| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/23/2005 09:51:04 AM · #1 |
shooting for the lighting challenge! lol
Man Snaps Pics Of Star Wars, Faces Fines
POSTED: 10:12 pm CDT May 20, 2005
SAN FRANCISCO -- The new Star Wars movie is apparently causing some fans to give themselves over to the dark side of the Force.
A California man was busted Thursday for taking snapshots with his digital camera of "Star Wars: Episode Three - Revenge of the Sith." He was given a citation.
A woman in the Del Oro Theater in Grass Valley complained to theater staff that the man kept bumping her chair. When they walked up to him, employees spotted the man with the camera.
When the movie was over, the man walked out of the theater, but some of the staff followed him. Other moviegoers say they saw him taking pictures during the movie.
Locally, the man could be fined up to $2,500 and be given jail time for a misdemeanor. But a new federal law could mean heavier prison time for such violators.
Message edited by author 2005-05-23 09:51:54. |
|
|
|
05/23/2005 10:10:01 AM · #2 |
Shannon, the things people do never seem to amaze me. What were they thinking????????? I hope they are not from DPC as well.
|
|
|
|
05/23/2005 10:35:48 AM · #3 |
| Was he using a Sith megapixel camera? ;-) |
|
|
|
05/23/2005 10:44:25 AM · #4 |
| Please post the source of the article you're citing with a link. |
|
|
|
05/23/2005 11:29:24 AM · #5 |
Here's a google news list of articles about this incident:
|
|
|
|
05/23/2005 11:35:27 AM · #6 |
Originally posted by Olyuzi:
Please post the source of the article you're citing with a link. |
I read this on a local news website...here is the link...
Man Snaps Pics Of Star Wars, Faces Fines |
|
|
|
05/23/2005 11:57:56 AM · #7 |
Grass Valley? That's my neck of the woods!
|
|
|
|
05/23/2005 12:36:34 PM · #8 |
What would he possibly do with those shots? They probably look like crap anyway. Speaking of taking shots of Sith, many people in the audience of my viewing took photos of the screen with their cell... I'm one of those people that get obsessive about copyright infringement on film, but honestly, if it doesn't disrupt the audience (if the man hadn't hit the back of the woman's chair), what does it matter if someone takes a few still shots? But don't think I'm condoning and encouraging...
Message edited by author 2005-05-23 12:37:26. |
|
|
|
05/23/2005 01:14:41 PM · #9 |
Because of my involvement with the industry I am in, I don't like any sort of pirates. Still, or video.
It has the potential to take my source of income away.
Because of the tech out there it is hard to police for pirates. That is a shame.
Sorry this next sentence may upset people, but ya know I have kids to feed,a mortgage to pay just like you, but I think pirates should be sent to jail for a long period of time, and if any other way of dicipline could be introduced, I think I would be for that too.
|
|
|
|
05/23/2005 01:41:07 PM · #10 |
| The part that I don't understand is what good are still shots of a movie? If he had been caught with a camcorder atleast that would make sense to me lol. |
|
|
|
05/23/2005 01:59:18 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by swinging_johnson_v1:
Because of my involvement with the industry I am in, I don't like any sort of pirates. Still, or video.
It has the potential to take my source of income away.
Because of the tech out there it is hard to police for pirates. That is a shame.
Sorry this next sentence may upset people, but ya know I have kids to feed,a mortgage to pay just like you, but I think pirates should be sent to jail for a long period of time, and if any other way of dicipline could be introduced, I think I would be for that too. |
As I understand it, the first, and almost instantaneous, pirated copies came from within "the industry." Maybe you should work to heal your own kind before hassling the fanatic who is simply trying to get a still shot as a souvenir. |
|
|
|
05/23/2005 02:09:12 PM · #12 |
| I just heard this morning on the news about bootlegged DVD's in another country of the new movie but it had sub-titles for a totally different movie. that would suck...guess you get what you pay for |
|
|
|
05/23/2005 02:13:58 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by Shannon:
The part that I don't understand is what good are still shots of a movie? If he had been caught with a camcorder atleast that would make sense to me lol. |
They make prints, posters, sell the images to their buddies and give them away to others, post them on their websites, amongst other things I am sure. This all takes away $ from the copyright holder as the recipiants no longer must buy the images. |
|
|
|
05/23/2005 02:24:27 PM · #14 |
| Making screen shots isn't even illegal. They can be used for commentary, critism, or parody which is fair use. |
|
|
|
05/23/2005 02:28:15 PM · #15 |
Originally posted by kevinf:
Making screen shots isn't even illegal. They can be used for commentary, critism, or parody which is fair use. |
I think I would be checking with several attorneys before I tried that(LOL). |
|
|
|
05/23/2005 02:34:43 PM · #16 |
| Point is it doesn't sound like this person is being charged with copyright infringement. Most likely the misdemeanor is coming because he violated the theatre's policy on bring and using a camera in a thatre without permission and they're prosecuting. |
|
|
|
05/23/2005 02:49:42 PM · #17 |
Originally posted by kevinf:
Point is it doesn't sound like this person is being charged with copyright infringement. Most likely the misdemeanor is coming because he violated the theatre's policy on bring and using a camera in a thatre without permission and they're prosecuting. |
You could be right! |
|
|
|
05/23/2005 03:10:45 PM · #18 |
I am so glad that I live in Iceland, the laws on piracy is totally different here than in USA, here it is legal to download movies, music, tv shows and just about anything that can be found online, kiddyporn and software excluded, those are the only 2 things illegal to download for personal use and I totally agree with those exclusion. but here it is illegal to upload and share copyright material of any kind, so as long as the material is for personal use and is not distributed then it is totally legal :) a BIG finger to the movicompanies and music distributors that are statin that they are loosing soo much money on this illegal distribution while annual income has increesed by over 1.5 billion dollars between 2003 and 2004 in the film industry alone.
so this illegal distribution has almost no affect on the industry, the software side is different, there is considerable loss on pirated copies, since you don't pay for the prieview of the software like you do with the movies, if the movie is good the you go to the Cinema to see it, even if you downloaded a screener few days earlier to get a preview, with the software you just download the pirated version and use it, you dont buy the software even if you like it.. at least that's the case with most people.
I admit to downloading pirated software, but that is only to see if it is the software I am looking for, I try it for few weeks and if it does what I need then I buy it, if not I delete it.
that is the programmers own fault, some of them distribute a trial version, but usually the trial version has some features disabled so you really can't test the full potential of the software, like a DVD copy software that has save2DVD disabled in the trial version, or it only copies 10 minutes and writes to disk.. who would pay for software thad destroyed DVD-R in the trial version by only writing the first 10 minutes ?
it does exist, I've had many different DVD copy programs with this tremendously stupid trial feature.
so I just say.. KEEP DOWNLOADING, but do NOT share, and if you like what you got, BUY IT ! |
|
|
|
05/23/2005 03:11:58 PM · #19 |
Originally posted by swinging_johnson_v1:
Because of my involvement with the industry I am in, I don't like any sort of pirates. Still, or video.
It has the potential to take my source of income away.
Because of the tech out there it is hard to police for pirates. That is a shame.
Sorry this next sentence may upset people, but ya know I have kids to feed,a mortgage to pay just like you, but I think pirates should be sent to jail for a long period of time, and if any other way of dicipline could be introduced, I think I would be for that too. |
I too am involved in that industry and believe pirates should be prosecuted, but there comes a point when you need to be reasonable and decide where the harm is actually coming from... the fanatic taking some still shots, or the guy with the video camera recording the film with intent to distribute. Yes, I do believe law enforcement should make an example of the guy taking stills, but focusing on that guy isn't going to stop the actual pirates with video.
Originally posted by sofapez:
Originally posted by Shannon:
The part that I don't understand is what good are still shots of a movie? If he had been caught with a camcorder atleast that would make sense to me lol. |
They make prints, posters, sell the images to their buddies and give them away to others, post them on their websites, amongst other things I am sure. This all takes away $ from the copyright holder as the recipiants no longer must buy the images. |
So what if they make prints? Who could they possibly sell them to? No news agency or publication would take them. Even if they made posters, it wouldn't do them any good... they still aren't going to profit. Sell them to their friends? Highly unlikely. Even if he were to give the images to the friends- it wouldn't matter because they wouldn't buy any type of photo to begin with. And do you really think if this guy taking stills were to have "official" stills, he would actually pay for the copyright release? Absolutely not! You usually don't have to even make payments for studio images. They're released in a press kit for the purpose of distributing to attract attention (as long as you are a valid media outlet). I was the co-founder of a film based website that closed about three years ago, and we never paid for a single still shot that was used. We obtained permission; nothing else.
Originally posted by DanSig:
...a BIG finger to the movicompanies and music distributors that are statin that they are loosing soo much money on this illegal distribution while annual income has increesed by over 1.5 billion dollars between 2003 and 2004 in the film industry alone. |
You really need to check your facts. The profit of the film industry is actually down from last year. You might've seen the press on the continuing "box office slump." The industry is 14 weeks (in profit)behind what it was last year.
Yes, pirating does take away from the industry. It doesn't harm the executives, but it does harm others, from gaffers, to boom operators, to set decorators, to the directors. And it takes the most away from the independent market- the source of the majority of the quality films. The writer of an independent film has to settle for far less money for his script, the director has to settle for below-scale pay, etc.
Message edited by author 2005-05-23 15:24:00. |
|
|
|
05/23/2005 05:14:49 PM · #20 |
"So what if they make prints? Who could they possibly sell them to? No news agency or publication would take them. Even if they made posters,..." (I didn't want to mess with the whole quote)
I really find it hard to beleive you think.... I have had images pirated from my web site and used for real estate sales and promotion to avoid paying for an original image or a $17 print. Wedding photographers loss money (lotsa money) because people take their proofs down to the copy station and pay $.45 per image instead of the photog making the cash their due.
IF all they need is permission, let them get permission. THEFT is THEFT! |
|
|
|
05/23/2005 05:25:10 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by DanSig:
that is the programmers own fault, some of them distribute a trial version, but usually the trial version has some features disabled so you really can't test the full potential of the software |
And the reason they started doing that is because plenty of people would take copies of UNcrippled "trial" software and never ever ever pay up for a legit copy.
While I find crippled trialware annoying too, I know exactly why they do it and they have my sympathy. Too many people out there who believe that programmers should give all their work away and, presumably, eat air and take their way out of electricity bills ;-)
|
|
|
|
05/23/2005 05:41:26 PM · #22 |
Originally posted by sofapez:
"So what if they make prints? Who could they possibly sell them to? No news agency or publication would take them. Even if they made posters,..." (I didn't want to mess with the whole quote)
I really find it hard to beleive you think.... I have had images pirated from my web site and used for real estate sales and promotion to avoid paying for an original image or a $17 print. Wedding photographers loss money (lotsa money) because people take their proofs down to the copy station and pay $.45 per image instead of the photog making the cash their due.
IF all they need is permission, let them get permission. THEFT is THEFT! |
I agree- you are definately correct; Theft is theft, and taking still photos in a theater is theft. My whole point, though, is that instead of putting so much focus on the guy taking stills, more focus should be put into stopping the videographers, as they are the ones causing the most damage. You rarely see photos taken of the screen in ciculation... you usually see the video or screencaps of the video. It's the same situation as police engaging in the pursuit of someone who stole a pack of gum, when a murderer strolls across the street in front of them.
I definately agree that piracy is a bad thing. Because of the film industry profit slump, I only received about 50% of scale for directing my last project. I usually don't prefer to discuss salaries, etc, but, piracy cost me nearly $60,000 on that last project- THAT is why I believe more focus should be put into preventing people from doing the greater damage.
By the way, I'm sorry to hear about the problem you ran into with pirates. When my cousin graduated from high school a few years back, his family sent out photo copies of professional proofs in his invitations, so I know what you're saying about people ripping off photographers.
Message edited by author 2005-05-23 17:43:17. |
|
|
|
05/23/2005 05:59:47 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by thewriterside:
You really need to check your facts. The profit of the film industry is actually down from last year. You might've seen the press on the continuing "box office slump." The industry is 14 weeks (in profit)behind what it was last year. |
They should make better movies then. |
|
|
|
05/23/2005 06:12:28 PM · #24 |
Thewriterside: I am sure video is a very bad thing as well. Regardless of still or video, software, or whatever. The money that is taken from the artist, small or large amounts, is financially a hardship. When it happened to me, my small company with our meager income suffered little financial loss. The emotional loss was the biggest. You learn.
We recently had our product FLAT OUT stolen from us, which was even more emotionally painful. I won't get into details, but I had to consider no longer taking checks, and credit cards... CASH ONLY from independent or private persons (not corporate or business that we generally work for). |
|
|
|
05/23/2005 06:33:59 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by xtabintun:
Originally posted by thewriterside:
You really need to check your facts. The profit of the film industry is actually down from last year. You might've seen the press on the continuing "box office slump." The industry is 14 weeks (in profit)behind what it was last year. |
They should make better movies then. |
If the quality of the films had anything to do with the slump, I'd find that hilarious.
Sofapez: Sorry to hear about your troubles. Cash only from private parties is the best sometimes. That's a hard lesson to have to learn. By the way, I just wanted let you know that I do believe violating copyrights on stills is just as bad as video... when I mentioned that it wasn't a big deal, I was only referring to stills taken of a movie in a movie theater. I don't want you to think I have callused view that disregards photographs :) |
|
