WWYD- Illegal Movies

Agreed. The MPAA has made it very clear they will bring the full force of their organization down on you.

The RIAA said they would begin to focus their efforts on distributors, after getting some very bad press for going after end users -- but I have not heard any similar claims from the movie industry.

I've had my site for just over 15 years and I have never received notification from any organization, task force or legal entity in any way whatsoever. These organizations are clearly not as effective as their PR teams wish you to believe.
 
I've had my site for just over 15 years and I have never received notification from any organization, task force or legal entity in any way whatsoever. These organizations are clearly not as effective as their PR teams wish you to believe.

That does not surprise me, you mentioned your site is private. Most of the attention I have seen, so far, has gone to public torrent sites. I personally would ONLY use a torrent site that is private, I think the public ones are asking for trouble.

And, FWIW, I'm not trying to claim that they are effective. I'm just saying that, unlike the RIAA, the MPAA has made it very clear that they are interested in the big guy, the little guy, and all the guys in between.
 
That does not surprise me, you mentioned your site is private. Most of the attention I have seen, so far, has gone to public torrent sites. I personally would ONLY use a torrent site that is private, I think the public ones are asking for trouble.

And, FWIW, I'm not trying to claim that they are effective. I'm just saying that, unlike the RIAA, the MPAA has made it very clear that they are interested in the big guy, the little guy, and all the guys in between.

Yes, the fact that we are private is very, very important to the fact that we have avoided the same issues the public sites do. I'm not sure what I'll do if the day ever comes that I am approached, but I haven't had to worry about it yet.
 
I have a few friends that have entire media libraries that they obtained over several years through unacceptable means from torrent sites and I am still waiting for Karma to catch up with them...
 
I have a few friends that have entire media libraries that they obtained over several years through unacceptable means from torrent sites and I am still waiting for Karma to catch up with them...

If it hasn't yet, it probably never will. At least not for the content they have currently.
 
I paid $15 to see Inside Out in 3D and I'd like my money back, actually it was $30 because I bought dd's ticket too. I wish my neighbor was showing it.

I also admit to taping songs off the radio in the early 90's and playing them for my friends at parties.

While we are confessing our sins, I have littered, AND gone over the speed limit (once I did both at the same time!)
 
Their backyard faces ours. Earlier in the spring we met them when we were out playing with the kids and they mentioned that they wanted to host neighborhood movie nights in the summer. Apparently they had a projector a really cool outdoor screen.

Anyway, I glanced out and saw they had started their movie it was packed and then I saw it was Inside Out. At first I thought it was just a preview and then realized it was the actual movie.

My opinion is that you need to mind your own business. What happens in the privacy of one's own home and YARD should remain private, unless one is in the act of endangering the lives of others and those participating is done non-consensually. They sent a flyer inviting you. You declined. Should have been the end of story.

In some states (still) there are laws that make certain gay *** acts illegal. Would you have called the police on neighbors doing that, if you happened to see into their bedroom window because they didn't have their blinds closed? IF they invited other people into their private home or yard for a private *** party, and you did not partake, it then becomes their private business.

Some places still have laws making it illegal to back out of one's driveway. People are doing it and are not being turned in by neighbors.

Wouldn't the activities you described in your OP make YOU a peeping tom or a voyeur? Once you declined the invitation, it is no longer your business. Just because you can see into the private yard of a neighbor and post the details about it on a publicly Googleable forum doesn't make it morally right either. You should buy heavier curtains, close the ones you have or get tall bushes or a fence to block off the view so YOU do not continue to peer into their yard and publicly posting about them.


I wouldn't do anything. Believe it or not, there are actually legal ways they could have gotten it anyway. Just because it's a movie that happens to be in the theater doesn't mean they're doing something illegal.

Yes, a friend of mine was on the SAG Awards nominating committee one year. She was sent legal DVD screeners way before the ones released to the public. Some were being sent to her starting in the summer. She invited me and and some other friends over to watch and get all our opinions before she had to vote the following January(?)


I would report them, too. They are totally breaking the law and stealing from my very company.
Wow I'd love a listing of what all of you do for a living. And then I'll go and steal whatever it is you make and see how you feel. I worked my behind off on Inside Out.

Again, theft is theft. A poster here was totally wrong in saying that the actors and others were paid for their work. Yes, they were. But what about the rest of us? Some of us can be laid off if a good movie doesn't do well at the box office. For each person that saw this movie, that's $x dollars out of the studio's pocket. Piracy is no laughing matter in my industry. More and more movies are being stolen such that we have task forces now. Where did you say you lived, OP?

Oh, and screeners? Yeah, not for public viewing unless you have written permission.

I understand how very personal this is to you. I understand what you are saying. I've been on many live award show party threads in which a film you or your costume designer friends were nominated for and we all collectively rooted for them to win, on your behalf, or celebrated the wins with you.

But, I still believe that what one does in the privacy of one's home & yard is their own business. I don't consider someone's backyard as public viewing.

I grew up in the days of cassette recorders and VCR recorders. We recorded songs playing on the radio or on TV all the time to have on cassettes or vhs tapes to watch later, in the privacy of our own homes or play in our cars. We didn't sell the copies. And many of us attended backyard parties while listening to those copied songs playing in the background on a cassette boombox.

I have friends who are actors. We often go over at a later time and watch a TV show or film they are in, from a copy they made of themselves in the show or film. We don't wait for the official DVDs of the season or film to watch the episode or film they are in.

Many clips posted on Youtube are posted without copyright permission with the trite disclaimer, "No copyright infringement intended," even though, yeah, they do intend it, and know they are doing it.

Oh, and we are often not supposed to make photocopies of some printed materials. Nor should we be taking pictures of some things - artwork, performances our kids are in - to have to privately look at later. All that is some type of copyright infringement.

So ALL of us who have done any of that belong in prison then.

Are all those offenses I mentioned illegal? Yes. Should people be prosecuted and thrown in prison for them? In my opinion: No.
 
I also admit to taping songs off the radio in the early 90's and playing them for my friends at parties.

90's? My siblings & I did that since the 60's. :p When they get through arresting all of our generation, you'd better have your bags packed to move to Canada or actually somewhere that the US doesn't have extradition agreements. :duck:
 
Why anyone wants to look at those current illegal movies, I'll never understand. They have to be horrible quality. If the movies have been released on DVD or Blu Ray, and you think he should not be showing them to the public, that is just a matter of opinion. I personally believe if he is not charging, it is OK.
 
Why anyone wants to look at those current illegal movies, I'll never understand. They have to be horrible quality. If the movies have been released on DVD or Blu Ray, and you think he should not be showing them to the public, that is just a matter of opinion. I personally believe if he is not charging, it is OK.

That's definitely not always true. It depends on where they get the movie.
 
Why anyone wants to look at those current illegal movies, I'll never understand. They have to be horrible quality. If the movies have been released on DVD or Blu Ray, and you think he should not be showing them to the public, that is just a matter of opinion. I personally believe if he is not charging, it is OK.

I only allow screeners of new released movies on my site so we don't have the quality issues you speak of. It's amazing how many people within the industry release screener copies.
 
Are you sure about this, I used to work for a major retailer, and in the very least, I know that shoplifting was an expected expense and was counted for in some way. I'm not saying that this makes it okay, but they definitely knew it was happening. In fact, they would let the same person steal multiple things before finally approaching them.

I used to work for Target and as "expected" as shoplifting is, in our "team huddles" we were thoroughly schooled on the topic, because a loss is a loss. And money gets spent on new and aggravating( for the team members as well as the guests) ways to try to deter the practice. We really didn't want our merchandise walking off with the guests and any guests who alerted us were thanked profusely. Maybe, just maybe, if you tell you might help someone change their life instead of continue on the wrong path. But you'll never know if you don't.
 
Adding in this website article & info in the mix. :stir:

This is an article from a year ago (so the facts & laws may have changed,) in which the European Union has decided that streaming copyrighted content is legal (in Europe) in some cases and done a certain way. So there are many, many European "YouTube" type sites now that allow people to upload videos to be watched online as long as the end users aren't willfully making COPIES of the videos, they can WATCH them online. (Or something like that. The full article is snipped below for you to read & figure it all out and correct me. And I *think* I might have bolded the pertinent point.)

Playing devil's advocate here :stir: perhaps the neighbor didn't know that what is allowable on the web in Europe may still be considered illegal while doing it in the U.S. He may have just thought he found a free link to stream the movie, which was uploaded legally wherever he got it from. And as long as he wasn't making a copy but just showing it live streamed to his neighbors & friends that night, he may have thought it is fine.

http://bgr.com/2014/06/05/streaming-movies-and-tv-shows-for-free/


"Pirating copyrighted content is legal in Europe, if done correctly

By Chris Smith on Jun 5, 2014 at 11:15 PM

The Internet provides access to many surprising things, including the means to enjoy copyrighted content without paying for it. Whether it’s movies or TV shows, music, books, games, software or other protected digital content, the Internet offers users ways to get their entertainment fix free of charge. Naturally, copyright holders are right to try to fight piracy, which they do on a regular basis, but a court in the European Union on Thursday ruled in favor of a certain type of copyright infringement.

As long as an Internet user is streaming copyrighted content online, GigaOm reports that it’s legal for the user, who isn’t willfully making a copy of said content. If the user only views it directly through a web browser, streaming it from a website that hosts it, he or she is apparently doing nothing wrong.

The ruling is part of a complex legal battle between a European media service that used to include headlines and ledes from various news stories in daily digests sent to readers via email. Copyright holders including the Associated Press sued Meltwater, the company in question, in the U.S. and U.K.

In Europe, one of the case’s matters also concerned regular Internet users. The group suing Meltwater argued that recipients of Meltwater’s emails had to pay license fees for the content they received, and the court basically ruled that Internet users who see content online, without actually willingly making a copy of it, should not be held accountable for any resulting copyright infringement.

This doesn’t mean that website owners who host copyrighted content illegally, which can be accessed and streamed by Internet users, are off the hook though. It’s just the end-user that’s covered under existing law from having to pay any fines for streaming any kind of illegally hosted copyrighted content from the Internet. This should be good news for all those German Internet users who received fines at home for streaming certain porn videos from a site last year.

Following below, is a relevant quote of the court’s ruling, which can be accessed in its entirety by following the source links at the end of this post."

"Article 5 of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society must be interpreted as meaning that the copies on the user’s computer screen and the copies in the internet ‘cache’ of that computer’s hard disk, made by an end-user in the course of viewing a website, satisfy the conditions that those copies must be temporary, that they must be transient or incidental in nature and that they must constitute an integral and essential part of a technological process, as well as the conditions laid down in Article 5(5) of that directive, and that they may therefore be made without the authorisation of the copyright holders."​
 
Yes, IMZADI. Our son is quite the hacker and downloads all sorts of sites for us to use. We get movies via Europe without the risk of prosecution back here in the states. We watch movies in our home while they're still in theaters.
 
My hosting and FTP servers are all located in Europe as well. I'd never host my site from a service located within the US.
 
Why anyone wants to look at those current illegal movies, I'll never understand. They have to be horrible quality. If the movies have been released on DVD or Blu Ray, and you think he should not be showing them to the public, that is just a matter of opinion. I personally believe if he is not charging, it is OK.

That is not always true- most of the ones on an app I use look just like any store bought did would look.
 
At my age I have learned early on to 'mind your own business' when it comes to neighbors unless they are endangering someone. You have your convictions about this - stick with it - and just leave them alone. We can't make others live the way we want to - wrong or right. Just set the right example and leave them be - just not your place to police them. You don't want to be enemies with neighbors. They will probably be nice neighbors in the long run.
 

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!











facebook twitter
Top