The Hurt Locker Producer Sues 5,000 BitTorrenters

Status
Not open for further replies.

CoryInJapan

Distinguished
Aug 14, 2008
276
0
18,780
0
Or just stick to the private trackers....Orrrrr don't pirate at all.
Not saying we dont all commit some sort of piracy.
But it has gotten a bit out of hand these days.With everyone on broadband n such.Well most anyways.

But twas a crappy movie.They are just looking for money for they're crap movie.Hollywood is mostly garbage now days with a good release maybe 1-2 times every 1-3 years now days.I'm comparing this decades junk to the awesomeness of the 90's on back.
 

cryogenic

Distinguished
Jul 10, 2006
449
1
18,780
0
So these torrenting users are preventing the filthy rich media companies from becoming even richer?

I don't recall seeing media companies compete on price, ever! I think we should sue them for price fixing and extortion.

I don't support piracy in any way, but considering the fact that the media conglomerates have not been able to present a solution for easy online access to content over the last decade, I don't think the law suits are warranted.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Any insolvent privateer should represent themselves in pro per and force the MPAA to take it to trial. Then declare bankruptcy.
 

kinggraves

Distinguished
May 14, 2010
951
0
19,010
12
No matter how many oscars they buy, it won't erase the bad press that lawsuits bring. Voltage Pictures is now the guy at the party that calls the cops. No one wants to invite that guy.
 

Kryan

Distinguished
Oct 23, 2008
233
0
18,680
0
these 5000 people...are they only in the US? (and no, i'm not asking coz i downloaded it, i didn't...*cough*yet*cough*)

but as far as i know most EU countries protect the end user (us paying subscribers) quite well...??
 

KingArcher

Distinguished
May 19, 2010
238
0
18,710
16
[citation][nom]zoemayne[/nom]FUCKING IMAN ADVERTISEMENT SCARED ME. LOUD SHIT BLASTED MY SPEAKERS YTF DO YOU NEED SUCH BASS ON AN ADV. Spam advertisements like that and I'll drop this website like a bad habit.[/citation]

Zoemayne, use Firefox with the addon: Adblock plus, very effective against those ads.
 

tipoo

Distinguished
May 4, 2006
1,183
0
19,280
0
[citation][nom]KingArcher[/nom]Zoemayne, use Firefox with the addon: Adblock plus, very effective against those ads.[/citation]


Those ads are what keep Tomshardware and every other tech site alive.
 

bison88

Distinguished
May 24, 2009
618
0
18,980
0
...because we are all shaking in our boots. Like people were going to see the movie anyways. Most people who pirated the movie last summer never heard about it but were bored shitless because nothing was on TV and decided "Hell, why not check out another crappy war knock off" and while the acting was better it is definitely another fake of military life. You war directors need to take some notes from Steven Spielberg, at least his flick was a more realistic example of it all and the emotional baggage that goes along with it.

Not to mention the script was stolen from a mans actual experience in which he didn't receive a dime or even a credit about by this director. Talk about pirates, way to STEAL a mans experience Hollywood. I encourage people to Google it and compare the two stories in verbatim.
 

Darkk

Distinguished
Oct 6, 2003
615
0
18,980
0
I remember when DirectTV tried to go after illegal subs only to get bad PR out of it.

Eventually DirectTV dropped the whole thing and updated the hardware protection. It's really a scare tatic to get people to go legit.
 

edilee

Distinguished
Sep 30, 2009
129
0
18,680
0
[citation][nom]Cryogenic[/nom]So these torrenting users are preventing the filthy rich media companies from becoming even richer? [/citation]

These Hollywood studios are there to make money like any other business...if they didn't want to make money then they wouldn't exist. Maybe you should do what you do for a living and just give it away and make no paycheck...how does that sound? The studio that made the movie in question, and I might be mistaken, seems to me to be a smaller newer studio since I have never heard of them before and I watch TONS of movies via my Netflix membership. This is probably why they are taking this step and going after these people...I don't blame them.
 

millerhighlife

Distinguished
May 31, 2010
2
0
18,510
0
watched it, it sucked, just another war movie only about something more current...LAME....only I didn't torrent it, I did ya one better, I rented it for 3 bucks and invited 23 people to my basement theatre to watch it for FREE, hmmmm whats worse.. trying before buying or what I did....yes very stupid of the production of studio of QUEEFlocker to take people to court, btw bit torrent download technology is TOTALLY LEGAL, you are getting "bits" of info from simultaneous users
 

scott91575

Distinguished
May 30, 2010
13
0
18,510
0
If they want to sue someone, sue someone. I have no problem with that. The problem here is it's a form of extortion. They have little evidence, and I am sure some of the people are innocent. Yet they send out mass letters with a $1500 settlement. Even if you are innocent it will be cheaper to send in the cash than fight it. That is the big issue here, and those types of tactics should be illegal.
 

killerclick

Distinguished
Jan 13, 2010
1,563
0
19,790
2
First off, it's an awesome movie. The professional critics agree (97% on Rotten Tomatoes), the Academy agrees (6 Oscars) and movie fans agree (7.9 on IMDB). It's not for everybody... kind of like most other masterpieces in any medium but hey, you brain dead teenagers always have Avatar.

Second, why whine about lawsuits against illegal downloaders? If you don't want to pay for a movie then don't download it. What's your argument against that? I can understand if people don't think a movie is worth $20 or whatever, most movies aren't but why download it then?
 

scott91575

Distinguished
May 30, 2010
13
0
18,510
0
[citation][nom]killerclick[/nom]First off, it's an awesome movie. The professional critics agree (97% on Rotten Tomatoes), the MPAA agrees (6 oscars) and movie fans agree (7.9 on IMDB). It's not for everybody... kind of like most other masterpieces in any medium but hey, you brain dead teenagers always have Avatar.Second, why whine about lawsuits against illegal downloaders? If you don't want to pay for a movie then don't download it. What's your argument against that? I can understand if people don't think a movie is worth $20 or whatever, most movies aren't but why download it then?[/citation]

So you won't mind receiving a letter then, right? Who knows, maybe they grabbed your IP address from somewhere and decided to send you a letter. There is no definitive proof here. You just assume everyone on their list is guilty. Heck, why don't they just send out even more letters. What is to stop other wealthy people who can afford to go to court from doing the same practice in other areas? Where does it stop?

Everyone here, for or against torrents, should be sickened by this practice. These settlements are set specifically to a point where it's below the cost of legal fees. Even innocent people would pay it just in case. That is the whole issue here, not "you shouldn't pirate movies!"
 

killerclick

Distinguished
Jan 13, 2010
1,563
0
19,790
2
[citation][nom]scott91575[/nom]There is no definitive proof here. You just assume everyone on their list is guilty.[/citation]

Well if they don't have proof they should have no case (the burden of proof is on them after all). If on the other hand you have a justice system that allows corporations harass innocent people in this way then it's not the corporations that are the problem, it's your whole country.

And while errors are certainly possible, I don't think they had trouble collecting 5000 IP addresses that were sharing this movie. If the only problem in this situation is that prosecuting people by their IP addresses is so unreliable, how come no one is concerned about this when an internet pedophile ring is brought down using the same methods?
 

scott91575

Distinguished
May 30, 2010
13
0
18,510
0
[citation][nom]killerclick[/nom]Well if they don't have proof they should have no case (the burden of proof is on them after all). If on the other hand you have a justice system that allows corporations harass innocent people in this way then it's not the corporations that are the problem, it's your whole country.And while errors are certainly possible, I don't think they had trouble collecting 5000 IP addresses that were sharing this movie. If the only problem in this situation is that prosecuting people by their IP addresses is so unreliable, how come no one is concerned about this when an internet pedophile ring is brought down using the same methods?[/citation]

I agree, it is an issue with the US law system. Hence why people should contact their public officials about these practices.

As for burden of proof, who cares if they have proof or not. They can afford to create bogus lawsuits, but the average person does not have the money to protect themselves against these types of lawsuits. It's cheaper to pay the settlement than fight it. Why fight it anyway? It will cost more and the end result is the same.

As to pedophile ring or whatever, that is a criminal lawsuit. Everyone in the US is provided free defense in criminal lawsuits. Plus I doubt an IP pull is the only proof that they have. Sorry, but that is not applicable in any way to this situation. That is a criminal suit, and they are not extorting people for money. They are actually proceeding with action, and not demanding money.
 

killerclick

Distinguished
Jan 13, 2010
1,563
0
19,790
2
[citation][nom]scott91575[/nom]They can afford to create bogus lawsuits, but the average person does not have the money to protect themselves against these types of lawsuits.[/citation]

If this is the case, then change the justice system, what can I tell you. What's to stop anyone with legal training and time on their hands to file lawsuits against people with no legal training? What's to stop me from sending a bunch of letters demanding money to random people right
now?

As for my example, in criminal cases they're not demanding money but they're offering plea bargains and public defense attorneys are advising their clients all the time to take the plea bargains even if they're innocent so yeah, my example is applicable in that sense. It's just that people who are actually pro-piracy have different standards for justice when it's one of their own in trouble.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS