Wow the UK is taking this seriously I see, bravo:
The movie thieves are still quite safe in Canada, the RCMP here refuses to enforce the law.
Jump to content
Bootlegger Gets 33 mos in jail!
145 replies to this topic
Posted 25 August 2014 - 04:32 AM
Officers were able to trace him after he used the username TheCod3r to leave a comment on a well-known pirated movie website.
Danks had used the same username on the Plenty of Fish dating website
What a complete prat.
I personally think excessive stupidity should be a criminal offense, so on that basis the sentence is not unreasonable.
When I think of all the hardworking folks out there who work tirelessly, anonymously and passionately in the background, making inexpensive entertainment available to the masses, for no recognition, no reward, and to be frank, no bloody reason whatever that I can figure out, it does my heart good to see a self-aggrandizing "bold, arrogant and cocksure" twat like Philip Danks get what's coming to him.
... the UK is taking this seriously I see,
Damn straight. True, I can't see any great reduction in the amount of piracy, but by God, you won't see too many people bragging about it!
The Federation Against Copyright Theft (Fact), is sending a clear message: "If you're going to distribute stolen intellectual property, DON'T put your f*cking name on the website!"
Posted 25 August 2014 - 11:33 AM
Waaaaa? This seems an about face for you Keith? The last time I posted on this topic we got into a real row on it, now, not so much. What changed?
I fully expected quite a different post from you.
Posted 26 August 2014 - 03:00 AM
Did you actually read what I wrote?
And sorry, while having a Sustaining Membership gives you 24 hours to edit your post, sadly, it doesn't affect quotations from your post, which is the only reason I'm replying .
I've seen some truly hilarious attempts here at "editing reality" unfortunately fossilized in other people's quotes.....
"The last time I posted on this topic we got into a real row on it,"
No, you got into a real row about it.
I don't know what the solution to intellectual property theft is, but I'm bloody sure it's not your recommended approach. Just sayin'...
As far as enforcement goes, this guy wasn't just "low hanging fruit", he was fruit: Picked, waxed, weighed and sealed in a plastic tray with a barcode and the grower's name, address, phone number and email
Posted 26 August 2014 - 12:27 PM
Tip of the iceberg. When I cruise Youtube it's like every film made can be found there in bits and pieces, or there's a link to a pirate website offering a stream (no, I've never been to one).
One time I contacted the copyright enforcement office and made a query about what I can do when I see an illegal upload, and the response I got was that Youtube usually had a report feature on all videos.
The only problem is that you have to be the owner to report a copyright violation. So, if you worked on something, you know the director and producer, and you know the distribution model, but you only crewed on the picture, you cannot report a copyright violation on Youtube, or anyplace else for that matter.
To me this is a real handicap. Without giving normal honest people the tools to report copyright theft, the pirates win, and their eating into distribution profits and DVD sales will dry up work.
It will come out of your paycheque after a gig.
That's why this is so important.
In Hong Kong and Singapore police have had shootouts with DVD pirates cartels. That's how serious a problem it is because that's how lucrative the pirates see this.
On the other hand, maybe the majors and indys need to bring down the prices on streams, DVDs and tickets. That way more people might be inclined to pay honest money to see a feature.
Posted 29 August 2014 - 05:43 PM
Oh wow, few people interested in this. I would have thought with all the aspiring directors that people would have been outraged and posting left and right, but I guess not.
Remember, when that producer tells you that he can only pay you in food, and not cash, you'll have piracy to blame for eating into his profits (YOUR PAY CHEQUE) and driving him effectively out of business.
And, like I posted earlier, there is NO WAY to report copyright violations unless you are the injured party whose work was stolen, even though you may have worked on the project, or are intimately familiar with the film.
I'm truly astounded about this.
Posted 29 August 2014 - 07:05 PM
Most interesting fact gleened on these pages for some time...and best reason to become a sustaining member ever...Thanks
Posted 29 August 2014 - 07:39 PM
Piracy has had a major impact on the indie film business, where 99.99% of new film people start out FYI.
Walk around AFM, talk to the buyers, they'll tell you they won't even bother buying DVD titles anymore because the piracy is so bad in their respective territories. Canada is one of the worst offenders. The bootleggers OPENLY sell pirate DVDs in retail stores at the Pacific Mall in the Toronto area. I have spoken to the RCMP directly about this and they refuse to enforce the copyright laws.
So since piracy is so bad for DVD titles in the indie world the buyers now look for titles that can go onto TV. At least that way they can make a TV sale and a few dollars. Problem is that the vast majority of indie movies are not good enough to make it onto TV, so they simply stay un-sold. Many of the DVD titles that were sold in the 90s were low budget horrors that a distributor could turn a profit on in the DVD market, but that is effectively gone now.
We've had members on here advocating for the benefits of DVD piracy, those people need a psychiatric exam....there are no benefits to people that rely on the movie industry to pay their rent or buy food.
Posted 29 August 2014 - 07:57 PM
those people need a psychiatric exam
The extent, significance or even existence or otherwise of the piracy problem has never really been commented on, contrary to what you continue to assert, and in a most abusive and insulting manner at times. We'll leave it to others to decide who needs a psychiatric exam.
I started out basically saying: "Yes, I acknowledge there is problem, but I don't believe Richard Boddington coming on here ranting and raving about it is going to achieve anything more than making him look like a pathetic prat. To solve this the industry needs the public on its side, and that is NOT the way to do it, and they are well aware of this."
But if you want to go on being a loose cannon on a forum that costs nothing to post on, go for your life.
Posted 29 August 2014 - 09:08 PM
Thank-you I will. You have no stake in the film industry so I have zero understanding of why you even bother to comment.
Posted 30 August 2014 - 02:21 AM
I'm curious why other people do not post. I mean presumably your livlihoods depend on this. My guess is that a portion of younger film makers probably DL illegal streams or buy pirated media. All the while they have dreams of "making it big". It seems like for those people it's okay as long as it's not their material, or your material, that's getting pirated.
I really don't get it. More people are not posting on something that's going to effect their livlihood. If you've been in the industry for 20 years or so, then what happens when you can't score that next gig because a producer doestn't have the money to pay you, or closed up shop because his films were pirated and his income stream dried up?
How do you beat piracy?
Posted 30 August 2014 - 03:09 AM
I don't know, I suspect not by making a complete idiot of yourself on a public forum.....
Posted 30 August 2014 - 03:25 AM
Whatever. We'll just add that the lo-o-o-ng list of other things that you have zero understanding of, or that you don't know, and that you have zero idea that you don't know.
Failure is not an option.
Well, not for you anyway....
And when's this bloody movie of yours going to be released in Australia, Cecil B? No sign of it anywhere.
It would be sort of ironic if the only way I could see your movie in Australia was by downloading it.
I know you can probably buy it online, but you see, the discs are only available in Region Code 1, (I checked) and any player in Australia that can play anything but region 4 is highly illegal, since it defeats the distributors' distribution control....
(You can't even do a legal download either, because the download sites all know where you're trying to access them from.)
I may be the only person in Australia with a region-4-only DVD player, but someone has to take a stand.
Posted 30 August 2014 - 04:13 AM
The reason I've avoided adding to this rather ill-tempered thread is that I've already more than adequately stated my opinion in others. In general it inclines strongly toward the Walters point of view, but can be summarised thus:
The real impact of piracy on any part of the industry is not something we can ever know. Pirates are typically unwilling to provide accurate statistics on the success of their actvity and even if they did there is no way of knowing how many instances of piracy represent a lost sale. This is not intended to be a defence of piracy, but it's the reason that a lot of those headline-grabbing loss figures claimed by the companies are so suspect. In the case mentioned in this thread, 700,000 downloads is states to represent "millions" of pounds of lost revenue for the distributor, a figure I find highly suspect. Again, I don't support piracy, but the debate is not positively served by this sort of hyperbole.
Claims of imminent catastrophe across the film industry have been made since the easy availability of VHS recorders first made piracy mainstream and it has not happened yet. As such my view remains that the copyright (and, as appropriate, law) enforcement response has the purpose not of eradicating piracy as is so often claimed, since this is probably impossible given reasonable anti-piracy action. The purpose of the enforcement response is to keep piracy down to a level which does not have a significant impact on the industry whose products are being duplicated. There can be, and should be, no expectation of completely eradicating piracy. Discourse which promotes the idea is at least a waste of time and at worst provokes entirely unreasonable enforcement action which is likely to have far more negative effects on society than a low level of piracy. I suspect, for instance, that the cost of imprisoning the man mentioned above will greatly exceed the value impact of his actions on the film industry.
For a long time, there were few or no ways to legally buy films online, and this remains the case in many jurisdictions and with significant technical limitations on the playability of the resulting film. There is no technical reason this needs to be the case and the fact that people in different jurisdictions (or, frankly, just people who aren't in the US) are often treated less favourably provides a justification to pirates.
Finally, the idea that anyone except people working in the best-paid parts of the film industry are really affected by this is hilarious. The major US distributors are overwhelmingly affected by this precisely because they overwhelmingly control the entire world market for film, and anyone not in a position to work for them - whether that's people outside the US or people not working at the high end - has already been massively disadvantaged by the way the film industry is organised, with or without piracy.
None of these things makes piracy OK, but then driving five miles an hour over the speed limit isn't really OK, either, and nobody's trying for sympathy headlines about that.
And in the end, they can do it, nobody can stop them, and if we incline for a moment to the Boddington point of view, the fact that you can do something and nobody can stop you makes it OK, doesn't it? Or does that suddenly not count when it's you?
Oh, I love this job.
Posted 30 August 2014 - 05:18 AM
Alright, here goes a different opinion.
We live in the internet age. I pay six pounds a month to be able to stream all the music I want from Google Play. Google then shares this income amongst the copyright holders according to the number of plays each one gets. I have not yet been able NOT TO FIND an album or single I want to listen to. It works, it's simple and pretty cheap. They've accepted their distribution costs are near zero and have accordingly changed their pricing structure. It's on my phone, my laptop, everywhere I want.
However, when I try and pay for movie streaming services, call it Amazon, Netflix and whatever, the offer pales in comparison to what is available on any "illegal" website. If I'm following a certain TV show, and I happen not to live in the country where it's premiered, the best I have available online is one season too late. Sure, certain shows like House of Cards and Extant are premiered online and to a worldwide audience. But these cases are so few they're essentially a grain of sand in the big machine.
When I go to the restaurant I ask for the menu, then I choose what I want and the lovely waiter brings it to my table. Yet, when it comes to watching movies, the restaurant tells me what I have to eat, and threatens me with the fires of hell if I eat somewhere else.
Posted 30 August 2014 - 06:19 AM
That's because you're eating their food without paying for it.
Posted 30 August 2014 - 06:54 AM
Posted 30 August 2014 - 07:05 AM
Given how much eBay make from each sale, no wonder they're satisfied. I suspect the funders of films would be happy enough if there was a satisfactory on line revenue stream in place. They don't exactly get a huge percentage from each seat during the theatrical release.