‘Twilight’ bootlegger sues movie theater

You go girl!!

I wish her luck.
Just a warning from me to any theater personel that thinks they want to detain me .
You better have a bunch of security guards because I can still take out a couple . & then plead self-defense if I get caught.
It probably was a lot easier to detain a woman. Unless you get a hold of some of the black belts ones .
If I had seen you mess with her I would have stepped in to give this theater employee the ass kicking deserved. I think more would have joined me once I got started.
Also where exactly was she going to pirate a couple of very short clips ?

Probably at the swap meet for 100 Billion Dollars

http://cache.boston.com/images/bosto...l_12.16.08.jpg

She just got stupid and never thought about what she was doing other then playing with her new toy a bit.
I hope she wins, less then 3 minutes of crappy video of a movie isn't going to make anyone not see it later and it doesn't sound like she had any intent to run out and post or try to sell it.
The movie theater manager probably was thinking OH BOY, I GET A BIG PAYDAY...

First of all, they won't lay any hands on you. They will wait for the police to show up. Go ahead and take out a couple, and piracy will be the least of your worries. With all of the video cameras in use, it'll be hard to prove self-defense.

Regarding the stupid girl, she has no case. That is, if there were signs stating that no recording was allowed. I guarantee you that she will think twice before she thinks of doing it again. It doesn't matter if it was a digicam or a cell phone. You can't record inside the theater. Outside in the lobby is fine. Some theaters won't have the person arrested. They'll just confiscate the item. If she needs material for self-pleasuring, there are other avenues.

It's obvious that she was part of a international terrorist ring that has movie-mules record different 3 minute sections of popular movies and then pastes them together to get a product superior to the BluRay & DVD's that will be officially released 9 months later. **Could a pasted together theatre screener really be ANY worse than the Transformers BluRay release?**

This 3 minute recording is single handedly responsible for $4B9,8D2,4F9,8EA,000,000,0B0 dollars in lost profits of the MPAA films over the last 1.73 months.
The dollar figure is in hexadecimal because the normal decimal number system was insufficient to describe the massive loss of profits.

The losses incurred by American Business Interests by this 3minute recording goes straight into the pockets of hostile parties.. It's not just a 3minute screener, it's a matter of National Security

Rules are rules. Like them or not. If you don't or can't follow them, then stay home and rent from Netflix. Plus, people who do that or use their cell phones during a movie bother others around them with their lit up equipment. It's not just wrong, it's downright rude. Theters are starting to add cell jammers inside the theaters as well.

It really does not take much to discourage someone from filming the picture screen by simply exploiting a weakness of a camera/camcorder. For example, set up a few infra-red spot lights to periodically scan the screen in various directions. Just like the infra-red LED on a TV remote, this will not be noticed by the eye, but would clearly show up on a recording. To see an example, try taking a video clip of the front of a TV remote while pushing a button. The LEDs on some IR-headphone transmitters show up as bright as flash lights on a video camera.

Of course, they figure it is simpler to just catch someone the act and use the media to make an example out of that person being humiliated, arrested, etc. as a deterrent to others.

Piracy wouldn't be my worry at all because I won't be pirating.
In the woman's case I wouldn't be commiting piracy by defending her.

In the article it seemed that the theater employee had confronted the woman before the police arrived .
It didn't say if any theater employee laid hands on her.
I think it would be just the opposite. In my state I'm allowed to come to the defense of someone being assaulted. I would wait till a theater employee had made physical contact or appeared they were about to.
All I really need to prove is that there was a probable assault about to happen.
Also why would there be all the video cameras ready to use inside the theater? If the video cameras were the theaters & they used them while the movie was playing they would be guilty of piracy.
I think the majority of people are like me & would be on the side of the woman. So would only take or produce video in her favor.
What I would start with in defending her is to stand between her & any theater employees while she left. Then if they decided to make contact with me " take them out".

The police wouldn't be who should have been called or the ones to make the arrest. The recording of the movie wouldn't violate local ordinences or even state law in most cases. The FBI would be the proper authority to call & make the arrest.
I can just imagine the FBI's response to the call. Something like this:
I have a woman who recorded 3 minutes of a movie & I want you to come arrest her.
To give an example of the feds not wanting local law enforcement enforcing federal law:
Look at what's happening in Arizona with their deciding to enacting a state law almost identical to federal law in illegal immagramts & enforcing it.
The federal government has long told border states that it is their job to enforce immigration laws & for the states not to enforce it for them. In other words if a state arrests an illegal & sends them back accross the border the feds jump on the state. The feds just ignore the actual law.
So why not let the feds handle all federal law enforcement . Like in this womans case?
Since it's a different state I won't be on the jury. If I was she has a case providing I could sway the other jurors to my opinion.
Actually that would be theft. The theater has no legal authority to confiscate any persons property. That is a denial of due process. Property can only be legally seized by some form of court order. There are a few exceptions involving imminent danger & self-defense. Taking away a persons gun that is threatening another person for example.
For law enforcement probable cause but that is often abused.
Last of course I wouldn't have tried to physically stop law enforcement officers but I probably would have tried to talk them out of arresting the woman.
Security officers are a different matter. They are private employees of a private company & have no greater legal authority that any other citizen.
Some of them just think they do.

So this woman, commits an illegal act by recording in a movie theater, gets caught, and then has the nerve to sue the movie theater??
Whether or not one agrees with how much damage, if any, recording in a movie theater is causing the movie industry, one must agree that this woman violated the law by doing so.
She should learn some personal responsibility. If you can't do the time , don't do the crime. Stop whining and suck it up.

What a bunch of crocks...that won't even float in any body of water...your numbers are more ludicrous then her taking 3 mins...those numbers are even more low brow then anything I read about piracy. Think stopping her will stop the piracy industry...NOT. They could give a &&&%* about her situation just a simple search would most likely find a full length already online. So all those talk are just BS...and more BS. They aren't even going after the big fish the MPAA/RIAA whom use greed and corruption to fund their so called piracy they do themselves against the Artists whom are the real Victims of the corrupted movie industries. Maybe when they really the Congress whom has no balls gets more balls and grow hair fix or nudder the MPAA/RIAA then will they even start to address the situation of corrupt thinking of movie CEOs. Whom could give a (()^&^& to those whom made money for them but none was give back for them. IF this look like I support her tell me how will she herself make money for those so called 3 mins or so of filming?? I doubt someone can make a claim for that. Also being that the video or pic included her personnel photos and video that also constitutes her violation of Privacy and due process buy taking them away. So something there could be said about piracy. So it can be a double edge sword since she has personnel and private photos of her own creations. Others will say it is just ranting of a lunatic but so be it. I hear so much and nothing really is done about the Greed and Corruption of the Industry in bed with the MPAA/RIAA to address the problem this will never in my mind go away. If they want to fix it then let's talk about whom created the problem to begin with .... the CEO/MPAA/RIAA/Congress....

Oh yeah and if they wanted to stop PIRACY go to China and arrest those people there since they are the one benefitting and making money. I can guarantee the China government will tell the US BEND OVER AND CALL US UNCLE......FACT.....

You've been reading too much MPAA propaganda.
The law used to arrest this person was distorted, and the only people who wanted to imprison this young woman was the manager of a Muvico theatre chain. He probably wanted some MPAA ransom money. The movie producers and police wanted nothing to do with it. Charges were dropped because they were ridiculous. Now the movie chain that instigated the whole ordeal is (rightfully) being sued.

This has nothing to do with MPAA propaganda. I'm not debating whether or not the MPAA is right or wrong in its claims about lost revenue due to movie piracy. It's irrelevant in this discussion.
What I'm debating is whether or not its illegal to record in the movie theater. If so (and in this case it was), then the woman broke the law. I don't agree with the law myself but it is nevertheless the law.

Wrongful or false imprisonment is also illegal, "two wrongs do not make a right", as my granny used to say.
What authority did the usher have to make an arrest?

From the article: "After being escorted out of the theater, she was arrested, and spent two days in jail related to the case."

Nowhere does it say the usher arrested her. the usher escorted her out of the theater. the police then made the arrest. wheres the fault in that?

If you read more about the dismissal of charges, you'll realize what she did was NOT breaking any law. The law cited was being distorted. It's like being arrest for murder because you stepped on a bug. Yes, you murdered a bug, but that's not the spirit of the law being used against you.

It would seem that part of the arrest was done inside the theater.
I assume that she was detained by the theater management until the police arrived.
That's where I was posting about stepping in. I would have advised her to leave before the police arrived. Then prevented the theater employees from stopping her leaving. They could like it or not.
I believe all this theater management was thinking of was a reward.
I agree with lordsmurf the spirit or intent of the law was not broken. This woman had no intent to pirate the video. Just someone with a new camera she had just got as a birthday present & wanted a shot of a star she liked from a movie.
I sure didn't read anything in the article that stated this theater had signs plainly displayed that read " No cameras allowed " .

I don't think the legality of recording in a movie theater is necessarilly the point here. It IS illigal to make copies of copy righted material without permission, so by recording a few parts of the movie, this girl made an illegal copy of those parts of the movie (the copy righted material). She broke the law and was arrested for it. If the charges were later dropped, that's her good fortune. She has no grounds to sue anyone that I can see.

i agree.

This is so wrong that I almost don't know where to begin.

Civil vs criminal, for starters. And then quit reading MPAA propaganda that uses words like "theft", "crime" and "illegal". It's misleading and distorts. Those are inaccurate words. And while I don't support the movie downloaders and pirates, neither do I support the overzealous idiots that trample the rights of citizens. YOU make the laws, not the corporations. Stand up for yourselves, dammit.

Consider studying basic government, too. Just because a law exists doesn't mean it will stand the test of court. This is some sort of oddball law that you only find in Illinois, and this was not the intended use of it. A court case would have surely re-narrowed it. And then civil cases don't necessarily follow the law anyway. Consider OJ and double jeopardy.

How can anybody think a college-aged woman deserves to go to prison for recording 3 minutes of crappy video on a cell phone. That's one hell of a warped worldview. A silly girl has a silly crush on a movie star, so you want to ruin her life? Really?

But that is the narrow mentality of some. If someone says it is illegal then it must be. An incindental recordind in a set of personal recordings is not a violation of copyright no matter what the movie industry might like.

I cannot agree with you more!!! ESPECIALLY the last paragraph!!! This generation is breeding irresponsibility, stupidity, and disrespect like cockroaches. We need a few roach motels!

Now this girl, she gets caught and then of course SOMEONE ELSE has to be blamed. Of course SHE did nothing wrong. It was the movie theater or the the bad people at the MPAA. Or maybe the camera started recording all by itself. It's amazing she hasn't sued the camera/cell phone manufacturer for defective equipment or for explicitly stating in the instruction manual that the camera shouldn't be used to record movies in movie theaters. i mean, how was she to know?

No, this girls life doesn't deserve to be ruined over a 3 minute crappy video on a cell phone or camera. But she did something wrong and she has to face the consequences whatever they may be.

1 week community service
No conviction recorded.

If this is even a law it definately needs a challenge. Personal freedom is eroding fast enough without some overzealous idiot thinking he will make a load by dumping on a person who is doing NOTHING wrong.

Again another MPAA/RIAA spouting progranda representative again. Touting the line without trying to give a solution to the problem. Unfortunaly you should be glad your in a country where they can wire tap and read your email/mails. So should be so responsible for the mess where in now cause of your lack of understanding how government works in favor of big corporation.

Maybe instead of yelling about her problems maybe you should take responsibility to how you got your country Greece in the mess it has gotten itself in. RIght....!! So first you should fix your mess you create before jumping in another mess.... FACT...

I'm considerably older than this young womans generation. I still think she shouldn't have been arrested .
Here's what I think should have happened:
The theater manager not just a lower level employee went to her & requested she stop using her camera to copy part of the movie. Then ask her to come by the office before she left the theater.
There she should have been asked to delete the parts of the movie she recorded. If that went down the no police called. If not then call the police who should have made the same request . No arrest made.
If she refused to erase the movie parts then her information would have been taken & turned over to the District Attorney. Still no arrest made.
Then the DA could have decided if the case merited going forward.
If it had been handled in that manner then no suit would be valid.
The way it happened this theater better be glad I live in another state & won't be on the jury.
Last : Movie theater employees shouldn't be Bounty Hunters. This woman did pay good money to view the movie uninterrupted. I sure didn't see where even her ticket price was refunded.
Other patrons also had their viewing of the movie interrupted by the theaters handling of this. If I had been one of them I would have demmanded a refund & maybe sued for lost time & travel expenses.

How about this you go to China and arrest all those bootleggers and see who far that gets you. Then you can come back and talk the talk...until then don't even talk like your the talk.

Are you serious? Of course she did something wrong. Just because you disagree with the law (and by the way so do I), it doesn't mean you ignore it. Fight it, Yes, Ignore it, No.

I understand there is no law against filming in the cinema .....
Just a sign saying piracy is bad, and no filming allowed .. mmkay

That is the most likely reason the case was dropped...They thought they had the law and found out it was not their law but had no law against it...