digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About
See the original image at torrentfreak.com

MPA Disappointed as Movie Cammer Walks Free From Court

torrentfreak.com — During recent months Australia has become a hot source for camcorded movies. Now, an Australian man accused of ‘camming’ movies and supplying the copies to well known ‘Scene’ group PreVail has been found guilty and convicted. However, the MPA is very disappointed as the court let the man go with just a slap on the wrist.

Who dugg this? Made popular Apr 5, 2009

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

55 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • racerboy99, on 04/05/2009, -4/+64The MPA?
    Dissapointed?
    oh no... they have all my sympathy /sarcasm
  • Konrad9, on 04/05/2009, -0/+46~$4000 (US) for 200 movies?

    That's less than one SONG if the RIAA sued you.
  • Fhwqhgads, on 04/05/2009, -5/+46***** the MPA. ***** em.
  • inactive, on 04/05/2009, -5/+44well his crime didn't hurt anyone.. and didn't cost them billions of dollars.. so maybe they should stop bitching..
  • qwer777, on 04/05/2009, -0/+25that's because that value is actually fair($20/movie)

    if the riaa was within reason on music each song would be a 1-5 dollar fine.
  • tgc1, on 04/05/2009, -0/+19Special consideration has nothing to do with it. The fact of the matter is that each Judge so appointed to judge these cases is supposed to make the punishment fit the crime. And it just so happens that charging someone millions of dollars and/or time in jail for filming a poorly lit movie to shuffle around on the Internet is not a serious crime. And hence, should be ruled upon accordingly.

    Ie. It's like the difference in prosecuting someone for stealing 10 bucks, versus a few million. There is discretion involved. And just because the MPA/RIA say that a particular downloader caused x amount in damages, they still have to prove it -- which they always seem to have a hard time doing. And on an individual basis, the damages wouldn't really exceed a few hundred bucks. If that.
  • redwire, on 04/05/2009, -0/+18He was probably let off so lightly because nobody downloaded the movies he recorded, since they were all terrible to begin with. :)
  • designmadz, on 04/05/2009, -3/+21If only there were more courts which were considerate towards pirates. Throwing a pirate into a jail for uploading a track which is downloaded by a couple of dozen people certainly doesn't look good on the judiciary....
  • inactive, on 04/05/2009, -1/+18"Among others, the equipment was linked to cammed versions of Bedtime Stories, Beverley Hills Chihuahua, He’s Just Not That Into You, Marley and Me and Yes Man."

    Throw the book at him!
  • aufte, on 04/05/2009, -5/+21I'm pretty indifferent, I hate the MPA but I hate cam quality too...
  • uskomaton, on 04/05/2009, -3/+18Well, at least someone has good sense in not ***** up someones life over something so trivial as camming movies.
    And yes, it is trivial, there wasn't a single movie in that list that I would pay for to see (and no, I haven't pirated them either, that shows you how much I wanna see them) and that is the problem, there is hardly anything, coming from Hollywood, worth seeing.
  • graemee, on 04/06/2009, -0/+11Good plan on the defense, make the Judge watch the movies.
  • iignotus, on 04/05/2009, -0/+9They're not charging him with recording, they're charging him with facilitation of unlawful distribution, MORONS.
  • Frostman3D, on 04/05/2009, -1/+10Thank-God for slaps on the wrist.
  • qazws, on 04/05/2009, -2/+9cam movies always come out crappy quality compared to the real version.
  • Spamcan, on 04/05/2009, -2/+9You hate America more then Association? I'm pretty sure the Association is the problem.
  • Inflammo, on 04/05/2009, -3/+10I always hated the last A the most.

    One letter down, three more to go!
  • NeoTechni, on 04/06/2009, -1/+6While you make a good point, you shouldn't compare it to something like that.

    For example, what if someone compared it to the holocaust, and how Nazis claimed the Jews weren't human? It's the same point, but it's an insult to the Jews (and the blacks in your example) by comparing their suffering to something so... petty.

    I dugg you up, but don't be surprised if I'm the only one
  • MarkOfTheDead, on 04/06/2009, -0/+4Not if America would have told them to go ***** themselves first, everyone else would have followed suit.
  • Claverhouse, on 04/06/2009, -1/+5@stubear 'So, all those people downloading movies on PirateBay, etc. are idiots because they have a different taste in movie then you?'

    Logically, no matter what subjective tastes are applied: either a work is good or it is crap. Therefore it follows that with the second case, that though some people who like crap enjoy that work it does not alter it's nature of being. So it is entirely possible both that those people are idiots & uskomaton is correct; without taking anything from the right of idiots to like crap.
  • replaysMike, on 04/05/2009, -2/+6HA HA.
  • earthforce1, on 04/06/2009, -2/+5They'll just arm twist the Australian government the way they did in Canada and buy themselves new draconian anti-cam laws to prop up their business model.
  • Inflammo, on 04/05/2009, -1/+4I wasn't thinking in terms of the actual acronym meaning.
  • dsmx, on 04/05/2009, -1/+4The idea behind the mpaa isn't bad it's just what it has been turned into by the people running it that is the problem.
  • yourbrokenoven, on 04/06/2009, -0/+3I think this is a more appropriate punishment for the crime. He didn't kill anyone. He didn't hurt anyone.
  • CVL4317, on 04/06/2009, -0/+3seriously, if the movie is great, do you think I would want to watch in the ***** cam quality?
  • theaceoffire, on 04/06/2009, -1/+4Guy in hong kong, in jail for uploading

    http://www.frihost.com/forums/vt-15449.html

    Enjoy your humble pie.
  • fury420, on 04/05/2009, -1/+4FTA:
    "However, the Blacktown Local Court in Sydney surprised everyone, not least the MPA. Although Farrugia pleaded guilty and was convicted, he was fined just A$5,400 (US$3900), placed on an 18 month good behavior bond and set free."
  • inactive, on 04/05/2009, -4/+6a movie theater is private property, moron.
  • tgc1, on 04/05/2009, -2/+4* Up their stupid asses!
  • MizuhoChan, on 04/06/2009, -1/+3I don't watch movies or download them anyway. I used to go to the cinema every week for over a year, but they're far too expensive now and most movies these days suck *****. I'd still go to big ones like James Bond, but even Quantum sucked.

    As long as they don't bitch about me downloading anime in a language I can't understand without help, I'm fine. And before you say buy the DVD's, perhaps you should actually watch a few of them.
  • wikinerd, on 04/07/2009, -0/+2Maybe if they LOWERed the prices for everything related to media, there might be LESS piracy?

    (tho keep in mind that there will always be a few who insists on pirating; you cannot stop them, nor can you convince them; they're not "revenue lost")
  • MistressRoninS, on 04/06/2009, -0/+2I wonder if his good behavior sentencing includes a restriction from internet access like past convictions have included.
  • SPECOPS, on 04/06/2009, -2/+4The Guy in Hong Kong shared movies, not a song(s), enjoy eating the humble pie too - link from within your own link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4413540.stm

    FTA: Chan, an unemployed man who called himself "Big Crook", was arrested in January for uploading three Hollywood movies - Daredevil, Red Planet and Miss Congeniality - onto the internet without a licence.
  • Pirataholic, on 04/05/2009, -4/+5I'm glad this guy got off easy. The MPA has to realize that by asking for such hard convictions and enforcing government snooping they are pissing off the end user. They promote a world similar to 1984, can't they just realize that their ongoing witch hunt to destroy lives financially needs to stop?
  • buckrogers1965, on 04/06/2009, -0/+1You know, these movie studios could be going with this and rewarding the person that makes the best cam movie with money and fame. Really drum up a lot of interest in a film. Instead they are just acting like dicks.

    Seriously, people just watch the cam version to see if it is worth going to see the movie in the theater. Often it is a good thing to avoid crappy movies.
  • inactive, on 04/06/2009, -1/+2You are right. The suppression of ideas kills far MORE people than the Nazis ever did.
  • MistressRoninS, on 04/06/2009, -0/+1Agreed.
    The cam movies always irritate me to the point of buying the actual movie because it forces me to realize the difference and thus, I am left craving for the quality. Like Mystery Science Theater without the cheesy robot comments and haggling that make it fun.
  • NeoTechni, on 04/06/2009, -0/+1Agreed.

    I can't stand dubbed/censored/butchered anime.
  • inactive, on 04/06/2009, -2/+3Copying is not theft, nor is it piracy.

    The corporate ***** have bastardized the language to create themsevles bad laws to protect their juntas like the American south did labeling black slaves as property.

    And as such, the people are no more bound to protect the corporate interests than they were to send black slaves in the north back to their "owners".
  • inactive, on 04/06/2009, -0/+1And he is not getting prosecuted.

    Are you so stupid as to be under the impression that you can only get sued for doing something ILLEGAL?

    By the way,,,it also IS illega. You competely asinine analogy to just recording the world around you proves that you are not even interested in an intelligent debate on the legal aspects of this, becuase you have absolutely NO knowledge of the law. Just because you saw something is legal does not make it so.
  • NeoTechni, on 04/06/2009, -0/+1I am conflicted. spyd3rweb made a good point.

    Though it counts and intellectual property theft. Which is against the law.
  • NeoTechni, on 04/06/2009, -1/+2You were buried out of stupidity.

    No one should be on the MPAA's side. His punishment was a tad OVERkill. Not underkill
  • stubear, on 04/06/2009, -3/+2The fines are NOT derived from the purchase price of a DVD or a movie ticket, they are based on both punitive damages as well as the cost of LICENSING the film rights. Licensing costs are A LOT more expensive to secure. They are NOT the same thing you get when you purchase a DVD or a digital copy of the film. You would think that by now, with all the bytes wasted on copyright discussions on the internet people would have educated themselves about the basics of copyright law by now. I know, silly of me to suggest this. God forbid we try to do away with the uninformed, uneducated, knee-jerk, sheep-like responses we see with these articles.
  • scriptcoder, on 04/06/2009, -2/+1Except most people agree that punishing the people who distribute stolen content should be punished and not the end user.
  • fragomatik, on 04/06/2009, -4/+2I hate CAMs, but I hate the MPAA more, so "huzzah!" for Mr Farrugia!
  • spyd3rweb, on 04/05/2009, -7/+3Why should the movie cartels get to dictate what subject matter is on your camcorder or camera? You are free to videotape or photograph the world around you, why not what goes on in a movie theater.
  • SparkKnot, on 04/06/2009, -5/+1yea! and also they're wrong... MORONSSS!!!

    oh... oops
  • duggdowncatisad, on 04/05/2009, -5/+1http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rX7wtNOkuHo
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 57 of 57 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.