Comments on: Girl nailed for 20-second video clip

By: Shia Labeouf

Shia Labeouf — Mon, 08 Oct 2007 18:17:56 +0000

If anything, her 20-second clip would have encouraged her 13-year old brother to go see the movie with friends, thus the movie and theater would probably have made more money.

How ironic.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 24 Aug 2007 17:17:49 +0000

I know I’ve sent a message to Regal telling them I will carefully check the ownership of any theater I patronize to insure Regal never gets another dime of my money. If you want to tell them as well, send an email to

ddelaria@regalcinemas.com

It’s investor relations but it’s the email I have. I’m sure they will notice if their inbox begins to flood.

Donald De Laria
Vice President Investor Relations
Regal Entertainment Group
7132 Regal Lane
Knoxville, TN 37918
Phone: 865-925-9685
Fax: 865-925-7858
E-mail: ddelaria@regalcinemas.com

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Mon, 06 Aug 2007 16:22:52 +0000

Even better, they should cam the tacky warnings

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sun, 05 Aug 2007 16:10:01 +0000

You know what would be funny? If someone cammed the commercial advertisement before the feature, then pretended to cam a section of the movie, so that when the evidence was produced all the judge would see would be a twenty second commercial for Viagra, or some such thing.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sun, 05 Aug 2007 16:01:41 +0000

How is this different than a critic sitting in a theater copying down quotes from the movie?

Doesn’t it only differ in the technology used, and the size of the audience for the critique?

By: Vangel

Vangel — Sat, 04 Aug 2007 21:17:32 +0000

To hell with boycott. I am not going to go to the theaters here in singapore, dont wanna take any chances. The laws here is stricter as most would know.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 03 Aug 2007 14:21:47 +0000

I think it’s good that they arrested that bitch. She could have brought the entire industry to its knees with her 20-second recording.

By: johnnyg0

johnnyg0 — Fri, 03 Aug 2007 12:14:46 +0000

Soon, just to get into a theater, you’ll be required to insert this happy anal probe. It will only scan your everyday moves and thoughts for a few hours, and it will evacuate by itself next time you go to the bathroom. You all should know that the ability to see is a priviledge, not a right. So stop complaining people.. here’s your probes.

Seriously, in one week we had the Guzzo incident (I will never go there again), and now this? Is my perception of the future so far from the truth?

By: the5cardstud

the5cardstud — Fri, 03 Aug 2007 03:12:59 +0000

Even if it is not fair use (which it is), how is Regal the victim? They don’t own the (ahem) Intellectual Property!!

And since when does the victim get to choose what the state prosecutes? Criminal law is not supposed to work like that.

This is wrong on many levels!!

By: cyberscan

cyberscan — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 22:43:43 +0000

They lost me as a customer years ago. I will be writing a letter to Regal to explain why. I do know that if I were sitting on the jury, I would not convict the girl regardless of any instruction given to me by a judge. Citizen jurors were implemented by the Founding Fathers for precisely this reason – to give the common people a way do nullify oppressive and unconstitutional laws.

By: Alter_Fritz

Alter_Fritz — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 21:01:42 +0000

Trent

the problem is that it does not count that her intended use might fall under fair use if the means with which he tried to archive this goal are illegal under another law.
on the paper it is that recording in cinema is against some law, so kiss your fair use defense good bye.

Its just the same as if she would have wanted to use some clips from a DVD to show in a class project. the usage of a clip in class would be definetly fair use, but her extracting the clip out of a copyprotected CSS carying DVD would be a violation of the DMCA.
(Desclaimer: Note that I’m no expert in your laws)

But as the other commenters pointed out already, if the manager in that cinema is such a jerk and make such a trouble for this nonsense, just boykot that one and inform his superiours in the company chain what a jerk he is and why you will not spend any more money in their cinema chain!
Without the people as customers all those jerks in the entertainment industry are nothing!

By: Trent

Trent — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 20:25:40 +0000

If the facts of what happened are true then they broke no law.

There is a thing called “fair use.”

In this case you can use clips of a copyrighted movie to show to make comments on it.
Since this was a clip to comment on to get others enjoy it…
Fair Use.

And lawsuit against police for unlawful arrest, kidnapping, false imprisonment,,,etc.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 19:34:41 +0000

A massive boycott of all Regal Cinemas is in order here. Have
as many people as possible cite this case, tell theater managers
they will urge everyone they know to never patronize a Regal
cinema, and even write the CEO to this effect.

Jail time for recording a 20 second clip of a movie? And the
intent was not to actually commit piracy, but was entirely
innocuous? BAD MOVE, REGAL. I hope your chain suffers a major
negative impact due to the overzealous attempt to pillory a
young girl.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 19:03:13 +0000

“They were the victim in this case, and they felt strongly enough about it.”

Bull-shit. Show me one instance when filming 20 seconds of a film for personal use has ever caused someone financial troubles.

By: ben

ben — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 18:37:41 +0000

The simple answer to this oppressive behaviour would be to boycott theatres and cinemas. How long would they last without customers? A nationwide boycott of cinemas for a month would have a devastating effect. I’m sure they would think twice about enforcing this policy given such consequences.