Pirate of Movie Leak Busted

[narrows101]

Film is intellectual property. The theft of intellectual property is against the law. I work for lawyers, and this is a big department in my office.

Technology and Crime - Intellectual Property Theft

Intellectual property, which includes such copyrighted material as games, software, and movies, is a huge part of the U.S. economy. The industries that produced copyrighted material in 2002 contributed 6% ($626.6 billion) to the domestic economy of the United States and employed roughly 4% of the U.S. workforce, according to the Report of the Department of Justice's Task Force on Intellectual Property (October 2004). The task force further reported that between 1997 and 2002, the copyright industries added workers at an annual rate of 1.33%, which exceeded overall U.S. job growth by 27%. These industries are important to the American economy and to the people employed in them; financial profit is vital for those who create music, video games, books, or software.

Intellectual property theft has posed perhaps the greatest single threat to the copyright industries since the 1990s. In the mid-1980s, pirating software and entertainment media on a large enough scale to make a profit demanded a large initial investment and a huge time commitment. Pirating movies, for instance, required large banks of VCRs along with hundreds of blank tapes. Copies of the movie were typically of much lower quality than the original, and national copyright laws made storing, selling, and distributing the bulky tapes very difficult. As a result, most pirated copies of movies, music, games or software were copied and distributed overseas in countries where copyright law was nonexistent or not enforced. Technological advances in the 1990s put an end to many of the hassles faced by intellectual property thieves. The Internet, along with powerful computers and the conversion of nearly every type of media into digital form, made copying and distributing intellectual property very easy even in the United States. Once a thief found a way around the copyright protection that existed on the copyrighted material, the computer provided an easy way to store the material. Since digital media do not degrade when copied, the thief could produce perfect duplicates. FTP file sites and peer-to-peer networks allowed for easy distribution of the media over the Internet to any country in the world.

The Justice Department report revealed that in 2002, intellectual property theft worldwide cost American companies $250 billion. The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) estimated that the movie industry lost $3.5 billion in 2004. The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) reported losses in the music industry of roughly $4.2 billion per year in 2004. The MPAA estimated that during each month of 2003, 2.6 billion songs, movies, and software programs were distributed illegally over the Internet, representing a 25% increase in the theft of intellectual property since 1997.

Read more: Technology and Crime - Intellectual Property Theft http://www.libraryindex.com/pages/1453/Technology-Crime-INTELLECTUAL-PROPERTY-THEFT.html#ixzz0ZuEY6JHk

[katie_girl09]

Originally Posted by SuperFerret

A few times that I've downloaded a new (as in still in theaters) movie, I downloaded it after seeing it in the theaters because I wanted to watch it again. I've also purchased the DVDs when they became available.

I confess that I did watch the leaked version. But *only* after I'd seen it in theatres.

[BlackLantern]

i think because some consider it immaterial, it's not theft...but it is

[SuperFerret]

So we're going to get into this again?

[8Diagrams(WU)]

In all honesty I actually thought this was a viral attempt by fox at first. It was a rough copy and it raised awareness of the movie at the time.

The only thing this whole thing proved was that people will still pay for the service to see the movie in a big screen and a leaked movie does not have the direct corelation with BO performance as many assumed before.

[danoyse]

Well, it depends. I overheard the guys in our mailroom making copies of it for people. The people they gave them to came back asking if they could also get Star Trek, Up, and Harry Potter - because it was 'saving them money' not having to pay to see them in a theater. (btw, they don't do that anymore, because...someone reported it )

Yes, if the movie had been better more people who downloaded it would have gone to see it anyway...but there are still plenty of people out there who will take the free movie, regardless of what is. And that costs them.

[8Diagrams(WU)]

To me watching a downlaoded movie has definitely gotten me more interested in other things and parties who would not have seen any money from me did.

Im ok with downloading because it has shown some interesting effects, not the straigh up "you download that means were $14 poorer now" idea to keep an exponentially aging business model running. Media availability has also created a marketing synergy of sorts. People are watching and whatever is in these movies people will "recognize and get".

My only problem with downloading is when it is done for profit with bootleging ops. That stuff should definiely be acted upon. If the movie industry is not making any money out of downloaded media content, those guys shouldn't be either.

Id like to see where this all goes long term. Many years from now it will probably be a very normal thing. Possibly with focusing on merchandising being the main source behind the profits and media fully or easily available/affordable to everyone

[danoyse]

I'm not cool with downloading. I work for a media company (of which I'm also a stockholder), and when people download instead of paying for one of our projects, it affects the money our company makes.

It annoys me because sometimes at work I do get to see materials before they're released and I have enough respect for my job to not steal it or put it over the internet. I ended up with a DVD of an unreleased documentary on my desk a few weeks ago - it was a screener that was mailed out to critics and this copy had been returned due a bad address. I could have taken it home, but I just dropped it off with the PR department. It wasn't mine to take.

That kind of self-entitlement drives me insane. I think of it as the same thing as walking out of a store with a book or a DVD that you haven't paid for. Just because it's on the internet, it doesn't mean it's yours to take.

[Deaths Head II]

Originally Posted by SuperFerret

When I went to see Spider-Man, the crowd was actually applauding certain scenes. Bugged the hell out of me.

When I saw Spider-Man 3, my crowd laughed throughout the entire film. Mostly at stuff they shouldn't be laughing at like every scene Peter cried in. But at the end, they all applauded and I heard most people talk about how it was a good movie as they walked out. I never got that.

I don't really like pirating, but I can see why it's so popular. People compare it to stealing stuff from a store or stealing a car, but in practice it's very different because it's so damn easy. It's like if there was a free device invented that let people make an exact copy of any car they wanted. The car companies would be furious since people would be driving cars they didn't pay for, but when all people have to do is click a button in order to get a free copy of a product then you can expect that they're going to do it.

I really don't think that the losses are as big as the companies claim most of the time though. A lot of people that pirated the film were likely never to see the film at all, and those that were likely to see the film were likely to go see it anyway. There is the group that gets disappointed and avoids the movie in theaters but that's still just a chunk of the people that pirated it, not the whole group. A huge majority of the people I know that pirated the film pirated it for the hell of it.

[BlackLantern]

just because it's "easy" still doesn't make it ok....those people are still thieves

[Rac]

Originally Posted by Deaths Head II

When I saw Spider-Man 3, my crowd laughed throughout the entire film. Mostly at stuff they shouldn't be laughing at like every scene Peter cried in. But at the end, they all applauded and I heard most people talk about how it was a good movie as they walked out.

Same here. Except everyone were talking how bad the movie was.

[VenomVsSpidey]

Originally Posted by BlackLantern

Spider-Man 3 deserves obnoxiousness

nope.

[RomyFan]

Originally Posted by BlackLantern

whys it gotta be a minority?? ****...

Conspiracy!!!!!

I thought the same, hehehe... But anywayz... shame on him!!!

[narrows101]

http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10420059-93.html

Accused 'Wolverine' pirate calls charges 'ridiculous'

The FBI has accused the man who allegedly was first, or among the first, to upload a pirated copy of "X-Men Origins: Wolverine" that circulated online in April. What authorities have apparently yet to do is identify the original source of the leak.

On Wednesday, after Gilberto Sanchez was charged in New York with violating federal copyright laws by posting "Wolverine" to a file-sharing site a month before the film's theatrical release, he told reporters from The New York Daily News: "It's just ridiculous. I bought it from a Korean guy on the street for five bucks. Then I uploaded it. I didn't make any money."

Sanchez, who is 47 and works as a glazier, doesn't appear to have any direct ties to 20th Century Fox, the Hollywood studio that produced "Wolverine," or the film industry. To hear Sanchez tell it, he was way downstream from the original leak and authorities should be on the lookout for one of the thousands of New York street vendors.

But Sanchez's explanation raises more questions than it answers. The first of which is whether the trail of the person who first leaked the movie has gone cold in the eight months since the unauthorized copy first appeared on the Web. Security experts I've spoken with, however, say long delays are common with these kinds of file-sharing cases, which sometimes require law enforcement officials to spend months compiling evidence.

The two things that almost everybody agrees on are: 1) the case illustrates once again how hard it is to protect digital content, and 2) Sanchez isn't the original source of the leak.

In April, someone posted to the Web an incomplete version of "Wolverine," which cost $100 million to make and stars actor Hugh Jackman. The indictment filed against Sanchez in Los Angeles earlier this month did not say whether he was allegedly the only person to upload it or the first, but Sanchez is the only person who's been indicted in connection with the investigation. The copy that began circulating online was missing music and many computer-generated effects but was still a popular attraction.

According to Big Champagne, which tracks file sharing, the movie was viewed 4 million times before it was screened in theaters on May 1.

In the months after the leak, "Wolverine" went on to gross $375 million worldwide, so it doesn't appear the pirated copy prevented the film from turning a profit. But 20th Century Fox, which produced the movie, argues the unauthorized version was watched about 14 million times online and no matter how one slices it, the leak cost the studio big money.

More recently, the U.S. Attorney's office has begun efforts to extradite Sanchez to Los Angeles, according to Philip Weinstein, his attorney. Weinstein said he has advised his client not to comment on the case.
According to my Hollywood sources, the authorities have ruled out Sanchez as the original source of the leak.

At many top studios, security is tight. Access to working copies is restricted. Copies are tracked and the names of anyone who touches them are supposed to be recorded. That happens not only at the studios but often at the firms hired to do post-production work, such as special-effects houses.

While sources say Sanchez didn't have that kind of access, what isn't clear is whether he knows someone who did.

The government said in its indictment against Sanchez that he posts comments on the Internet under such usernames as "SkillfulGil" and "SkillyGilly." A Google search showed that those names are prevalent at some video-sharing sites as well as numerous music-themed community sites, including MySpace and Crazypellas.net.

Many of the posts from these sites are accompanied by snapshots of a person resembling the Gilberto Sanchez who was photographed by the Daily News on Wednesday.

In one 2008 post at Crazypellas.net, SkillfulGil discussed ripping and posting movies to the Web. At the same site on July 7, two months after the "Wolverine" leak, SkillfulGil wrote: "I had FBI with search warrant in my place. They took my PC. Now (they're) building a fed case on me for the same thing. Copyright Infringement...So I guess I'll (be) made an example of."

An FBI spokeswoman said Tuesday that Sanchez's residence was searched by agents last summer.

Tracing the source of the leak

If, like Sanchez says, the leaked "Wolverine" copy was first available on bootleg DVD and was sold from a street corner to any passerby, then isn't it logical to assume others uploaded the movie to the Web? Couldn't tracing the discs back to their source help lead agents to the original leak? And if there were others who uploaded the film to the Web, wouldn't the government be arresting them as well?

According to my film industry sources, one possible reason that federal officials haven't arrested anyone else is that they may be building a case.
One example for how long it can take to build a case was illustrated in last year's leak of "The Love Guru."

FBI agents had to follow a long trail before filing a criminal complaint nine months after the original leak. (Ben Sheffner, a well-known pro-copyright blogger and attorney, posted a copy of the criminal complaint at his site, Copyrights & Campaigns).

In that case, agents had strong suspicions early on about who leaked the much-maligned Mike Meyers film, according to court documents.

Jack Yates, an employee of Los Angeles Duplication & Broadcasting ("LADB"), was asked to make screener copies that were supposed to appear on talk shows for promotional purposes (one of the copies went to Jay Leno). Yates, however, was seen on the company's video cameras making an extra copy and taking it to his car.

In interviews with agents, Yates denied knowledge of the copy. So federal officials were forced to track down the IP address associated with the first uploading of the movie.

The trail of who obtained a copy of the film involved multiple people but Yates was eventually undone when investigators traced it back to his cousin.

Last summer, the 28-year-old Yates was sentenced to six months in jail.

[the a1ant]

It's "ridiculous", and yet he uploaded an illegal copy of a film (an act, which in itself is already illegal) before it was ever intended to be released? Yeah....I'm not feeling sorry for him at all. Regardless if he was the originator of the leak or not, he's still guilty for uploading it to the internet.

Thanks for posting, Narrows.

[danoyse]

Originally Posted by the a1ant

It's "ridiculous", and yet he uploaded an illegal copy of a film (an act, which in itself is already illegal) before it was ever intended to be released? Yeah....I'm not feeling sorry for him at all. Regardless if he was the originator of the leak or not, he's still guilty for uploading it to the internet.

Thanks for posting, Narrows.

Exactly! It was not his to upload onto the internet in the first place. I have no sympathy for this guy. What an idiot.

[narrows101]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/13/ny...wolverine.html

The Online Adventures of the Man Who Leaked ‘Wolverine’
By MICHAEL WILSON
Published: January 12, 2010

The man who stole Wolverine opened the door to his Bronx apartment with a grunt, his thin frame hunched over at the waist, an unlikely villain with a bad back and pajama pants. “I’m a scapegoat for this,” said Gilberto Sanchez, 47, after flopping down at his desk — the crime scene — and dragging on a cigarette. “I’m gonna get crucified.”


Librado Romero/The New York Times

Gilberto Sanchez, a glass installer and musician, posted a bootleg copy of “Wolverine” on the Web and has since been charged with violation of copyright law.

It has been nine months since the theft of the superhero, or more accurately, the superhero’s story. On March 31, 2009, someone posted a “work print” — an unfinished copy — of the film “X-Men Origins: Wolverine” on a Web site. It was a full month before the movie, starring Hugh Jackman as the famous mutant, was to open in theaters. Hollywood analysts called the leak unprecedented and speculated whether its free, albeit brief, availability to the public — and the unkind buzz that followed — would dampen its box office draw. Mr. Jackson himself was said by the studio to be “heartbroken.”

“The source of the initial leak and any subsequent postings will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law,” the studio behind the movie, 20th Century Fox, said the day it appeared online. While the studio was up in arms, Mr. Sanchez, a glass installer and musician who knows his way around a high-speed computer, was watching “Wolverine” in his living room with three grandchildren from a former marriage. There were special effects and music missing, but no matter. “So we see a string pulling up Hugh Jackman,” he shrugged later.

Mr. Sanchez likes movies as much as the next guy, but detests the cost of taking the brood to the theater. He said that he bought a bootleg copy of “Wolverine” on the street, and posted a copy on the sharing site megaupload.com, for the cachet.

Eight months later, on Dec. 16, Mr. Sanchez was awakened by a knock at 6 a.m., and opened the door to F.B.I. agents, who placed him under arrest. He was charged with violation of copyright law, arraigned in federal court in Manhattan and allowed to return home, but he faces the possibility of prison time, possibly in California, where his indictment originated.

The whole affair has Mr. Sanchez deeply rattled. “I’m out on bond, waiting for them to sentence me or give me a pat on the hand and tell me, ‘Don’t do it again,’ ” he said. Someone from CBS called and invited him to appear with Mr. Jackman on “The Late Show with David Letterman.” No, thanks.

“I’m not going to sit next to Wolverine,” he said. “That’s a setup.”

In an interview in his $695-a-month apartment in the Parkchester neighborhood of the Bronx, Mr. Sanchez, who was in and out of city jails in the 1990s on drug charges, told his story.

It started in a neighborhood Chinese restaurant. A Korean man entered, muttering “DVDs” and “digital” over and over. The sale of counterfeit DVDs is nothing new in New York, or in this corner of the Bronx. “Koreans set up on these sidewalks every day,” Mr. Sanchez said.

At first, he doubted the claim of “digital” quality, so the peddler popped a copy into a portable player. “I said, ‘Wow,’ ” Mr. Sanchez recalled. He forked over $5 and took the disc home.

After watching it with the grandchildren, he made a copy on his computer and posted it on megaupload, where his screen name is “SkillyGilly,” so others could share in the fun and he could get props in the movie-loving community. He ignored a friend’s warnings — “You’re going to get in trouble. It’s not even out yet.” — and watched as several other copies surfaced on the site soon afterward.

At 5 a.m. the next day, that friend called and told him to turn on the TV.
“Fox News is in an uproar for the leak of ‘Wolverine,’ ” Mr. Sanchez recalled. “They’re offering a reward.” By then, he said, his copy of the movie had been downloaded 198 times, at no charge; Mr. Sanchez said he never sought to make any money off the bootleg.

He was scared, but did not imagine he would be blamed — “Some employee had it — ‘Hey, take this down to graphics’ — and he stopped off and showed it to his friends,” Mr. Sanchez said. “They made more copies, more copies, until the Koreans had a copy.”

Two weeks later, the F.B.I. showed up, having tracked “SkillyGilly” through computer footprints. Mr. Sanchez said he explained what had happened. “ ‘Talk to the Korean,’ ” he said he told them. “ ‘You keep following leads and you’ll get to a warehouse.’ ” But when the F.B.I. asked if he could identify the peddler, he said no.

A few months later, agents took his computer, then returned it, he said. Several months passed, and then, the agents were back with an arrest warrant. Wesley Hsu, an assistant United States attorney in the Central District of California who is supervising the prosecution, said financial gain is not necessarily the sole motive for so-called pirates.

“It’s some sort of Internet prestige thing,” Mr. Hsu said. “They’re giving to get. That’s sort of how the culture works.”

Mr. Sanchez, who speaks to rehabilitation groups — “I’m Gilberto Sanchez, I’ve been to jail, I’ve been through this, I’ve been through that” — said he has no intention of fighting the charge. “I can’t say no,” he said, pointing to his computer. “That’s like DNA.”

His fate is unclear: In 2003, a New Jersey man was fined and put on probation after uploading an unfinished print of “The Hulk” before its release. But last year, a man who took a copy of “The Love Guru,” from a tape-duplication company was sentenced to six months in prison.

An F.B.I. spokeswoman said the investigation into who stole the movie from the studio in the first place is continuing. A spokesman for 20th Century Fox did not return telephone calls last week.

“Wolverine” went on to gross $373 million worldwide, despite bad reviews, and despite the online adventures of a glass installer from the Bronx who, a day after his interview, was laid out flat on the floor of his apartment, the only comfortable position for his back.

He tried to imagine what Mr. Jackman might say to him if they ever meet. He hoped it would go something like this: “‘Hey, you did what you did. You didn’t hurt us.’”

[danoyse]

Again, poor baby.

Maybe if he actually watched legal DVDs once in awhile he would realize that these rules apply to him too:

[katie_girl09]

Well, they usually copy those warnings too.

[Nell2ThaIzzay]

I don't have a problem with downloading, because as people said, it can raise awareness.

I have bought many CD's from artists I never would have even HEARD OF if it weren't for the internet and downloading their music first.

I do have a problem with downloading IN PLACE OF buying the CD / DVD / ticket to the theater.

I downloaded X-Men: The Last Stand. I also saw it 7 times in theaters, own 2 copies on DVD (2 different Collector's Editions), and a PSP copy.

I downloaded the X-Men Origins: Wolverine leak. I saw it twice in theaters, and own the 2 disc Collector's Edition on DVD.

I downloaded the 2 movies out of a fanboyish lack of patience. I didn't download them so I didn't have to spend money on them.

[danoyse]

But this guy not only bought a downloaded copy, he uploaded it to a filesharing site and made it available to others. That's distribution of copyrighted material, and therefore illegal.

And I don't think he'll find anyone involved with a pirated movie to call him up to say "hey, it's OK, you didn't hurt us!" like he's hoping. That's basically telling everyone it's OK to put an illegal copy of a movie over the internet.

[katie_girl09]

Originally Posted by danoyse

But this guy not only bought a downloaded copy, he uploaded it to a filesharing site and made it available to others. That's distribution of copyrighted material, and therefore illegal.

Agreed. I don't necessarily support downloading, but if the industry is going to crack down on anyone, it should be the people uploading the content on the internet in the first place, NOT the people who download it as a result.

And I agree with Nell. If you download the movie and still go to see it in theatres/buy it, I don't think you've really done anything wrong.

[narrows101]

http://bhcourier.com/article/Local_N...en_Movie/75108

Man Pleads Guilty To Distributing Pirated 'X-Men' Movie (CNS) Posted Monday March 14, 2011 – 3:25pm

A New York man pleaded guilty today in Los Angeles to violating federal copyright law by uploading a pirated work print of X-Men Origins: Wolverine to the Internet before the film opened in theaters.

Gilberto Sanchez, a 48-year-old glass installer and musician, entered the plea in Los Angeles federal court to one count of uploading a copyrighted work being prepared for commercial distribution, a felony that carries a maximum penalty of three years in federal prison, according to the U.S. Attorney's Office.

Sanchez also faces a fine of $250,000, or twice the gross gain or gross loss attributable to the offense, whichever is greater, prosecutors said.

Sanchez was indicted in December 2009 for uploading an illegal copy of the Hugh Jackman sci-fi thriller to the sharing site Megaupload one month prior to its May 2009 release.

Sanchez told the New York Times last year he bought a bootleg DVD of Wolverine for $5 on a New York street and posted a copy on the Hong Kong-based website for the prestige.

After uploading the movie, Sanchez publicized the upload by posting links on two publicly available websites, so that anyone who clicked on the links would have access to the movie and be able to download it, Assistant U.S. Attorney Lisa Feldman said.

Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp. owns the copyright to the movie.

Sanchez is free on a $50,000 bond, pending his Sept. 19 sentencing by U.S. District Judge Margaret M. Morrow.