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!

Warner Brothers Pulls Canadian Previews

kdawson posted more than 7 years ago | from the camcorders-eh dept.

Movies 273

A number of readers let us know that Reuters and others are reporting that Warner Brothers is canceling movie previews in Canadian theaters, starting with Oceans Thirteen. A Warner VP said, "Within the first week of a film's release, you can almost be certain that somewhere out there a Canadian copy will show up." Recently, the International Intellectual Property Association placed Canada on its Priority Watch List, along with the likes of Argentina, China, Russia, Turkey, and Venezuela. This community knows, thanks to Michael Geist, that the claim is mostly ficiton.

cancel ×

273 comments

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

TAG ALERT (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19041101)

whatclaim ficiton

Publicity Stunt by MPAA (4, Insightful)

farrellj (563) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041619)

That's all there is to this...the only people who will be hit by this are the movie critics, and the MPAA is hoping they will raise a fuss about this...I *hope* the critics have a clue about this, and don't take the bait....

ttyl
          Farrell

Lucky Canadians (5, Funny)

DJCacophony (832334) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041109)

Too bad they don't do that here, too, so I wouldn't have to sit through so many previews just to see the movie I paid to see.

Re:Lucky Canadians (5, Informative)

Nos. (179609) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041137)

Those are called trailers, and they're not stopping those. They're canceling early screenings of new movies.

Re:Lucky Canadians (2, Interesting)

DJCacophony (832334) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041263)

Oh, my mistake. I thought they said previews, rather than early screenings.

Re:Lucky Canadians (0, Redundant)

Nos. (179609) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041301)

They did, it is called a preview. What you are referring to are called trailers, and are a completely different thing.

Re:Lucky Canadians (3, Insightful)

stoolpigeon (454276) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041577)

the term previews is used frequently for the trailers, commercials, etc. that are shown prior to the beginning of a film. i've been in theaters where they have their canned deal and it will say something about 'following the previews'. i don't know if this is common across all of the u.s. but it is how i have heard it used in each of the areas where i have lived in the u.s.
 
occasionally I've had passes to showings of films a week or two before they came out - and i always have had to explain to people that it was an 'early showing' or some such. if I just said preview, they wouldn't know what I meant, so I think the usage is pretty common.

Re:Lucky Canadians (2, Funny)

Isaac-1 (233099) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041995)

It would certainly be nice if those "trailers" would go away, I went to see a movie earlier this year and it had 54 minutes worth of trailers and commercials before the opening credits.

Re:Lucky Canadians (1)

LordPhantom (763327) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041211)

Read the article - they're talking about pre-release showings (previews) of movies.

Re:Lucky Canadians (2, Insightful)

StarvingSE (875139) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041741)

Can we just tag this article with !trailer and be done with it?!?

Re:Lucky Canadians (1)

neoform (551705) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041307)

"Warner Bros. Pictures said Monday it will cancel preview screenings of its movies north of the border."

This is for preview Screenings.. meaning the full film being played before it's release date to a select audience (generally newspaper reviewers and radio contest winners).

Re:Lucky Canadians (1)

deathy_epl+ccs (896747) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041663)

It's worth noting that, even if what you suggest were so (that they plan to stop showing preview commercials in front of movies), all that would result in is more advertisements for Pepsi and Nike.

Yet another reason I hate going to the theatre... They charge way too much for the ticket for me to think it's OK for them to also force feed me advertisements for things that are completely unrelated to the movies.

Re:Lucky Canadians (2, Interesting)

An ominous Cow art (320322) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041991)

It's been something like four years since I've been in a regular movie theater for exactly that reason. I go to Chunky's [chunkys.com] instead; they don't do that. Every time I post a message about this, other people chime in with similar theaters elsewhere. I hope you can find one near you...

Re:Lucky Canadians (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19041695)

They're not pulling previews....just preview screenings.

A few years late, but.... (2, Funny)

tmosley (996283) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041117)

...it seems like everything's gone wrong since Canada came along!

Re:A few years late, but.... (3, Funny)

eclectro (227083) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041475)

...it seems like everything's gone wrong since Canada came along!

I think that it's high time that we stop this tyranny, protect the movie studios, and invade Canada.

I see no alternative.

Re:A few years late, but.... (1)

jcgf (688310) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041579)

To quote your president: "bring it on".

Re:A few years late, but.... (2, Interesting)

Magneon (1067470) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041641)

Well, we all know how well that turned out for you guys last time... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_1812 [wikipedia.org] "When the war had finished, 1,600 British and 2,260 American troops had died." Oddly enough both sides claim to have won... The British (now Canadian) said that they won because they successfully defended. The Americans claimed a victory because they stopped the native Americans from harassing them...

Re:A few years late, but.... (2, Funny)

sYkSh0n3 (722238) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041883)

Should we blame the government?
Or blame society?
Or should we blame the images on TV?
No, blame Canada
Blame Canada

Maybe I missed something... (4, Insightful)

Corpuscavernosa (996139) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041139)

... but where the hell is the correlation between a preview and a pirated full copy of a movie?

You're probably thinking of a trailer (2, Informative)

p3d0 (42270) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041247)

I think a preview is the movie, released a bit early.

His confusion is quite reasonable (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041339)

I think a preview is the movie, released a bit early.

In the GP's defense, they do say "THE FOLLOWING PREVIEW IS RATED whatever" before each trailer.

Re:Maybe I missed something... (1)

Kadin2048 (468275) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041321)

I didn't get this for a while either, but they're using "preview" in the sense of "showing the whole movie, before it's officially released," which is quite distinct from those advertisements/teasers that get shown before other movies, and are properly called "trailers."

I don't know if calling 'trailers' 'previews' is an Americanism, but I found the whole thing pretty confusing.

Re:Maybe I missed something... (1)

An ominous Cow art (320322) | more than 7 years ago | (#19042111)

I've never understood the practice of calling them 'trailers', siince they're generally shown before the main attraction. Wouldn't 'headers' be a better name? :-)

Re:Maybe I missed something... (1)

neoform (551705) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041361)

"Warner Bros. Pictures said Monday it will cancel preview screenings of its movies north of the border."

preview screening = full movie shown before it's release

Re:Maybe I missed something... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19042037)

before its release. It's not that hard, dammit!

Shooting themselves in the foot (4, Insightful)

neoform (551705) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041151)

Promotional Previews are specifically released in order to help promote the film through positive word of mouth and newspaper reviews..

Do they really think this is somehow going to help them make more revenue if there's no buzz on the street, amongst friends and no reviews in papers?

Talk about stupid. The movie industry seems as stupid as the RIAA labels..

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot (1)

Lockejaw (955650) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041195)

Haven't you heard? All decreases in revenue are because of piracy.

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot (4, Insightful)

compro01 (777531) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041237)

they're trying to reduce sales. then they can claim that teh ebil PIRAT3S! are stealing everything and convince the government that they need to "modernize" canadian copyright and IP laws.

it's not stupid. it's moderately smart and it seems to be working quite well in the US.

WTF are they thinking?! (4, Insightful)

RingDev (879105) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041503)

So in an effort to curb CAMCORDER pirated videos, they are getting rid of previews which will generate word of mouth, reviews, and more sales?!? It's not like we're talking about copied DVDs, or direct rips with full Dolby 7.1 surround sound, we're talking about PoC hand held camera recordings with a single audio channel, wiggling around through out the movie, with people blocking a chunk of the screen and audience noise over the movie...

I hate to break it to them, but anyone who is watching a copy of a movie from that medium was not in a position to actually buy a ticket or DVD.

-Rick

Re:WTF are they thinking?! (2, Funny)

ksheff (2406) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041793)

Someone in Hollywood heard that was the next scam that Julian and Ricky were going to pull. It will involve replacing one of Bubbles' lenses with a camcorder.

Re:WTF are they thinking?! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19041925)

Are you kidding?

The Spiderman 3 CAM was good (7.5-8 or so) and you don't need any more than that to figure out it wasn't worth going to the cinema.

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot (5, Funny)

mentaldingo (967181) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041513)

Indeed. This is the dumbest fucking idea I've heard since I joined the MPAA.

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot (4, Interesting)

SpeedyDX (1014595) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041707)

It is true, what you say.

I go to a lot of previews (part of the perks of being a University of Toronto student if you know where to look). Whenever a preview is shown to a select group of U of T students, there's a noticeable buzz going around campus (40,000+ strong) about the new movie. For example, I went to the previews for The Last King of Scotland and Waitress. After watching the previews, spreading a few words here and there myself, there's a noticeable amount of interest for those two movies.

Anyway, I don't know why Warner Bros would do this. Fox previews require us to hand in cell phones and they pat us down to check for recording devices. I don't mind letting them have a little touch if they're showing me a good movie for free. It's a win-win.

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot (1)

illaqueate (416118) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041893)

It seems more than anything else that they're trying to blow smoke to influence policy in Canada.

Re:Shooting themselves in the foot (3, Informative)

soft_guy (534437) | more than 7 years ago | (#19042053)

I disagree with you. I think that this is an excellent move by the film industry and should be encouraged. In fact, they should take it to the logical conclusion and stop making commercial movies altogether. That would prevent piracy. Movies suck. Do not cripple the 100 billion/yr computer industry that creates jobs for families to save the 5 billion/yr movie industry that creates trash and destroys families.

That's Fiction, Not Ficiton (0)

stimpy77 (1062126) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041191)

Learn how to spel.

Re:That's Fiction, Not Ficiton (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19041421)

Learn how to spel.
I'm dylsexic you insnestitive cold!

Re:That's Fiction, Not Ficiton (1)

Paul Pierce (739303) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041449)

That's spell, not spel. Learn how to spel.

Re:That's Fiction, Not Ficiton (1)

sayfawa (1099071) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041505)

Nobody likes it when you correct their diciton.

Self-fulfilling prophecy (5, Insightful)

Tackhead (54550) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041201)

> the studio said it will immediately halt all "promotional and word-of-mouth screenings"

Prediction: by August, there'll be a press release noting that revenues for Ocean's Thirteen and Harry Potter were low, and that it'sss all the faults of those tricksy pirateses stealing their preciousss, and that (surprise, surprise), the only solution is that the Canadian government "harmonize" its rules with the US by passing something equivalent to (or worse than) the DMCA.

Re:Self-fulfilling prophecy (0, Troll)

Otter (3800) | more than 7 years ago | (#19042003)

Prediction: by August, there'll be a press release noting that revenues for Ocean's Thirteen and Harry Potter were low...

Have you seen the Harry Potter trailer?!? More likely, Michael Geist and "this community" will be running around in Gryffindor robes complaining that the DVD won't be out soon enough.

Awesome! (5, Insightful)

jollyreaper (513215) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041217)

Now what can we do as a nation to get them to pull their crappy movies from our theaters?

Re:Awesome! (1)

Adambomb (118938) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041655)

Reduce theatre prices, as obviously people want to spend 80$ every time you take the kids to a show. I know if I saw reasonable prices, i'd be thrown into a loop i might never resolve.

Re:Awesome! (1)

Reality Master 101 (179095) | more than 7 years ago | (#19042027)

Reduce theatre prices, as obviously people want to spend 80$ every time you take the kids to a show.

$80?? How many kids do you have?? The most I've ever seen a ticket price is $10, and it's typically around $8 where I live.

Now, let's really examine that $8. EIGHT FREAKING DOLLARS. To see a production that they possibly spent hundreds of millions of dollars to produce. Ever priced live theatre? The circus? A concert? Sports events?

It always floors me that people complain about the price of tickets. What, exactly, do you expect them to cost?

Now, granted, food is rip-off, but too many people feel that they're obligated to stuff their traps while being entertained. Sheesh, stop eating for a couple of hours. Trust me, you'll survive.

Re:Awesome! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19042055)

Wow - you're the guy that owns all the theaters?!?

Wait... I'm confused. If you own them, why don't you just take them out yourself?

Seems straightforward to me (2, Insightful)

LordPhantom (763327) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041257)

Well.... If they're interested in preventing pre-release copies being available, I guess it kind-of makes sense. Don't show movies in theaters that aren't enforcing camcorder bans, etc. If they're trying to prevent piracy in general, it's not going to help much.

Re:Seems straightforward to me (5, Insightful)

orclevegam (940336) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041569)

Most of the quality rips you find on bitorrent and such are actually ripped from inside the projection room as opposed to down in the audience. This won't cut back on pre-release copies in the slightest, and honestly I'd bet most of the copies floating around now are from the US and not Canada. This is mostly a PR thing to try and pressure the Canadian government into bending over and lubing up for the MPAA, and has nothing at all to do with piracy.

Re:Seems straightforward to me (1)

Malc (1751) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041877)

They should water-mark the films and identify the offending cinemas. Next time those cinemas will lose ticket sales when other cinemas in the area host advanced showings and they don't.

Why? (0, Troll)

Hemogoblin (982564) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041261)

Who will this move actually affect? Are these the previews that Canadian reviewers would have seen? Or are these the "previews" ie commercials at the beginning of other movies? Or something else entirely?

As a Canadian, I don't really care either way. Of course, I never go see movies as soon as they come out anyway.

copying previews? huh? (0, Troll)

radarsat1 (786772) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041279)

Can someone explain why its a problem for movie previews to be copied?
I don't understand..

Or are they somehow "punishing" us for making pirated copies of full features by pulling the previews?
How is this a punishment..?

Oh, wait... okay now that I've read the article: "Previews" here is referring to advance showings of the full-length film, NOT to "trailers"... Je comprends.

Re:copying previews? huh? (1)

Lockejaw (955650) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041375)

There's still an unanswered question though: do you feel like you're being punished?
I wouldn't -- maybe having fewer prerelease screenings means the newspapers will contain a smaller percentage of talk about movies.

Re:copying previews? huh? (1)

sowth (748135) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041757)

They will just add more talk about celebrities. I gave up on "news" outlets a long time ago.

Good I hate previews. (1)

Safiire Arrowny (596720) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041295)

I thought they just meant getting rid of the previews you're made to watch before a movie, but they mean early preview screenings. Anyway, that's less US media in our Country. Perhaps we can go see movies from other countries, or our own country instead those days.

Re:Good I hate previews. (1)

multisync (218450) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041589)

Perhaps we can go see movies from other countries, or our own country instead those days.


Excellent idea. Sarah Polley's "Away From Her" looks good.

There's some other coverage on this.... (4, Informative)

8127972 (73495) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041333)

... On theglobeandmail.com below:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM .20070508.WBmingram20070508112009/WBStory/WBmingra m [theglobeandmail.com]

The Globe And Mail is one of Canada's largest daily newspapers and has some amount of influence. Also, Mathew Ingram is somewhat influential in the "blogisphere" up north. I think he's hit the nail on the head. Too bad the studios won't be paying attention.

Oblig Reference (1)

ZiakII (829432) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041341)

"Can be found here... [nearlygood.com]

Go Team USA! (4, Funny)

d34thm0nk3y (653414) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041347)

Within the first week of a film's release, you can almost be certain that somewhere out there a Canadian copy will show up.

Come, my fellow Americans, we can do this! We have a week to get our copy of Oceans Thirteen up! FTW!!

Re:Go Team USA! (1)

servognome (738846) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041601)

Come, my fellow Americans, we can do this! We have a week to get our copy of Oceans Thirteen up! FTW!!
Too much work, why don't we just outsource it to China.

Source ID (0)

no_opinion (148098) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041355)

The studios know where the camcorder copies come from - they are marked such that the leak can be traced back even after transfer to DVD or VCD. As far as I know, it's not in their business interest to cut previews so odds are they have reliable evidence the leaks are coming from Canada.

Sequelitis (1)

russotto (537200) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041367)

I have a feeling that banning previews for _Oceans 13_ will only help its draw, by reducing negative word of mouth. Same for _Potter_; the fifth book was by far the least enjoyable.

I do have a few questions which might lead to concern for a studio exec.

1) Just how much equipment, in dollars, does it take to transfer a movie to DVD or an HD format?

2) Is this equipment easily transportable?

3) How long does the transfer take?

4) How much would it take to bribe a projectionist or theatre manager to allow someone in the theatre, with the equipment, for long enough to do the transfer?

Re:Sequelitis (1)

compro01 (777531) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041403)

4) How much would it take to bribe a projectionist or theatre manager to allow someone in the theatre, with the equipment, for long enough to do the transfer?

this is why they're getting rid of the previews. you can't bribe them to copy what they don't have.

Re:Sequelitis (1)

russotto (537200) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041529)

The stated reason for getting rid of previews is that the laws against someone sneaking a camcorder into the theatre and making a copy that way are insufficient in Canada. Bribing a theatre employee for access to the print to make a high-quality transfer is a whole different thing, and works as well in either the US or Canada.

Re:Sequelitis (1)

Animats (122034) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041889)

I have a feeling that banning previews for _Oceans 13_ will only help its draw,

Yes, it's one of those movies that makes you ask "Why bother?". The original Oceans 11 was a vehicle for Frank Sinatra and the Rat Pack. So this is the second sequel of a remake. For a second-rate heist movie.

Maybe they're trying to break the record for second-rate sequels, currently held by "Police Academy 7".

No previews? BONUS! (1)

decipher_saint (72686) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041401)

Ok, I don't see how a company pulling its advertising is going to hurt me or the theater.

International? (1)

El_Muerte_TDS (592157) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041425)

The International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA) is a private sector coalition formed in 1984 to represent the U.S. copyright-based industries in bilateral and multilateral efforts to improve international protection of copyrighted materials.
http://www.iipa.com/aboutiipa.html [iipa.com]

How can you call something international when your own interest is protecting something from a single country.

This, IMO, is a good first step.... (2, Insightful)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041453)

All those thieving consumers out there need to be punished. I can only hope that the MPAA members carry forward with step #2 on their route to newfound profits: Stop releasing films, period. That will show those thieving consumers.

Stop 1 - Make movies
Stop 2 - Don't release them to the public
Stop 3 ........
Stop 4 profit! /sarcasm

Re:This, IMO, is a good first step.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19042017)

Lets have a -1, humornotappreciated moderation!

Oceans 13 Preview - Oceans 13 Sucks (0, Offtopic)

future assassin (639396) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041461)

Hopefully this gets indexed by google and shows up first.

BLAME CANADA! (0, Flamebait)

pak9rabid (1011935) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041465)

...they're not even a real country aanyways

Re:BLAME CANADA! (0, Redundant)

pak9rabid (1011935) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041643)

awww, cmon....hasn't anyone seen the southpark movie??

Re:BLAME CANADA! (1)

orclevegam (940336) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041919)

awww, cmon....hasn't anyone seen the southpark movie??
Oh sure, I downloaded that off a Canadian bittorrent server the other day. Only problem was the moose that kept walking past the camera every 30 minutes or so.

Blame Canada: +1, Militaristic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19041469)

"Recently, the International Intellectual Property Association placed Canada on its Priority Watch List, along with the likes of Argentina, China, Russia, Turkey, and Venezuela."

Undoubtedly encouraged by this War Criminal [whitehouse.org] .

Thanks for the notice.

Pax,
K. Trout

Movie Piracy Helps Prevent Gun Crime (5, Funny)

Bert the Turtle (1073828) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041471)

Come on, we all know that despite a similar or larger number of firearms per person in Canada that violent crime and gun crime in particular is much lower there. It is obvious that having the opportunity to get cheap pirate movies keeps Canadians from killing each other. As such, I call on the US government to decriminalise piracy. Won't someone please think of the children!

One thing I wonder about these countries (1)

MikeRT (947531) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041477)

If the United States did to China what China allows to happen to us WRT IP rights, I bet China's government would go nuts. If the federal government allowed piracy of every category of IP to flourish, and to flood the Chinese market with counterfeit goods ranging from clothes to cars, you'd hear an outcry about it.

The United States is really the only country in the world that people expect to respect IP rights. Imagine what would happen if the Department of Health and Human Services seized the patents on drugs made in Brazil because it didn't want to pay the price the Brazilians wanted.

Is it because we're "too rich?" Whatever happened to the Golden Rule and Categorical Imperative?

Re:One thing I wonder about these countries (2, Informative)

orclevegam (940336) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041823)

Actually, China wouldn't care at all. The fact is, the United States is incapable of matching China's production costs, so it would be completely impossible for us to flood their market with cheap counterfeit goods (which are the only kind of counterfeit good that sells unless for some reason it's a limited supply item). As such, we could counterfeit Chinese goods coming into our country, but the chinese ones would probably be cheaper unless the Chinese government put large export tariffs on them, or we could try and ship counterfeit goods to China, but once again our goods would end up costing more than the origionals. The only reason that the US cares at all about IP is that it's our current major export, and as such we would really rather prefer if everyone payed us for it.

Re:One thing I wonder about these countries (1)

compro01 (777531) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041839)

Whatever happened to the Golden Rule

the golden rule became "he who has the gold makes the rules", which near-perfectly describes the state of the us government in this matter.

Bou hou hou (0, Offtopic)

Chris whatever (980992) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041487)

How in hell will i ever get to watch movies now if they ban the previews, OH wait true i'm 35, with a wife and kids, work all day, tired at night, doing basement over the next year, go to movies once in while when mother in law is available.

I DONT CARE, i barely have the time to go so who care if they ban previews, ouhh i'm missing out, are they going to ban it from video stores? no well i'll wait for the dvd.

Pirate copies,...tsk! the only thing they should do is feel sorry for the poor chaps who watches pirated movies on their 20 inch lcd screen hoping no one will shout in the audience or get up.

that's like masturbating with the braw section of any FREE women's clothing magazine, it's just a few and there is no alarm.

This ought hurt (1)

Bullfish (858648) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041491)

But it won't. Just checking around my office, the feeling is a resounding, "meh".

No, people shouldn't camcord in theatres, but if this is supposed to get the common citizen to get up in arms, it isn't going to happen. Fact is, I doubt anyone will even notice.

The only thing I can hope (1)

oGMo (379) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041545)

The only thing I can hope is that with all the self-doomsday predictions by the media industry about how they're going to go bust is that they suddenly actually do. That would be funny.

Please Take It One Step Further... (0, Flamebait)

FrankDrebin (238464) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041567)

... and stop releasing your crappy movies in Canada altogether. And while your add it, spare our friends in the rest of the world too.

Delays cause piracy. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19041593)

Most people would prefer to see a movie in crystal quality on a giant screen. The only reason people watch these extremely low quality camcordered versions is quite simply that don't have any other choice. Now, let's watch as they remove the other choice and just see what happens.

Canada might not have laws expressly against using a camcorder in the theatre, but 1) it is still illegal to distribute it, especially for profit, and 2) getting caught will likely get you banned from the theatre for life.

Re:Delays cause piracy. (1)

popeye44 (929152) | more than 7 years ago | (#19042099)

While I agree in theory that "most people" would like to see movies on a giant screen. I've been to a movie 1 time in 2006 and before that 1 time in 2005.. and prior to that I'ved averaged 2x a year or less. I'm the rare few I guess in that could give a shit if it's on a 40 foot or 40inch screen. I enjoy the movie if it's good either way. I have hdtv, and 1000w surround I really don't feel the need to spend an avg of 15-20.00 per person with drinks and popcorn to see a movie in that environment. The last time I went to Six Flags magic mountain I spent 20.00 per ticket, and probably 25.00 to eat that day and I can damn sure tell you I enjoyed that more than the "movie theater environment" I'd like to see spiderman 3 in a theater.. but the chances that I will are low. I cannot justify the expense right now. I grew up not going to movies and I will continue the trend as long as I'm alive. I'd pay 20.00 a movie if I could get it in my house the day it was released and then buy the dvd a few months later.. Hell Thats the exact distribution method I'd love to see.

BullFUD... (1)

Cervantes (612861) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041639)

This is just BullFUD (a subtle and aromatic combination of bullshit and FUD). The **AA are unhappy with our relaxed and liberal IP laws up here, along with their inability to run around suing tens of thousands of us like they apparently do down there. So they've been trying to spread this bullfud about Canada being Piracy Central, likely in the hope of creating a bit of media noise and encouraging the current government to pass some draconian laws that would let them sue every canadian citizen at once. I already recall one /. story a while ago about how "50% of piracy comes from Canada" or some such crap, which was almost immediate refuted.

But, like all good PR strategies, truth doesn't matter, truthiness does. They'll keep throwing out these ridiculous statements, and trying to make headlines, and hope that eventually people just remember the fud, and not the truth.

The truth is that 25 million Canadians are much less of a source of piracy than 300 million americans. It's just a matter of numbers. All the **AA wants is some new laws so they can start suing us out of existence, and then they can frame the pirate problem as a European or Asian problem, stir up that xenophobic rhetoric, and then really encourage some strange new way of stamping out the "piracy problem" (net filtering, extradition treaties, etc etc) that they can't do while those Nice Canadians(tm) are still pirating up north.

Plus, we can't be evil pirates, most of us don't even have high-speed running to our igloos.

As usual... (1)

Jabrwock (985861) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041747)

I guess I'll just have to get my pirated copy from US industry insiders, or US movie reviewers... Who seem to be a source of 75% of all pre-release net-leaks... according to AT&T Labs anyway...

Preview SCREENINGS, not previews. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19041753)

There seems to be a terminology misunderstanding here. Previews are the 2 minute ads before you see a feature film in a theatre. These are not what the article is talking about. Preview screenings are showings of a full feature film to an audience before it officially opens. For instance, when you see something in the paper that says "Go to Store X to pick up your free pass for 2 to see Ocean's 13 5 days before it comes out!", that's what the article is talking about.

It's not really hard to figure out where a film was camcorded from. Each motion picture print has a serial number encoded on the film itself which can be freeze framed and read on the pirated copy. You've probably seen quick flashes of red dots which seem like a defect in the movie when you're watching it in the theatre- that's the serial number flashing by.

In reality, this isn't going to do anything to stop camcording in theatres - it is only a tactic to get a rule implemented that a studio wants. But I will give them kudos for attempting to stop the creators and distributors of the pirated items, as opposed to harassing and suing the end user a la the RIAA.

Yeah, i'm logged in as Anonymous Coward because I do some preview piracy enforcement for a studio in the US. If it's a big film like Harry Potter or Ocean's 13 here, they tend to have a studio or agency rep there with security and night vision goggles to monitor the audience during the show. What the studio doesn't seem to get is that the majority of camcorded copies I've seen have come from the projectionist's booth. (In my experience, yours may vary.)

From a studio field rep and 15 year projectionist. ;-)

Like everyone else, I'm confused (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041795)

I'm trying to understand the movie industry's motives here. I have a few thoughts.

Punishment: They're hoping that having to wait a week or two before the release will so infuriate the Canadians that they will lobby their government to enact stronger laws. If this is the idea they're really out of touch. While there is a certain desire to keep up with what's hot and happening amongst ones peers, and this will lead to a lot of demand to see the latest movies, people do not have an overwhelming need to see a film just because some people in a different country have seen it.

Piracy reduction: I guess it is conceivable that stronger laws in other countries will prevent camcorder copies elsewhere thus eliminating this problem in the first week of release, or something. But how much of an effect do cams have on audience figures? The previews exist in order to promote the movie. Will the reduction in promotion really be outweighed by the decrease in piracy?

Statistical data: They are genuinely interested in whether stronger piracy protection in Canada would cut down on this sort of piracy. This could actually work. Seems a fairly expensive way to get some data.

Morons (1)

Sciros (986030) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041803)

Pulling advance screenings will help reduce piracy? Hah, yeah, absolutely. I wonder how many people in the MPAA are making their careers on spreading FUD about film piracy and pushing various "solutions" to it. Oh well, as if anyone other than movie critics really care about advance screenings much. I'm just surprised how aggressive and seemingly desperate MPAA/RIAA tactics have gotten in the last few months...

This is actually a good thing (1)

redphive (175243) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041831)

If the previews are pulled, and the Warner Brothers titles are still being pirated before they are even available to Canadians, then go look somewhere else. I pay to see movies I want to see. The odd time I will catch a free preview but that is a rarity. If the movie is of interest, I will pay to see it and don't care if there is a preview or not.

All this said, I really doubt that any correlation will be drawn from this.

Cam Quarters (1)

LevonB (1099459) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041863)

We have to stop letting people in our movie theaters with cam-quarters.

When in Doubt... (1)

whisper_jeff (680366) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041871)

When in doubt, treat them all like criminals.

I love watching big business bully governments to do their bidding. That is, after all, what democracy is all about, right?

This is to give ammo (3, Informative)

jhylkema (545853) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041887)

to Harpo to "harmonize" Canadian copyright laws with the U.S. This is part of his "deep integration" hidden agenda he's going to implement the second he gets a majority government. You know, all of those "extra" laws Canada has on the books that "hinder" trade? He's already sold the tar sands to the oil barons lock, stock and barrel.

Don't forget, the "piracy" claims come from an industry whose reputation for "creative accounting" is cited as examples of such in accounting textbooks!

This is great news!!!! (2, Funny)

limabone (174795) | more than 7 years ago | (#19041901)

So if we start pirating commercials before movies they will stop showing them also?? That is absolutely fantastic news!

please remind me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#19042011)

Is the US about to declare war on piracy ?
in that case, id better flee...

Preview or pre-release (1)

phorm (591458) | more than 7 years ago | (#19042015)

I think that the wording on the story is a bit confusing. While it seems they are talking about previews (short snippets of the movie release to entice watchers, aka "trailers"), they are more likely referring to pre-releases (full releases to certain entities to generate hype - although often with identifying marks or distortions - before the official movies hit the theatres etc).

Good Riddance! (1)

businessnerd (1009815) | more than 7 years ago | (#19042065)

I say good riddance to these preview screenings. The preview screening for "Miracle" almost caused m y girlfriend to dump me. Funny story...

I was doing the long distance thing for a while with the girlfriend while in college. There was a preview screening of "Miracle" at the movie theater, and as avid hockey fans, my roommate and I had to go. I tell the girlfriend that I'm going to see "Miracle" tonight. A few days later she finds out that "Miracle" was not out in theaters yet. It took some explaining to convince her I was not out cheating her and was actually at a special advanced screening.

It's about time that Canada got tough on insecure girlfriends and did away with the "convenient excuse" that is the Preview Screening.

PS. Save you're breath on the "slashdotters don't have girlfriends" comments. We get it. We're socially inept nerds. ha ha

They'll be missed (1)

hansamurai (907719) | more than 7 years ago | (#19042069)

And here I always enjoyed them Canadian versions of movies, all those "aboots" and the additional "eh" here or there always gave me a smile.

Makes no sense, really (1)

imarsman (305818) | more than 7 years ago | (#19042113)

The US, pushed largely by its entertainment industry, wants the world to share the wonders of IP legislation that it has foisted on US consumers. This pre-screening action will do nothing to stop piracy, since fuzzy video tapings of movies interspersed by coughs don't compete well with the pristine per-screening copies of movies that make up the majority of leaks. It will, though, give Bev Oda, our fearless Minister of Heritage, something to point at when her government tries to push through more restrictive IP laws. Politicians and lobbyists have perfected the art of whining and fear-mongering until they get their way. If Bev Oda were doing her job she'd be paying more attention to actual Canadian heritage. Perhaps she's true to the Canadian heritage of caving in.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>