Comments on: Tape 20 Seconds of a Movie and Go to Jail http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/08/tape_20_seconds.html The Law, the Universe, and Everything Tue, 14 Feb 2012 05:18:12 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Bruce Boyden http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/08/tape_20_seconds.html/comment-page-1#comment-52940 Bruce Boyden Sat, 04 Aug 2007 00:12:24 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2007/08/tape-20-seconds-of-a-movie-and-go-to-jail.html#comment-52940 Chris and Sherwin: how would you amend the statute so that it meets its objective without requiring proof of the recording of an entire movie, and without including difficult-to-establish elements such as intent? Chris and Sherwin: how would you amend the statute so that it meets its objective without requiring proof of the recording of an entire movie, and without including difficult-to-establish elements such as intent?

]]> By: Chris http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/08/tape_20_seconds.html/comment-page-1#comment-52939 Chris Sat, 04 Aug 2007 00:02:24 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2007/08/tape-20-seconds-of-a-movie-and-go-to-jail.html#comment-52939 I completely agree with Sherwin; while there may be a case here, the real problem (some would argue crime) is that the MPAA (and other organizations like them) have successfully lobbied for such poorly drafted and poorly applied laws. You would think the MPAA would learn from the absurdity of the prosecutions gone after by the RIAA. I completely agree with Sherwin; while there may be a case here, the real problem (some would argue crime) is that the MPAA (and other organizations like them) have successfully lobbied for such poorly drafted and poorly applied laws. You would think the MPAA would learn from the absurdity of the prosecutions gone after by the RIAA.

]]> By: Sherwin http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/08/tape_20_seconds.html/comment-page-1#comment-52938 Sherwin Fri, 03 Aug 2007 22:58:56 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2007/08/tape-20-seconds-of-a-movie-and-go-to-jail.html#comment-52938 The charge is indeed under the Virginia Code--one of several state laws pushed by the MPAA a few years back. Random: I think there's a case that the law was violated even without meeting any of those three conditions--the real problem to me is a poorly-drafted and poorly-applied law. The charge is indeed under the Virginia Code–one of several state laws pushed by the MPAA a few years back.

Random:

I think there’s a case that the law was violated even without meeting any of those three conditions–the real problem to me is a poorly-drafted and poorly-applied law.

]]> By: Bruce Boyden http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/08/tape_20_seconds.html/comment-page-1#comment-52937 Bruce Boyden Fri, 03 Aug 2007 06:38:27 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2007/08/tape-20-seconds-of-a-movie-and-go-to-jail.html#comment-52937 Random, you're right, but from what I can tell from the article, it sounds like 1, 2, and 3 are all false. Since the police confiscated the camera, 2 should be pretty easy to verify; if the only clip starts near the end of the film, that's not a very plausible piracy attempt. Random, you’re right, but from what I can tell from the article, it sounds like 1, 2, and 3 are all false. Since the police confiscated the camera, 2 should be pretty easy to verify; if the only clip starts near the end of the film, that’s not a very plausible piracy attempt.

]]> By: random law student http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/08/tape_20_seconds.html/comment-page-1#comment-52936 random law student Fri, 03 Aug 2007 01:51:19 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2007/08/tape-20-seconds-of-a-movie-and-go-to-jail.html#comment-52936 The facts are unclear, but 1. if it is a digital recording camera (rather than digital picture camera that can record but is primarily for pictures) 2. if she started recording at the beginning of the movie and 3. she only stopped because she was interrupted (or thought she had been seen) then I think there is a case for the VA law violation. Why would she think recording her own clip would be better than a trailer her little brother can download? The facts are unclear, but 1. if it is a digital recording camera (rather than digital picture camera that can record but is primarily for pictures) 2. if she started recording at the beginning of the movie and 3. she only stopped because she was interrupted (or thought she had been seen) then I think there is a case for the VA law violation.

Why would she think recording her own clip would be better than a trailer her little brother can download?

]]> By: random law student http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/08/tape_20_seconds.html/comment-page-1#comment-52935 random law student Fri, 03 Aug 2007 01:51:13 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2007/08/tape-20-seconds-of-a-movie-and-go-to-jail.html#comment-52935 The facts are unclear, but 1. if it is a digital recording camera (rather than digital picture camera that can record but is primarily for pictures) 2. if she started recording at the beginning of the movie and 3. she only stopped because she was interrupted (or thought she had been seen) then I think there is a case for the VA law violation. Why would she think recording her own clip would be better than a trailer her little brother can download? The facts are unclear, but 1. if it is a digital recording camera (rather than digital picture camera that can record but is primarily for pictures) 2. if she started recording at the beginning of the movie and 3. she only stopped because she was interrupted (or thought she had been seen) then I think there is a case for the VA law violation.

Why would she think recording her own clip would be better than a trailer her little brother can download?

]]> By: random law student http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/08/tape_20_seconds.html/comment-page-1#comment-52934 random law student Fri, 03 Aug 2007 01:51:09 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2007/08/tape-20-seconds-of-a-movie-and-go-to-jail.html#comment-52934 The facts are unclear, but 1. if it is a digital recording camera (rather than digital picture camera that can record but is primarily for pictures) 2. if she started recording at the beginning of the movie and 3. she only stopped because she was interrupted (or thought she had been seen) then I think there is a case for the VA law violation. Why would she think recording her own clip would be better than a trailer her little brother can download? The facts are unclear, but 1. if it is a digital recording camera (rather than digital picture camera that can record but is primarily for pictures) 2. if she started recording at the beginning of the movie and 3. she only stopped because she was interrupted (or thought she had been seen) then I think there is a case for the VA law violation.

Why would she think recording her own clip would be better than a trailer her little brother can download?

]]> By: Daniel Solove http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/08/tape_20_seconds.html/comment-page-1#comment-52933 Daniel Solove Fri, 03 Aug 2007 01:13:09 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2007/08/tape-20-seconds-of-a-movie-and-go-to-jail.html#comment-52933 Bruce -- I think you are right that FECA isn't the law she's charged under. It was the only law cited in the article, which is why I quoted from it. Bruce — I think you are right that FECA isn’t the law she’s charged under. It was the only law cited in the article, which is why I quoted from it.

]]> By: Bruce Boyden http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2007/08/tape_20_seconds.html/comment-page-1#comment-52932 Bruce Boyden Fri, 03 Aug 2007 01:08:18 +0000 http://www.solove.org/archives/2007/08/tape-20-seconds-of-a-movie-and-go-to-jail.html#comment-52932 Hopefully the prosecutor will exercise discretion and drop the case. The purpose of the law is obviously to combat the copying of all or substantially all of a movie for redistribution. It can't only prohibit that, because otherwise the offense wouldn't be complete until the movie was over. But I don't think anyone intended to make making a 20-second clip of a feature film a crime punishable with jail time. One correction: I don't think federal law is involved here, given that she was confronted by Arlington County police officers and there's a reference in the article to 1 year in jail and a $2,500 fine. The penalties under the FECA are different. I suspect Va. Code § 18.2-187.2: "A. It shall be unlawful for any person to operate an audiovisual recording function of a device in a commercial theater, excluding the lobby and other common areas, to record a motion picture or any portion thereof without the consent of the owner or lessee of the theater. Any person who violates the provisions of this section is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor." Hopefully the prosecutor will exercise discretion and drop the case. The purpose of the law is obviously to combat the copying of all or substantially all of a movie for redistribution. It can’t only prohibit that, because otherwise the offense wouldn’t be complete until the movie was over. But I don’t think anyone intended to make making a 20-second clip of a feature film a crime punishable with jail time.

One correction: I don’t think federal law is involved here, given that she was confronted by Arlington County police officers and there’s a reference in the article to 1 year in jail and a $2,500 fine. The penalties under the FECA are different. I suspect Va. Code § 18.2-187.2: “A. It shall be unlawful for any person to operate an audiovisual recording function of a device in a commercial theater, excluding the lobby and other common areas, to record a motion picture or any portion thereof without the consent of the owner or lessee of the theater. Any person who violates the provisions of this section is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.”

]]>