe there's so much debate on the morality of this! If you sneak a fúcking camera in to record something, that everyone else pays for, then you rightly get punished for it - it's copyright theft ffs. The severity of the ban is is apt as far as I'm concerned. And while I'm not totally innocent, I don't expect illegal downloads to be as available as they are now for very much longer.

mikhail

Goldstein wrote: »

It's a shame noone goes to the cinema anymore alright.

<image removed for length>

Those figures are not adjusted for inflation. By that measure, the M50 cost as much as WWII. Cinema attendances are way down over time.
http://boxofficemojo.com/alltime/adjusted.htm

Theboinkmaster

CrackisWhack wrote: »

Ye the poor directors, producers and actors, I feel terrible that they probably only get $30 million dollars a movie, as opposed to the $85 million they deserve.

Erm not all movie makers are making millions, there are plenty working for free or very little money.

And what about the canteen lady in MGM who is making mimum wage, how do you think she gets paid.

Cop on.

Nodferatu

a murderer or a rapist wouldnt get as harsh a punishment as that! thats the hilarious thing about it, i just go onto hmv website check out the latest dvd releases then go download the film torrents. who buys dvd's or pirate films anymore to be honest?

Nodferatu

Nodferatu wrote: »

a murderer or a rapist wouldnt get as harsh a punishment as that! thats the hilarious thing about it, i just go onto hmv website check out the latest dvd releases then go download the film torrents. who buys dvd's or pirate films anymore to be honest?

Yes two years in prison and a fine is certainly far worse than the average run of the mill rapist or murderer would get for their crime. After all it's not like this sentence was given in a country where murderers are routinely executed and rapists can face decades in prison.

The US judicial system is not like ours, more often than not serious crimes result in serious punishments and no amount of letters from the parish priest will see a judge go lightly.

CrackisWhack

Theboinkmaster wrote: »

Erm not all movie makers are making millions, there are plenty working for free or very little money.

And what about the canteen lady in MGM who is making mimum wage, how do you think she gets paid.

Cop on.

Do you think MGM will double her pay if they double their profits?