Man Who Uploaded Viral Deadpool Movie to Facebook Sentenced to Prison

cageymaru

cageymaru

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 10, 2003
Messages
22,074
In 2016, Trevon Franklin uploaded a pirated copy of Deadpool to Facebook. The viral video was seen 6,386,456 times and the government was seeking a 6 month prison sentence in federal court. After accepting a plea deal where he admitted guilt, the judge sentenced him to 3 weeks in prison. He had no prior criminal record.

With all Facebook credentials readily available Franklin was an easy catch. Last summer he was indictment. Faced with a limited defense, he signed a plea agreement a few months later, admitting that he indeed uploaded the pirated film. The Government noted that a six-month prison sentence would send a strong message to Facebook users and the public at large, to show that there are real consequences for such a crime.
 
I wonder, was it "time served" ?

Court says he downloaded it from a site in Iceland, then put it up on Facebook.
 
Last edited:
So, dumb ass uploads copyright protected movie to Facebook and gets a few weeks in detention. Sounds fair.

Hopefully, someone in the big house schooled him on using torrents for future activities since he is now a hardened criminal. That whole IP address is not a person doesn't work well with your Facebook page. ;)
 
Trevon dont seem to be the smartest kid around, i mean a stunt like that is like doing B&E use the computer there to check your facetwitt profile and then leave your wallet behind.
 
So some PRIVATE COMPANY is upset that someone uploaded a movie to Facebook, instead of sending a take down notice to Facebook they let it roll? Then they get the government involved, and for some fucking reason spending a year, who knows how much tax payer money, to investigate who uploaded a movie that very easily could have been removed if Facebook did anything, and it all comes down to 6 months in prison? Seriously what in the actual fuck is wrong with this country, the movie made like 800 million on a 50 million budget but I'm sure Fox suffered "great loss" in this.

I mean throw me a bone here, did Facebook actually take it down and he kept making fake accounts and re-uploading it?
 
bigdogchris said:
Prison for uploading a movie to FB is beyond ridiculous. CI should be a civil fine, ONLY. Prison is for murders and rapist, true dangers to society, ONLY.
Click to expand...
He's a danger to society, the 1% who might have lost some money on him uploading deadpool. Or maybe he made them money since I doubt the upload was in good quality and people went to the theaters to watch it in good quality.
 
RogueTrip said:
How funny since deadpool himself would likely pirate a movie since he has little to no morals.

I mean he kills people. Uses drugs. Hides the cure for blindness and i'm sure there's more.
Click to expand...

you have got to be kidding
 
bigdogchris said:
Prison for uploading a movie to FB is beyond ridiculous. CI should be a civil fine, ONLY. Prison is for murders and rapist, true dangers to society, ONLY.
Click to expand...


Fuck that.

I've heard this bullshit argument from people for a few years now and it's my opinion that you guys are on crack.

You wouldn't have sent Bernie Madoff to prison then?

What about the Enron, Walter Forbes, etc who decimate people's retirement savings?

Or doctors who falsified FDA testing?
https://www.nytimes.com/1999/05/17/business/a-doctor-s-drug-trials-turn-into-fraud.html

Or assholes who try to sell bullshit fake cancer medications;
http://wayback.archive-it.org/7993/...ov/iceci/criminalinvestigations/ucm433570.htm

If the penalties are not severe then they serve no inhibitive purpose. You tell someone that they will only be fined for doing something that can make them money and it becomes a game to see if they can make more than they loose.

I know you see this case, this very young person, and this particular instance of copyright infringement as an example of minor criminal activity, but there are other examples that were no where near minor. But then there are others like Kim Dotcom.
https://www.thewrap.com/biggest-piracy-case-in-u-s-history-gets-its-first-conviction/

I will not debate with you the validity of the claims of lost revenue, no point. But I don't think you can argue that he didn't make the claimed 175 million in profits off of other people's work. What kind of a fine would you put on a Copyright Infringer that would make a guy like him think twice? Which would you rather have, this 22 year old spend three weeks in jail or should he be under a $500,000 dollar fine that a person can't just declare bankruptcy to get out of?


Our legal system wasn't born from nothing, it came from lessons learned from other countries. Lessons learned about human nature. The world changes, people change some too, and I can see reasons for why the approach to punishing criminals might evolve over time. But I don't see any reason at all to entertain your idea on criminal punishment as anything but ill-conceived, and I am being really nice with that descriptive.
 
sfsuphysics said:
So some PRIVATE COMPANY is upset that someone uploaded a movie to Facebook, instead of sending a take down notice to Facebook they let it roll? Then they get the government involved, and for some fucking reason spending a year, who knows how much tax payer money, to investigate who uploaded a movie that very easily could have been removed if Facebook did anything, and it all comes down to 6 months in prison? Seriously what in the actual fuck is wrong with this country, the movie made like 800 million on a 50 million budget but I'm sure Fox suffered "great loss" in this.

I mean throw me a bone here, did Facebook actually take it down and he kept making fake accounts and re-uploading it?
Click to expand...


3 weeks dude, he was sentenced to 3 weeks.
 
Gotta make an example for the rest of the peasants, if you break the laws bought by billion dollar corporations, it's to the cage with you!

They'd hang you if they could but the lawyers and lobbyist are still working on it.
 
So that explains why Deadpool bombed at the box office and lost a ton of money! /sarcasm about the usual "piracy hurts our sales" claims that only come out when their movie sucked.

I hope that's 3 weeks in minimum security. 6 months request by the government is absurd since he didn't do it for monetary gain.
 
lcpiper said:
Fuck that.

I've heard this bullshit argument from people for a few years now and it's my opinion that you guys are on crack.

You wouldn't have sent Bernie Madoff to prison then?

What about the Enron, Walter Forbes, etc who decimate people's retirement savings?

Or doctors who falsified FDA testing?
https://www.nytimes.com/1999/05/17/business/a-doctor-s-drug-trials-turn-into-fraud.html

Or assholes who try to sell bullshit fake cancer medications;
http://wayback.archive-it.org/7993/...ov/iceci/criminalinvestigations/ucm433570.htm

If the penalties are not severe then they serve no inhibitive purpose. You tell someone that they will only be fined for doing something that can make them money and it becomes a game to see if they can make more than they loose.

I know you see this case, this very young person, and this particular instance of copyright infringement as an example of minor criminal activity, but there are other examples that were no where near minor. But then there are others like Kim Dotcom.
https://www.thewrap.com/biggest-piracy-case-in-u-s-history-gets-its-first-conviction/

I will not debate with you the validity of the claims of lost revenue, no point. But I don't think you can argue that he didn't make the claimed 175 million in profits off of other people's work. What kind of a fine would you put on a Copyright Infringer that would make a guy like him think twice? Which would you rather have, this 22 year old spend three weeks in jail or should he be under a $500,000 dollar fine that a person can't just declare bankruptcy to get out of?


Our legal system wasn't born from nothing, it came from lessons learned from other countries. Lessons learned about human nature. The world changes, people change some too, and I can see reasons for why the approach to punishing criminals might evolve over time. But I don't see any reason at all to entertain your idea on criminal punishment as anything but ill-conceived, and I am being really nice with that descriptive.
Click to expand...

I think comparing the loss of millions from Enron/Madoff, or to the potential loss of life due to falsifying drug tests / fake medicine is a bit... different, as that's actually having a giant impact on many peoples lives.

However, if it did get 6 million views, and say 40% of those viewers didn't go to theater or rent it because of the video then that's a pretty damn big chunk of money. So 3 weeks is a slap on the wrist. However, I think it could have been just as easy to put on probation and levy a "reasonable" fine.


It is pretty ridiculous that it stayed up long enough and went viral for 6m people to see before it got taken down though.
 
Fuzzy_3D said:
Gotta make an example for the rest of the peasants, if you break the laws bought by billion dollar corporations, it's to the cage with you!

They'd hang you if they could but the lawyers and lobbyist are still working on it.
Click to expand...


Same laws protect book writers, etc. Some might make a few million, others maybe not so much. Point is, you are using a really big brush. These laws do not only protect the rich corps like Disney, they protect anyone else who might publish a copyrighted work, including yourself.
 
At least his wallet will be bigger as a result. His prison wallet.

I kill me...
 
Surprised he was just hit with prison time and didn't have to pay back any portion of the lost revenue. 6 million views is a lot of lost revenue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zrikz
like this
Why not give most of these non-violent criminals duties like cleaning up garbage for 10 years, cleaning sewers, farming, build a frickin pyramid at the junk yard or something... instead of just sitting in prison doing nothing spoiling their brains more as other folks around them teach them how to do it next time without getting caught... I am curious, have we tried this to any significant extent and what were the results?
 
zrikz said:
I think comparing the loss of millions from Enron/Madoff, or to the potential loss of life due to falsifying drug tests / fake medicine is a bit... different, as that's actually having a giant impact on many peoples lives.

However, if it did get 6 million views, and say 40% of those viewers didn't go to theater or rent it because of the video then that's a pretty damn big chunk of money. So 3 weeks is a slap on the wrist. However, I think it could have been just as easy to put on probation and levy a "reasonable" fine.


It is pretty ridiculous that it stayed up long enough and went viral for 6m people to see before it got taken down though.
Click to expand...


I agree, but please don't be mistaken. I wasn't comparing this young man's actions with those of these super-assholes. I'm making an argument that prison should not be just for violent offenders as another believes, and listed examples of why. It's the modern digital world that has raised the bar on copyright infringement. I doubt that it started with boot-legged 8-Track tapes but the advent and proliferation of recording technology and the distribution capabilities of the internet have without doubt had an impact on what is possible, and in reaction, governments have addressed the problem from a point of view aimed at the criminal infringer and done so with a felony boom-stick.

I don't think 3 weeks is too harsh at all. I do think that we need another option other than a felony charge. We need to separate copyright infringement into two distinct camps, none felony where the actions are not malicious or intended to make money, and felony for the Kim DotComs and those who would use copyright infringement with harmful intent, maliciously.

In that way we can separate the kids and old grannies from the assholes and deal with each in a far more appropriate manner.
 
lcpiper said:
Fuck that.

I've heard this bullshit argument from people for a few years now and it's my opinion that you guys are on crack.

You wouldn't have sent Bernie Madoff to prison then?

What about the Enron, Walter Forbes, etc who decimate people's retirement savings?

Or doctors who falsified FDA testing?
https://www.nytimes.com/1999/05/17/business/a-doctor-s-drug-trials-turn-into-fraud.html

Or assholes who try to sell bullshit fake cancer medications;
http://wayback.archive-it.org/7993/...ov/iceci/criminalinvestigations/ucm433570.htm

If the penalties are not severe then they serve no inhibitive purpose. You tell someone that they will only be fined for doing something that can make them money and it becomes a game to see if they can make more than they loose.

I know you see this case, this very young person, and this particular instance of copyright infringement as an example of minor criminal activity, but there are other examples that were no where near minor. But then there are others like Kim Dotcom.
https://www.thewrap.com/biggest-piracy-case-in-u-s-history-gets-its-first-conviction/

I will not debate with you the validity of the claims of lost revenue, no point. But I don't think you can argue that he didn't make the claimed 175 million in profits off of other people's work. What kind of a fine would you put on a Copyright Infringer that would make a guy like him think twice? Which would you rather have, this 22 year old spend three weeks in jail or should he be under a $500,000 dollar fine that a person can't just declare bankruptcy to get out of?


Our legal system wasn't born from nothing, it came from lessons learned from other countries. Lessons learned about human nature. The world changes, people change some too, and I can see reasons for why the approach to punishing criminals might evolve over time. But I don't see any reason at all to entertain your idea on criminal punishment as anything but ill-conceived, and I am being really nice with that descriptive.
Click to expand...
I see your point and agree to an extent. While a fine would be detrimental to him financially, the lesson wouldn't be learned. Why not have him to Community Service like picking up trash for a couple hundred or even thousand hours. Going to jail for something like that is only going to create a potentially dangerous individual that isn't going to help anybody but himself.
 
Ultima99 said:
3 weeks seems fair to me considering what they could have given him.
Click to expand...
I agree. A financial settlement would probably destroy his life. A 3-week prison sentence is something which could plant some fear in him to not do it again. A brief taste of what a new lifestyle could be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PaulP
like this
Youn said:
Why not give most of these non-violent criminals duties like cleaning up garbage for 10 years, cleaning sewers, farming, build a frickin pyramid at the junk yard or something... instead of just sitting in prison doing nothing spoiling their brains more as other folks around them teach them how to do it next time without getting caught... I am curious, have we tried this to any significant extent and what were the results?
Click to expand...


Let's see if I get this right. I'm 58 years old and my wife and I have been trying to do it all right by the standards of our society. We work 1/3rd of each day 5 days a week. See to our kids, raised them, payed taxes for all kinds of things, things we really don't think our hard work should ever pay for. Been to war zones, albeit it was voluntary, no one made me go, but dammit I was there and so someone else didn't have to do it in my place. Almost 40 years of this and although it hasn't happened yet thank God, say some jerkoff comes along, and cheats me out of my retirement along with 20,000 other couples just like us?

Now if it were up to me, I'd say put a bullet in the back of this asshole's head. 20,000 families destitute because this greedy fucker can't just do it like the rest of us. But because he's non-violent you think he should just pay a fine because prison's too harsh, too costly, too whatever.

While you digest this, I'll pose a totally different solution.

Let's easy prison crowding, a life sentence without the possibility of parole = a death sentence. If the person can not be returned to civilization then why force society to carry his living corpse, end it for the betterment of all. While we are converting the un-recoverable we might as well get serious and clear those death penalty waiting lines.

As of October 2, 2018, there were 2,705 death row inmates in the United States.
Click to expand...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_death_row_inmates_in_the_United_States

tatistics. Over 159,000 people were serving life sentences as of 2012, with just under a third, nearly 50,000, serving life without a chance of parole.
Click to expand...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_imprisonment_in_the_United_States

OK, so close to 53,000 inmates cleared from the prison tit.

It certainly would fix a lot, but it could be a step in the right direction.
 
NeghVar said:
I agree. A financial settlement would probably destroy his life. A 3-week prison sentence is something which could plant some fear in him to not do it again. A brief taste of what a new lifestyle could be.
Click to expand...

Yes, except for a few more things that go hand in hand with a Federal Conviction, like can't vote, can't own a firearm, and there are more. Unless this was some sort of felony misdemeanor.
 
lcpiper said:
Let's see if I get this right. I'm 58 years old and my wife and I have been trying to do it all right by the standards of our society. We work 1/3rd of each day 5 days a week. See to our kids, raised them, payed taxes for all kinds of things, things we really don't think our hard work should ever pay for. Been to war zones, albeit it was voluntary, no one made me go, but dammit I was there and so someone else didn't have to do it in my place. Almost 40 years of this and although it hasn't happened yet thank God, say some jerkoff comes along, and cheats me out of my retirement along with 20,000 other couples just like us?

Now if it were up to me, I'd say put a bullet in the back of this asshole's head. 20,000 families destitute because this greedy fucker can't just do it like the rest of us. But because he's non-violent you think he should just pay a fine because prison's too harsh, too costly, too whatever.

While you digest this, I'll pose a totally different solution.

Let's easy prison crowding, a life sentence without the possibility of parole = a death sentence. If the person can not be returned to civilization then why force society to carry his living corpse, end it for the betterment of all. While we are converting the un-recoverable we might as well get serious and clear those death penalty waiting lines.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_death_row_inmates_in_the_United_States


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_imprisonment_in_the_United_States

OK, so close to 53,000 inmates cleared from the prison tit.

It certainly would fix a lot, but it could be a step in the right direction.
Click to expand...
If you were one of the first ones in, you'd have retired at 54.
 
lcpiper said:
Yes, except for a few more things that go hand in hand with a Federal Conviction, like can't vote, can't own a firearm, and there are more. Unless this was some sort of felony misdemeanor.
Click to expand...
Is that a blanket policy and not a case by case?
 
g00z13 said:
I see your point and agree to an extent. While a fine would be detrimental to him financially, the lesson wouldn't be learned. Why not have him to Community Service like picking up trash for a couple hundred or even thousand hours. Going to jail for something like that is only going to create a potentially dangerous individual that isn't going to help anybody but himself.
Click to expand...


Actually I would be surprised that this wasn't "time served" and that detail was omitted for shock value.

It probably didn't help that he missed his first sentencing because he missed the buss, and it was rescheduled. Judges can get a little pissy over that kind of shit.
 
NeghVar said:
Is that a blanket policy and not a case by case?
Click to expand...


Being convicted of a felony is a serious event with lifelong consequences. Becoming a convicted felon will have a long lasting impact on a person’s life and results in the loss of basic civil rights such as the right to vote, the right to sit on a jury, and the right to own, possess, or use a firearm. Convicted felons are also prohibited from certain employment such as law enforcement, the school system, and hospitals. Often times employers will automatically reject applicants due to a felony conviction or will state on the job offer that the applicant must have a clean criminal background in order to apply.
Click to expand...
https://www.appealslawgroup.com/the-impact-of-a-felony-conviction/
Click to expand...


A person who has committed a felony is a felon. In addition, upon conviction of a felony in a court of law, a person is known as a convicted felon or a convict. In the United States, where the felony/misdemeanor distinction is still widely applied, the federal government defines a felony as a crime punishable by death or imprisonment in excess of one year. If punishable by exactly one year or less, it is classified as a misdemeanor. The actual prison sentence handed out has no effect on the classification, which is based on the maximum sentence possible under law.
Click to expand...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony

from this article;
Franklin is charged in a one-count indictment returned by a federal grand jury on April 7 with reproducing and distributing a copyrighted work, a felony offense that carries a statutory maximum penalty of three years in federal prison.
Click to expand...
https://www.justice.gov/usao-cdca/p...ations-alleged-illegal-upload-deadpool-movi-0

It would seem that because of how this was handled, there was no way to both convict him, and still be lenient and not have a long term effect on the boy's life. As I said earlier, they need a way to handle this with a lighter touch. Still, he can appeal things like the loss of his right to bear arms and a Judge would probably allow it after a few years. It's just hard to convince a 22 year old that his entire life isn't fucked up over this, they don't have a long term point of view usually.
 
lcpiper said:
Let's see if I get this right... because he's non-violent you think he should just pay a fine because prison's too harsh, too costly, too whatever.
Click to expand...
nope, you got it wrong... or maybe you meant to quote someone else...
 
lcpiper said:
why force society to carry his living corpse, end it for the betterment of all
Click to expand...
The reason as I understand it is the victims of those crimes will somehow feel better knowing their enemy is suffering. I've no idea if that's even remotely effective (you can't change the past), seems like a waste of space/money to me...
 
Youn said:
The reason as I understand it is the victims of those crimes will somehow feel better knowing their enemy is suffering. I've no idea if that's even remotely effective (you can't change the past), seems like a waste of space/money to me...
Click to expand...

Yea I'm ok with justice, even perhaps revenge, inflicting long term suffering not so much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top