Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

X-Men Origins Pirate Draws a 1-Year Sentence

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the pre-fx-version-would-make-good-bonus-content dept.

Piracy 341

An anonymous reader writes with this excerpt from geek.com: "In 2009, a copy of X-Men Origins: Wolverine found its way on to Megaupload a month before it was due to appear in movie theaters. The so-called 'workprint' copy was unfinished — so unfinished in fact, anyone viewing this copy saw green screens and wires attached to actors used to help with the more acrobatic movements during action scenes. Hugh Jackman even commented on the leak, describing it as like getting a 'Ferrari without a paint job.' The person who decided to share the movie illegally was tracked down, however. He is a 49-year-old New Yorker by the name of Gilberto Sanchez, and he's just been prosecuted." The New York Times' 2010 interview with Sanchez is a good read, too.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Ferrari without a paint job (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38437328)

As far as I know the Bugatti Veyron Pur Sang comes without a paint job and it's sold as a good thing.

It is also a mortal sin to paint a DeLorean. So sometimes the lack of paint job actually increases its value

Re:Ferrari without a paint job (5, Funny)

mark_elf (2009518) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437552)

If only you had been there, he would be a free man today. In fact, the film probably was better without all that sterile, fake looking animation.

Re:Ferrari without a paint job (5, Insightful)

nschubach (922175) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437680)

I don't think it matters. The movie butchered so many comic book back stories that it was incredibly painful to watch even after "the paint was applied."

I wouldn't call it a Ferrari either. Maybe a Pinto without a paint job.

Re:Ferrari without a paint job (4, Funny)

ifiwereasculptor (1870574) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437996)

The movie butchered so many comic book back stories that it was incredibly painful to watch even after "the paint was applied."

Tell me about it. Not only this guy, but every distributor of that crap should be jailed for unleashing such an atrocity. I saw it on TV and still felt like demanding my money back.

Re:Ferrari without a paint job (1)

sootman (158191) | more than 2 years ago | (#38438226)

The movie was so-so and the effects were HORRIBLE--literally lower than SyFy monster-of-the-week movies. Watching the workprint was the best part. It's interesting to see the behind-the-scenes stuff.

Gene Siskel had a metric for movies: "Is this film more interesting than a documentary of the same actors having lunch?" My variation is, "Is watching this movie more fun than watching the 'making-of' extras on the DVD?"

Re:Ferrari without a paint job (1)

helix2301 (1105613) | more than 2 years ago | (#38438282)

I agree the movie was bad Sabertooth being Wolverines brother was so stupid. Not to mention my favorite character of all time Gambit got just totally messed up they made him look like a dork and a idiot. Bad movie and they already have plans for a 2nd movie according to hsx.com

Re:Ferrari without a paint job (2)

ifiwereasculptor (1870574) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437782)

The biggest problem with his analogy is that X-Men Origins: Wolverine was more like a Volkswagen Beetle. The "paint job" they added in post-production was all it had going for it.

Re:Ferrari without a paint job (1)

gonk (20202) | more than 2 years ago | (#38438008)

Except the original VW Beetle had a whole lot going for it even without its paint. Of course, its paint was high quality, too.

robert

Federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38437342)

The appropriate place for all pirates..

Re:Federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison (4, Interesting)

zill (1690130) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437516)

Except, of course, those convicted of sodomy charges. There's the Federal no-ass-pounding prison for that.

Jokes aside, it's interesting how among all the different types of intellectual property, only copyright is settled in criminal courts.

Re:Federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison (5, Informative)

sed quid in infernos (1167989) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437588)

it's interesting how among all the different types of intellectual property, only copyright is settled in criminal courts.

There are criminal offenses defined under trademark law [wikipedia.org] , too.

Re:Federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison (1)

zill (1690130) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437820)

Thank you, I did not know that before.

There are actually quite a few exceptions to my claim. France and Austria have criminal penalties for wanton patent infringement for example.

But I think my point still stands: out of all the criminal prosecutions for intellectual property infringements, the vast majority of them are copyright infringements.

Re:Federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison (2)

tixxit (1107127) | more than 2 years ago | (#38438314)

I think the difference is that copyright infringement is mostly perpetrated by individuals, patent and trade mark is left to businesses. To intimidate a person, you threaten them with jail. To intimidate a business, you threaten them with a lawsuit.

Re:Federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison (1)

gorzek (647352) | more than 2 years ago | (#38438328)

That would stand to reason since copyright infringement is the most common type of IP crime.

Re:Federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison (5, Insightful)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437674)

Jokes aside, it's interesting how among all the different types of intellectual property, only copyright is settled in criminal courts.

And are policed by the FBI and ICE and Homeland Security ... pretty sweet deal, make the government responsible for policing your profits, and at their expense.

The police (and the government) now officially work for the corporations. It's amazing the laws you can buy.

Re:Federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38437816)

ICE is a branch of homeland security.

Re:Federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38438086)

It wasn't always. One of the things the patriot act did was absorb multiple existing agencies into 'homeland security', so that supposedly it would streamline things like information gathering/sharing.

Now, you may look at the ICE wiki page and say 'Bullshit, it was formed March 1st 2003, it was always part of homeland security.'

Look at the homeland security wiki page:

"On March 1, 2003, DHS absorbed the Immigration and Naturalization Service and assumed its duties. In doing so, it divided the enforcement and services functions into two separate and new agencies: Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Citizenship and Immigration Services."

One of the convenient things about absorbing multiple agencies into one large conglomerate is that when someone inside gets caught doing something illegal (warrantless wiretapping, kidnapping and abducting people domestically and internationally, etc), it is easy to pass the buck around into a mire that no one single agency or person can be brought to justice.

Re:Federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38437684)

Also corporations (which in US are persons? - I'm from Europe) can't be sent to prison.

Re:Federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38437804)

See, there's the trick. In the US, a human has responsibilities, but very few actual rights remaining, and a corporation has rights, but no actual responsibilities except to make profit for their shareholders and file their tax dodges.

Re:Federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison (2)

91degrees (207121) | more than 2 years ago | (#38438036)

A corporation doesn't commit a crime. It has no guilty intent or intent at all. The one who commits a crime is the executive who makes the decision, and they certainly can be sent to prison.

And this is the way it should be. A company can easily behave if those without ethics are removed from the board.

Re:Federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison (3, Insightful)

PortHaven (242123) | more than 2 years ago | (#38438238)

Thank it's not a person, and shouldn't have the rights of one.

Re:Federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison (1)

bws111 (1216812) | more than 2 years ago | (#38438364)

Exactly what 'rights' (that do not extend from the individual rights of the owners) do you think a corporation has?

Re:Federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison (2)

dpilot (134227) | more than 2 years ago | (#38438338)

>The one who commits a crime is the executive who makes the
> decision, and they certainly can be sent to prison.

I was under the impression that at least part of the basic reason for a corporation was to shield people from liability. To be reasonable, I'm guessing that it was meant as financial, not criminal liability.

But then we get to a thing I call, "blame diffusion," where you spread a bad, even criminal decision around many people. At this point while something truly bad may happen, something that would clearly be criminal had one individual done it, each person in the chain of command has done only something minor or "mildly negligent," and at no single point does it rise to the level of being criminal. IMHO corporate processes can be designed to make things happen this way, and very possibly are, for this exact reason.

> A company can easily behave if those without ethics are
> removed from the board.

That presumes you can find someone else "at that level" who does have some ethics. Given that executives seem to be a rather exclusive club these days, finding a member of that club with good ethics and ready to fill your position may be very difficult indeed.

Re:Federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38437686)

Jokes aside, it's interesting how among all the different types of intellectual property, only copyright is settled in criminal courts.

This is not an accurate statement. Selling counterfeit goods (ie Trademark Infringement) is criminal in most countries, including the US:
http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/crm01715.htm [justice.gov]

Patent infringement is not criminal in the US, but there's been discussion of making it criminal in the UK. It is currently criminal in China:
http://www.chinaipr.gov.cn/direrdcusarticle/directions/criminal/rdclpfaq/200706/235031_1.html [chinaipr.gov.cn]

Re:Federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison (1)

zill (1690130) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437948)

Please see my response here [slashdot.org]

Even though lot of exceptions exist, I think my point is still valid. The number of copyright infringement cases in criminal courts dwarfs the number of all other intellectual property violation cases in criminal courts.

Re:Federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison (1)

jimmerz28 (1928616) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437966)

Except that Gilberto Sanchez wasn't selling anything.

Not sure how anyone can claim the copy uploaded was "'identical with, or substantially indistinguishable from' the genuine trademark.' Even the braindead Wolverine could see that via his horrid car simile.

So the OP is still correct in pointing out the disconnect.

Re:Federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38437988)

Which is really where it gets funny.

His source came from some korean guy selling DVDs. If he'd known the guy's name, or had an address to point the FBI to, they probably would have let him off the hook as an informant.

His first mistake (after, of course, uploading the movie) was in not demanding a lawyer present for all interrogations. His second was in not being able to identify by face/name one of the thousand or so Koreans/Chinese who are running around Manhattan selling bootleg crap every day.

And of course, the bigger problem for us is that copyright has ceased to be meaningful. This guy made no profit, but is going to jail for a year. The guy who leaked the source that the korean had? Never been found. The koreans/chinese themselves hawking knockoffs and bootleg DVDs? Fat chance the FBI ever goes after them - they make money, but chances are some precinct head or FBI local branch head is on the take from them.

Re:Federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison (2)

geoffaus (623283) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437894)

I can just imagine his first conversations with fellow prisoners - so what are you in here for? Convict 1) I killed 3 people. Convict 2) I raped some kids. Sanchez) I uploaded a movie to a filesharing site. He is definitely going to be someone's bitch!

Re:Federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison (4, Funny)

sconeu (64226) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437998)

And they all moved away from him over on the Group W bench....

Re:Federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 2 years ago | (#38438152)

They don't throw all the federal prisoners in together. He's going to go to a minimum security prison, which looks more like a college campus. The other prisoners are going to have been convicted of fraud or money laundering.

lesson learned, don't upload stolen movies (3, Insightful)

alen (225700) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437376)

not like he was ripping DVD's to play on his ipod or iphone because the digital copy thing for blu ray is a scam. not like he only watched the stolen copy in his home. he uploaded it so it could be downloaded by others

Re:lesson learned, don't upload stolen movies (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Brave Guy (457657) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437418)

I think the punishment here is perhaps disproportionate, but I agree with the sentiment. It's far better to go after the people who knowingly share things with widespread audiences than anyone else in the infringement set-up.

Re:lesson learned, don't upload stolen movies (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38437666)

But is this the right place to draw the line? Assuming the uploader was telling the truth and he got the copy from a street vendor, you're basically excusing poor internal controls and substituting it with the legal system. I'm not saying they should go after the Korean DVD vendor either, but this is like plugging a hole in a dam with your finger and wondering why the leaks aren't stopping.

Re:lesson learned, don't upload stolen movies (0)

jimbolauski (882977) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437848)

But is this the right place to draw the line? Assuming the uploader was telling the truth and he got the copy from a street vendor, you're basically excusing poor internal controls and substituting it with the legal system. I'm not saying they should go after the Korean DVD vendor either, but this is like plugging a hole in a dam with your finger and wondering why the leaks aren't stopping.

By the same logic it's my fault if someone breaks into my house and steals my belongings because all I had was a lock and not a security system. Continuing this logic the burglar shouldn't be prosecuted for the crime because burglaries are so prevalent that going after one is just putting your finger in the dam.

Re:lesson learned, don't upload stolen movies (2)

chronoglass (1353185) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437924)

i think the logic would be more akin to the guy who bought your stereo from the guy who bought your stereo, from the guy who bought your stolen stereo from the guy who broke into your house and took your stereo, shouldn't be held responsible for breaking into your house.

Re:lesson learned, don't upload stolen movies (1)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 2 years ago | (#38438206)

i think the logic would be more akin to the guy who bought your stereo from the guy who bought your stereo, from the guy who bought your stolen stereo from the guy who broke into your house and took your stereo, shouldn't be held responsible for breaking into your house.

Except in this case, he still received stolen goods, which is illegal. He's not responsible for the break-in, but it doesn't make it legal for him to have your stereo.

Not sure that helps your analogy or not. :-P

Re:lesson learned, don't upload stolen movies (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38438398)

Except purchasing said stolen goods would result in the confiscation of said stolen goods, NOT imprisonment and NOT the police ignoring the vender who sold it to you and NOT the police ignoring the burglar who stole it in the first place and NOT excusing the original owner of said stolen goods who left his front door wide open because he was too cheap to replace a long rusted away lock.

I don't know where the line should be drawn, but this is pathetic. By your logic, we should be able to throw children in jail because a drug dealer gave them some "candy" to share with their friends.

Re:lesson learned, don't upload stolen movies (2)

tnk1 (899206) | more than 2 years ago | (#38438074)

In this case, the movie was not completed, so no one could even buy it. I don't even know why someone would think it wasn't stolen property. It's not like it was a copy that was made after someone paid for it fair and square, or who received it without some sort of NDA and who decided sharing it because they felt they "owned" the DVD or whatever.

Sharing movies can have all sorts of shades of grey in terms of ownership rights, but I'd say that obtaining an unfinished work print is probably going to qualify as passing stolen property and the initial sharing is evidence of knowingly being in possession of said stolen property. There's really no defense for that sort of thing.

Re:lesson learned, don't upload stolen movies (1)

Ravon Rodriguez (1074038) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437916)

There's a precedent for this in the computer security world, as well; it's not an uncommon practice for software vendors to prosecute or threaten to prosecute people who discover security holes in their products, instead of simply fixing said security hole. The problem is that in a lot of cases the flaws don't get fixed until they're out in the open; the thinking of the big software firms is that if nobody knows about it, then it's not worth the cost to fix it. This may seem like a legitimate action on the surface, but eventually somebody of a less savory character will rediscover the security flaw (especially if it's made known that a particular type of flaw is out there), and that's when legitimate users get burned.

Re:lesson learned, don't upload stolen movies (3, Interesting)

Moryath (553296) | more than 2 years ago | (#38438318)

Actually, going after the Korean DVD vendor would be a better place to start. He's actually making a profit from criminal activity.

Going after the warehouse that's making the DVDs the Korean is selling is an even BETTER proposal. Hell, we have DVD Sniffing Dogs [ifc.com] to check cargo containers for undeclared shipments of bootleg DVDs that come from overseas (china, mostly).

Meanwhile, go to Hong Kong or most places in South America (Brazil's particularly bad for it) and you won't find a single legitimate console or game in stores. What you will find is a shop where they sell you a modchipped console, then you bring a box to the guy at the counter who nods, goes into the back, and comes back 5 minutes later with a burned copy of whatever disc you indicated; if it's a PC disc, there'll probably be a no-cd crack included on the disc. When the local government shuts these guys down, you can be sure that it's not because they broke the law, but because they didn't make their bribery payments to the right guy on time.

Re:lesson learned, don't upload stolen movies (4, Funny)

trdrstv (986999) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437770)

I think the punishment here is perhaps disproportionate, but I agree with the sentiment.

It could of been worse. He could of been forced to watch the movie repeatedly through his 1 year sentence; thankfully the 8th amendment prevents that.

Re:lesson learned, don't upload stolen movies (5, Funny)

YrWrstNtmr (564987) | more than 2 years ago | (#38438062)

It could of been worse. He could of been forced to watch the movie repeatedly through his 1 year sentence; thankfully the 8th amendment prevents that.

Similarly, he could have been forced to read your tortured sentence structure repeatedly.

Re:lesson learned, don't upload stolen movies (1)

popeye44 (929152) | more than 2 years ago | (#38438132)

Thanks for making me read it twice. yeesh.

Re:lesson learned, don't upload stolen movies (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38437460)

The law is the law. It doesn't matter if he watched it at home or uploaded. If he broke the law, it's only logical that some form of repercussion be administered. Not saying I agree with it necessarily, but in any event, he broke the law. Almost all of us have. Period.

Re:lesson learned, don't upload stolen movies (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38437982)

The law is the law. It doesn't matter if he watched it at home or uploaded. If he broke the law, it's only logical that some form of repercussion be administered. Not saying I agree with it necessarily, but in any event, he broke the law. Almost all of us have. Period.

If you don't agree with this law, why don't discuss what you don't like about it? "The law is the law", that's freaking bullshit if you don't agree with it and still say that. Were you brainwashed when you were young? Darnit, we're here on /. to discuss and all you have to say is "The law is the law, nothing to see here move along" ?

Re:lesson learned, don't upload stolen movies (5, Insightful)

Mordok-DestroyerOfWo (1000167) | more than 2 years ago | (#38438342)

There were also laws in the books prohibiting alcohol, interracial marriages, and homosexuality. Not every illegal action is unethical, and not every unethical act is illegal.

Re:lesson learned, don't upload stolen movies (4, Interesting)

SJHillman (1966756) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437506)

So the question becomes... why does a guy that intentionally uploaded this for others, a month before the movie comes out (where I would expect the studio to make a huge chunk of its profit on the movie) only get a year in prison when someone who accidentally shares a few crappy songs gets a financial punishment that makes a year in prison look quite tame?

Re:lesson learned, don't upload stolen movies (5, Insightful)

DaveV1.0 (203135) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437584)

You do know that he can still be sued by the studios for copyright infringement, right? This was a criminal action. The studio can still take civil action against him if it so desires.

Re:lesson learned, don't upload stolen movies (3, Insightful)

Ravon Rodriguez (1074038) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437980)

If that's true, then it's one of the biggest perversions of justice I've seen in a long time; I'm not a lawyer, and I realize double jeopardy laws may not cross over from civil to criminal cases, but it's ridiculous to be able to send somebody to jail for stealing your imaginary property, and then be able to sue in another court for the same reason.

Re:lesson learned, don't upload stolen movies (1)

Hadlock (143607) | more than 2 years ago | (#38438278)

In most cases I would agree that a DVD of a movie that already came out is imaginary property, but here, you were actively paying various studios and partners to develop CGI effects and finish editing a product you'd just paid megabucks for actors to star in, a film crew to build sets, a film crew to place cameras, set off explosive charges, pay insurance premiums, pay the caterers and a thousand other line items.
 
They weren't stealing a finished product that had done it's rounds in the theaters and was revving up for round two as a director's cut DVD release. This was an active production, he had fueled up an unpainted 747 at the factory in the dead of night, taxied to the runway and taken off, got halfway over the pacific and then parachuted out in mid-flight, watching the plane slowly arc in to the ocean.

Re:lesson learned, don't upload stolen movies (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38438288)

Copyright isn't any more imaginary than the value of currency is... it is a legally recognized property deemed to have worth in the eyes of the law that does not necessarily reflect its physical value (it costs approximately 15 cents to print a dollar bill, for instance). The only significant difference between copyright and currency in terms of value is that the precise value is much more subjective in matters of copyright.

Re:lesson learned, don't upload stolen movies (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38438262)

They can get his 1990 Honda Civic for $500,000 in lawyer fees.

Re:lesson learned, don't upload stolen movies (3, Insightful)

girlintraining (1395911) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437616)

So the question becomes... why does a guy that intentionally uploaded this for others, a month before the movie comes out (where I would expect the studio to make a huge chunk of its profit on the movie) only get a year in prison when someone who accidentally shares a few crappy songs gets a financial punishment that makes a year in prison look quite tame?

Judges often don't have leeway in sentencing; Whether it's a "crappy" song or a pre-release of a highly-anticipated motion picture, the law says the punishment is the same. Don't blame the judges for the seemingly random or harsh sentencing... blame the politicians. I mean, I can come over to your house and beat the snot out of you on the way in to work with my bare hands and get less time than this guy did for posting some crappy "work print" movie. Which crime do you think is worse? Worse, downloading that same crappy movie can cause civil penalties far in excess of what I would get if I broke into your house and did something horrible to you (use your imagination)...

Re:lesson learned, don't upload stolen movies (4, Insightful)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437902)

> Whether it's a "crappy" song or a pre-release of a highly-anticipated motion picture, the law says the punishment is the same.

No. Usually not. The law and judges actually have a wide degree of leeway. They have it because typically no two sets of facts are quite alike and they can be often quite different.

The judge could have suspended the sentence entirely.

The judge isn't just an automaton despite the fact that some people like to pretend that they are or should be.

The ability to adapt to different circumstances is actually a good thing.

Re:lesson learned, don't upload stolen movies (4, Insightful)

Mitreya (579078) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437972)

lesson learned, don't upload stolen movies ... he uploaded it so it could be downloaded by others

There is one more lesson we have learned. The world is full of assholes who seem to agree with this punishment!
So you do think that 1 year in federal prison after being hunted by FBI is an appropriate punishment for buying a bootleg movie and uploading it? Really? If he at least stole the copy during his employment - there would be a breach of trust/contract violation (why, yes, I read TFA). But he bought and uploaded a bootleg movie.
Only in a cruel asshole world is 1 year in prison plus another year of limited computer access an appropriate punishment for uploading/sharing a movie he didn't even steal. We can argue about some fines (he's not right or anything), but the punishment is very clearly out of proportion. And those cheering it on are part of the problem!

Re:lesson learned, don't upload stolen movies (4, Funny)

jd2112 (1535857) | more than 2 years ago | (#38438252)

Just one year? The studios lost TRILLIONS of dollars due this guy. If he hadn't released the unfinished film they would have been able to finish the film properly and would have been the greatest and most successful film of ALL TIME! Instead they had to cut their losses and release a half-assed attempt of a movie. It's all HIS fault!!!

Re:lesson learned, don't upload stolen movies (1)

Hatta (162192) | more than 2 years ago | (#38438296)

Lesson learned, upload movies from behind 7 proxies.

how much will this cost US (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38437380)

Sooo, instead of imposing a fine, we'll let the taxpayer foot the bill for a year's incarceration. Brilliant.

Re:how much will this cost US (1)

varmittang (849469) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437558)

Yeah, because we are sure he will be able to get a job that pays enough to pay the couple of million it cost to prosecute him and repay the plaintiff for the damages. This is better for him to serve some time than being in monstrous debt for the rest of his life. He will probably be out in a couple of months anyways.

Re:how much will this cost US (4, Interesting)

cduffy (652) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437628)

"Out in a couple of months"? Maybe not.

For Texas, at least, it would have to be a year and a day to be eligible for parole; a year bare is actually the harsher sentence.

Re:how much will this cost US (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38437808)

Yes let's just impose fines on criminal mischief. That'll teach 'em.

Re:how much will this cost US (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38438030)

What is brilliant is that you are focusing on monetary costs and forgetting what really matters.

You see, this person did nothing other than uploading a movie, which he acquired without physically harming anyone. He also did not invade private property in order to steal it. The thing was already on the streets.

So, now he gets to be imprisoned for a whole year. Prisons are supposed to keep harmful elements out of the streets, while at the same time punishing them for their transgression. This person, being free, does not appear to be harmful to the general public. So why imprison him?

Not only he will cease being a productive member of the society for the full year, but he also be in contact with undesirable people, either violent or convicted of more serious offenses. Not to mention the emotional scarring and the damage to his personal life.

So, instead of rehabilitating the guy, he's probably going to get more screwed up.

If only the punishment is desired, hell, use him as free labor for one year. Keep him on his job but have him show up somewhere to do community work. That would be more useful and depending on the type of work could even be a net positive for the treasury.

Problem with the analogy.. (1)

Xunker (6905) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437396)

The problem with calling it "a Ferrari without a paintjob" is that it's not a Ferrari of a movie. Hell, it's not even an Hyundai Elantra of a movie.

At least watching the workprint made it fun: "Claws Grow".

Re:Problem with the analogy.. (1)

g0bshiTe (596213) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437510)

Good to know I'm not the only one that saw that copy. It was actually better than watching the finished product. At least there were more laughs.

It wasn't till the end fight scene I realized what it was. During the bus fight I kept trying to figure out why Silver Surfer was in the film.

Re:Problem with the analogy.. (4, Interesting)

AngryDeuce (2205124) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437790)

At least watching the workprint made it fun: "Claws Grow".

Hell yeah! I found the workprint to be far more entertaining than the finished film as well. I watched it at least 3 times and laughed my ass off every single time. Remember the plane crash? "EXPLOSION!!!" The part when Wolverine gets hit by the Big Rig was great, too.

I wish more studios would include workprints and stuff like that on their legitimate DVD/BD releases. The process of making a movie is often times far more fascinating to me than the movie itself.

Re:Problem with the analogy.. (4, Interesting)

DreadPiratePizz (803402) | more than 2 years ago | (#38438276)

I find it interesting that you would be more interested in the process than the narrative itself. I remember a time when people went to films to be lost and engrossed. A noticeable special effect was a bad thing which took you out of the film. Now, it seems people WANT to see outrageous effects which call attention to themselves. I'm guessing it's because the narrative of many films simply does not grab an audience any more, so there's really nothing to take you out of.

More like a 1980 Ford Pinto without a paint job. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38437398)

Am I right?

Re:More like a 1980 Ford Pinto without a paint job (1)

Fujisawa Sensei (207127) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437456)

Only after its been rear-ended.

Re:More like a 1980 Ford Pinto without a paint job (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38437704)

Only after its been rear-ended.

In that case you'd want the '77 version, before they fixed the gas tank problem.

Put it in perspective (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38437490)

That movie made over $200m profit after MPAA creative accounting, and before DVD / blu-ray sales. Not bad for yet another comic character flick.

where do i find it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38437494)

am i the only one who suddenly wanted to see this?

Part of the reason why he was punished (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38437518)

He knowingly shared Wolverine Origins with other human beings. The movie makes The Room look like a masterpiece.

They ignore the commercial pirate? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38437564)

TFA says the jailed guy got the movie on DVD for $5 from some guy in a Chinese restaurant. So the movie was already in commercial, pirate distribution on DVD and the feds did nothing about that. Instead they went after the movie buff who uploaded the DVD for no commercial gain. This sounds more like the usual "war against the internet" than "going after the right person" as the articles propagandistically pretend.

Re:They ignore the commercial pirate? (0)

Synerg1y (2169962) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437802)

Lol, the Korean was clearly a lot smarter about it than the defendant in this case. I think only in America do people exist who would take a movie they bought illegally, that hasn't been released yet, and upload it via their IP to a major download site that everybody has access to.

Re:They ignore the commercial pirate? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38437812)

The real travesty is that the writer, director, and lead actors aren't doing jail time for that piece of shit. The film stole $350 million from unsuspecting moviegoers in the theatrical release alone.

Re:They ignore the commercial pirate? (1)

jklovanc (1603149) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437862)

RTFA, "An F.B.I. spokeswoman said the investigation into who stole the movie in the first place was continuing." The found the person who uploaded the stolen video to a sharing site. That was a criminal act so the prosecuted him. That does not mean that they are not still investigating the situation and are not looking for other people in the chain of custody. Should they not have persecuted him because he was not the only person in the chain?

There is also a huge difference between a few DVDs available in person at a few select locations and an uploaded file available to anyone with an internet connection. The latter has a much wider audience, is easier to find and has much more impact on the revenue for the film. They are going after the "right" person as the uploader did far more damage than the DVD supplier.

Re:They ignore the commercial pirate? (1)

misexistentialist (1537887) | more than 2 years ago | (#38438120)

Producing pirated DVDs for sale requires a lot more criminal intent than uploading a file. The movie made $85 million the first weekend and seems have had around the normal profitability for the series so there was probably no perceptible damage. No harm, no intent to harm, no crime.

Re:They ignore the commercial pirate? (4, Informative)

Pope (17780) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437908)

Two weeks later, the F.B.I. showed up, having tracked “SkillyGilly” through computer footprints. Mr. Sanchez said he explained what had happened. “Talk to the Korean,” he said he told them. “You keep following leads and you’ll get to a warehouse.” But when the F.B.I. asked if he could identify the peddler, he said no.

Reading is fundamental

Re:They ignore the commercial pirate? (1)

j00r0m4nc3r (959816) | more than 2 years ago | (#38438384)

Sounds more like, "A senator who is in the MPAA's pocket poked his buddies in the FBI to make an example out of this guy"...

Anonymous (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38437566)

What gets me is that instead of posting it anonymously, he does it under his login and hopes to get bragging rights for the whole thing. That was the really dumb part. If he just wanted to share, he could've done better to protect himself.

Hrmm, seems the OP is slighty incorrect (4, Informative)

SGDarkKnight (253157) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437572)

"The person who decided to share the movie illegally was tracked down"

Well, not exactly... the person who first uploaded it was tracked down, not the person who first stole it, copy it, and give it to the Koreans to sell on the street.

Seems the person to first share it is still out there...

Re:Hrmm, seems the OP is slighty incorrect (1)

jklovanc (1603149) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437878)

And according to the article, "An F.B.I. spokeswoman said the investigation into who stole the movie in the first place was continuing", still being looked for.

In one year he will get his vengeance... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38437668)

Worst. Super villain origin. Ever.

obligatory (5, Insightful)

nEoN nOoDlE (27594) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437676)

Here's the obligatory proportions post. How many people have been arrested for the housing market crash thus far? How much monetary damage did those people actually do in comparison to this guy?... yeah.

Re:obligatory (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38438028)

Except the housing market crash was caused by a whole lot of people taking out loans they could not pay back. How is this the same? Were the houses stolen?

Re:obligatory (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38438164)

Who are you to accuse us 'Mericans of being responsible to pay back a loan? I get my welfare check, my free education, free emergency room visits whens i gets the sniffles; of course the goverment owes me a reasonable discount on my house, 'specially since owning a home is a right, not a privileges. Just ask that colored president we gots now.

Re:obligatory (2)

jklovanc (1603149) | more than 2 years ago | (#38438286)

So because we don not prosecute the big bad guys we should not prosecute the little bad guys? Sorry that is false logic

Hard for me to get excited about it (1)

ATestR (1060586) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437730)

Come to think of it, I still haven't seen this movie. The first one was good, the second OK, the third... well, you get the picture.

So where did get it? (2)

OzPeter (195038) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437752)

That copy was not ripped from a theatrical release DVD. It was obviously copied directly from a data file in some productions houses' work flow. This guy was just an accessory after the fact. And that "Sanchez explained that he actually bought the movie on DVD for $5 from a Korean man in a Chinese restaurant.". So where does the data originate from?

  Who ever released the original data is the person who needs to spend time in jail, not some patsy who bought a cheap DVD from an anonymous pusher in some shady restaurant dealing.

Still the Wrong Guy (4, Insightful)

Sir Realist (1391555) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437858)

Look, I don't really follow the Slashdot party line on this one; I think stealing from artists you respect is stupid, because they won't make you more stuff. And Sanchez was an idiot for uploading this thing from the illegal pirated copy he bought. But his punishment does seem disproportionate, and they still got the wrong guy.

This guy bought stolen goods, and made illegal copies of copyrighted materials. Somebody, somewhere, actually stole the proof from the studio. That is the real crime they should be punishing if they want to stop pre-release pirates. And I won't even bother to point out how effortlessly easy it would be to track copies and identify leaks in this technical audience, because I'm sure you can all come up with half-a-dozen schemes yourselves. If the studios can't be bothered to prevent the leaks or identify and punish the leakers in the first place, why should we care what happens to the leaked materials?

Re:Still the Wrong Guy (3, Insightful)

Imagix (695350) | more than 2 years ago | (#38438076)

I disagree. I think they got one of the right guys. (Note "one of", not "the" right guy). I don't think anybody could reasonably expect that the guy was dealing with an above-the-board transaction. This guy was willfully distributing stuff the he knew (or any reasonable person would have known) wasn't legit.

Re:Still the Wrong Guy (-1, Troll)

Tanuki64 (989726) | more than 2 years ago | (#38438222)

Look, I don't really follow the Slashdot party line on this one; I think stealing from artists you respect is stupid,

Either you are a MAFIAA shill, or an idiot. People who use the 'artists' argument are usually one of those.

Variable sentences (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38437940)

If he had obtained/watch it legally, his sentence would have only been in the neighborhood of two hours.

Possibly worth noting; (4, Insightful)

grasshoppa (657393) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437954)

It's possibly worth noting that that version was actually more interesting than the final cut.

Motherfucker Jones did a dime for this you know (3, Informative)

slashdotresearch_mj (2463842) | more than 2 years ago | (#38437962)

Also has anyone else ever seen when the police do a "raid" on the bootleg dvd sellers on Canal Street in NYC? I've seen it happen a few times and the police move as slowly as possible, it seems to allow everyone time to pack up all their shit and escape. Sometimes enough time for people to pack up entire carts and run down the street with them. Not exactly a possibility for this dude, clearly. No idea what the sentence time is for someone caught with pirated material in real life is compared to online possession/distribution, or maybe it's the same?

Interesting Fact (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38437978)

Saving up to buy gifts this year was surely not easy. I came across this great site the other day www.optimize.com - They help you to find deals across mutual funds, saving accounts, credit cards CDs etc...All for free!!! Check them out!

How was i crimmal? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38438148)

506. Criminal offenses6

(a) Criminal Infringement. —

(1) In general. — Any person who willfully infringes a copyright shall be punished as provided under section 2319 of title 18, if the infringement was committed —

(A) for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain;

          He didn't earn any money off uploading it

(B) by the reproduction or distribution, including by electronic means, during any 180-day period, of 1 or more copies or phonorecords of 1 or more copyrighted works, which have a total retail value of more than $1,000; or

(C) by the distribution of a work being prepared for commercial distribution, by making it available on a computer network accessible to members of the public, if such person knew or should have known that the work was intended for commercial distribution.

        The work was a unfinished work that was never going to see the light of day.

(2) Evidence. — For purposes of this subsection, evidence of reproduction or distribution of a copyrighted work, by itself, shall not be sufficient to establish willful infringement of a copyright.

Did they find anyone that downloaded the movie from the megaupload site? If they didn't have anyone to show that download it then there is no evidence of distribution attributive to him. It might have over some some where else.

(3) Definition. — In this subsection, the term “work being prepared for commercial distribution” means —

(A) a computer program, a musical work, a motion picture or other audiovisual work, or a sound recording, if, at the time of unauthorized distribution —

(i) the copyright owner has a reasonable expectation of commercial distribution; and

(ii) the copies or phonorecords of the work have not been commercially distributed; or

(B) a motion picture, if, at the time of unauthorized distribution, the motion picture —

(i) has been made available for viewing in a motion picture exhibition facility; and

(ii) has not been made available in copies for sale to the general public in the United States in a format intended to permit viewing outside a motion

I think he has a goo case for bad representation and for appeal.

Do7l (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38438156)

doesn't fit the crime (4, Interesting)

spirit_fingers (777604) | more than 2 years ago | (#38438246)

I know what the law says, and I know that he broke the law. But consider this: there was no provable financial harm to the producers of the film. No one was hurt. No one was deprived of anything. Yet, this guy is deprived of his freedom for one year and earns a permanent criminal record. This was a classic victimless crime and I would argue that that makes it no crime at all.

To put this in perspective (Why America is DEAD!) (5, Insightful)

PortHaven (242123) | more than 2 years ago | (#38438334)

Recently, a Social Security employee was robbed and shot. The shooter, recently released from prison after 9 months "time-served" of a 10 year sentence for armed robbery.

So armed robbery, and you can be out in less than a year. Upload an unfinished video of a film and it's a year in prison.

The avg person's well being is meaningless to the Law. But the profits of a stealing mega-corporation, now that the Law is concerned with.

There is a point where the Sheriff is corrupt, and his badge is nothing more than a bully pulpit.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?