Comments on: 2nd Canadian charged with camcording

By: Granny

Granny — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 02:59:30 +0000

I don’t go to the movie very often for several reasons. The first is because the price of the tickets. The second is that part of the fun of the movie is having salty popcorn, candy and a drink. The amount they charge should be illegal. It is most likely cost prohibitive to the average family today. The next thing you know you will be arrested if you have a candy bar from home in your purse.

By: monkeysmasher

monkeysmasher — Sun, 20 Jan 2008 16:45:07 +0000

say, why don’t people start going into theaters and just pretend to record the film?
Build some fake camcorders at home out of like plastic junk and duct tape, paint ‘em black and grey, just so they look like a camcorder. hell, if you’re creative, throw in a christmas tree light for the red recording glow.
get a few dozen/hundred/thousand (whatever amount who care enough about these crazy laws to try and activily protest) to do that everytime they go to the movies.
If enough people do it, maybe the cop’s/politicians will get the idea, and change the law
(yeah, that’s doubtfull, they’d probably make carrying a simulated camcorder a crime).

But hell, it’s an idea.

By: Jay

Jay — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 07:20:55 +0000

So if I take a picture of pictures in Maxim magazine while it is still on the store shelf am I infringing on their copyright?

I dont understand how you can get fined or jailed for recording a couple of minutes or seconds of a movie and these paparatzi that follow and harass movie stars make thousands of dollars of their images. I wonder if you can copyright your face. lol.

And I still can figure out why someone would go into a theatre and try to record the movie Do they not have the internet? Why not download it from someone who has more experience. Oh yeah and what about all the movies that where released on torrents the last couple of weeks that were all from Oscar voters. ie The Bucket List, The Quite Man, No Country For Old Men only to name a few.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 02:46:53 +0000

As a lawyer, I can say this might work.

By: Rekrul

Rekrul — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 00:47:55 +0000

Anyone who opposes such laws should do the following; Anytime you go to the theater, take along a NON-camera cell phone, or a small box that resembles a camcorder. During the movie, hold it up as if filming. When the idiots at the theater demand for you to hand it over, insist that you’ve done nothing wrong. Tell them that you were checking the time and that they’ll have to call the cops if they want you to hand over your private property. If they do, cooperate nicely with the cops and show them that you don’t have a single device on your person capable of recording a movie. Then file a lawsuit against the theater for harassment, emotional distress and anything else you can think of. Also demand a refund of the ticket price since they most likely didn’t let you finish watching the film.

I realize that most people aren’t going to be too eager to do this, but imagine if a majority did. Theaters would have no way to tell who the real pirates are and who are only pretending. It would quickly get very expensive for them, both in monetary cost and bad PR to pick on people in the theater.

By: Slowpost

Slowpost — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 23:39:54 +0000

Kelly: He got caught, essentially, for possessing a camera in a movie theatre. Had he wanted to film or take a picture of his friends reactions to the movie, he might suffer the same accusation. At this point that’s all you know, and since he was arrested and the contents of the camera presumably confiscated, it’s all you’re likely to know.

Bill C-59 has the purported purpose of reducing distribution of works copyrighted by the movie industry, but it doesn’t focus on distribution – instead it focuses on image capture. At this point anyone with a camera in their pocket – which eventually will be round about everyone – can be accused of breaking the law simply for being in a movie theatre. Perhaps you can imagine why some folks would see that as good incentive to stay out of them.

In fact you should and generally do have the right to make a personal copy of something you see, including something you paid to see. If you want to retain the right to, say, record your family and friends enjoying a theme park, concert or paid public gathering, you might want to question whether this is the thin edge of the wedge.

By: Kelly

Kelly — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 20:58:40 +0000

Bill C-59 is not harrassing us. I will gladly pay 10 dollars to see a movie.

What an idoit im glad he got caught.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 19:21:22 +0000

LOL. People should stop recording movies – there are NOT worthwhile wasting your time to go and see these movies. Hollywood makes crap movies. They are all copies of each other, essentially. I prefer to watch foreign and independent movies/film, and will gladly spend a buck on these. Hollywood can keep their crappy movies, and the “police” or “authority” and play by their rules however they like it. It is nothing more than a charade and a farce. Police should be doing their job in making streets safe, keeping track of traffic, and helping taxpayers with their needs, NOT playing cops vs. bandits on behalf of the Hollywood corporations who could do a lot of good things with the money they get from their movies.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 18 Jan 2008 18:30:58 +0000

The Bill C-59 is what causes me no to go to the movie theater any more and to boycott the movie industry. They want want to harrass us? fine! they can keep their shit for themselves but me I am not going to give money to these pigs!