Last week the story spread around quickly. A woman who filmed her sister’s birthday party and a few minutes of the movie New Moon had been arrested.

Theater managers, who knew only too well that the lady faced three years in jail, insisted on pressing charges, apparently completely unable to tell the difference between a pro pirate and a happy snapper.

Fortunately, on Friday the prosecutors threw out the case against her, but now Muvico are trying to dig themselves out of the hole they dug for themselves by issuing a press release on the situation. Unfortunately for them, they have simply reinforced what many observers have already noticed – they have no minds of their own, are unable to demonstrate discretion, and have only the ability to follow MPAA orders in a drone-like fashion.

Muvico, in compliance with the anti-piracy guidelines issued to movie theater operators nationwide by the Motion Picture Association of America, followed standard procedure by referring the matter to police. Specifically, theater managers are instructed to alert law enforcement authorities whenever they suspect prohibited activity. Theater managers do not make the determination whether a crime has been committed, and it is up to the police and prosecutors to use their discretion whether or not to press charges.

What is wrong with these people? Who on earth is going to buy or download a 4 minute ‘cam’ of a movie taken on a handheld, no-tripod camera, interspersed with family outing footage of celebrations and the singing of ‘Happy Birthday’, coupled with a continuous commentary by the camera operator?

No one, that’s who. Risk of monetary loss to the movie or theater – 0%. Why not simply have a quiet word and inform the ‘criminal’ that the camera really isn’t allowed? Is it really necessary to have a customer locked up in jail for 2 days?

Supposedly Muvico’s actions were to prevent a ‘crime’ against the theater and the movie itself, yet these supposed experts can’t even tell if a crime has even been committed. Can’t they recognize ‘intent’ when they see it? Is it really that difficult to tell? Of course not, but blatantly following MPAA instructions is clearly their number one priority, no matter who it hurts, no matter who it offends, no matter how many customers they alienate.

And Muvico is absolutely unrepentant, stating that it will continue to enforce its zero-tolerance policy, noting that any recording of a movie, of any length, “is a federal and state offense that Muvico is compelled to report.”

An aggressive law, that everyone knows, was lobbied for by the MPAA.

While Muvico stands by its action in this instance, it is happy that the judicial process has reached an appropriate result and is pleased that the charges against Ms. Tumpach have been dismissed.

This press release is a complete joke – congratulations Muvico, you just made things even worse.

Say after me: “Yes, we can think for ourselves…” – or do you need me to get the MPAA to tell you?

Article from: FreakBits

Bahrain is a very small Arabic country located in the Persian Gulf to the east of Saudia Arabia.

The population sits at just under 800,000 but that hasn’t stopped the country from gaining the attention of what are being described as “international companies” – a veiled reference to the big players in the worldwide music and movie industries.

This week Bahrain’s telecom watchdog (Telecommunications Regulatory Authority) “declared war” on Internet piracy.

TRA said it would work with the country’s Culture and Information Ministry to protect the rights of the aforementioned media companies, although chairman Dr Mohammed Al Amer said it would be inappropriate to name the companies making the complaints at this time.

TRA general director Alan Horne said they have hired a former head of British Telecom’s Internet security department as an advisor.

“We have taken this move because we recognize the importance of safeguarding the Internet and many aspects to do with content,” he said, adding, “Over the next year, we will be addressing many issues dealing with intellectual property rights and international best practice.”

Article from: FreakBits

“UPC has informed the rights holders that there is no basis under Irish law requiring an ISP to block access to certain websites and that it will not agree to a request that goes beyond what is currently provided for under Irish law,” UPC said in a statement.

“Should the rights holders proceed with their threat of legal action if UPC fails to block access to Pirate Bay, UPC has every intention of vigorously defending its position in Court,” they add, putting them in the same boat as the Norwegian ISP Telenor.

Previously, Ireland’s largest ISP Eircom refused to block the Pirate Bay without a court order. Instead, they made a deal with the local equivalent of the RIAA to warn and eventually disconnect illegal file-sharers.

Article from: FreakBits

A few days ago the Portuguese Cultural Activities Inspection (IGAC), an organization which is part of the Portuguese Ministry of Culture asked Sapo, one of the most prominent Portuguese ISPs, to remove and block all access to a list of 28 websites that allegedly link to copyrighted movies and music.

The complaint originated from the local anti-piracy outfit MAPiNET and according to the reports this is not the first ISP that was targeted.

Interestingly, the targeted sites are mostly smaller blogs linking to files hosted on Rapidshare and other file-hosting services, and no torrent sites were included. The majority of the websites are Portuguese language websites hosted elsewhere, and 4 of the websites are hosted at Sapo’s blog service.

The Government’s actions were taken under the local e-commerce law, which is in effect since 2004 and apparently allows for a shutdown of websites that link to copyrighted material hosted elsewhere.

The full list of all the censored sites is available in this pdf.

Update: IGAC doesn’t have the power to force the ISPs to take these sites offline, they issued a complaint.

Article from: FreakBits

According to a National Police Agency spokesman, the lawsuit against the individuals was filed at 10 police stations in the South Korean capital, Seoul, and the Gyeonggi province.

The studios also filed suit against 80 adult websites accused of aiding and abetting the distribution of the illegally uploaded movies, after they charged for access to the material.

The studios have also asked the police to investigate the infringements, which potentially carry a jail sentence in South Korea.

The lawsuit notes that the law firm representing the studios has also harvested around 100,000 IP addresses of those who downloaded the movies.

Article from: FreakBits