Hurt Locker Makers To Sue Thousands of BitTorrent Users

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Be truthful, has the old "sue the downloaders" approach ever worked? Seriously, trying to “increase revenue” for the film by suing people that wouldn’t pay to see your movie in the first place is not a winning strategy.

Despite the recognition from Academy members and the huge success among downloaders, the U.S box office revenue has been relatively low at $16.4 million. In an attempt to increase the film’s revenue its makers will threaten to sue thousands of BitTorrent users who have illegally downloaded (and therefore uploaded/distributed) a copy in recent months.
Click to expand...
 
Besides this movie winning an award that's all I know about it, not interested thanks, I'll read the book if I feel like giving a crap.
 
Just watched it today. I wasn't bad, but it wasn't THAT great either.
 
the box office is low because the movie sucked, sorry. once you watch it, you'll never have the desire to watch it again.
 
Lol that movie won a Oscar? The best movie of 2009? Thats more of a crime than people downloading it. I watched it and did not think it was that good. Then again there wasn't much that was any good.
 
xorbe said:
the box office is low because the movie sucked, sorry. once you watch it, you'll never have the desire to watch it again.
Click to expand...

Were you watching the same movie? It was a great film! Box office was low because advertisers didn't do their job. Just because you watched it once doesn't make the film worse...
 
thats a very inefficient tactic, just sue Limewire for a million bucks each time someone downloaded it
 
Avatar wasn't deep, but after seeing Hurt Locker, I cant belief this film beat it...


Generally criticized as a gross exaggeration of the day-to-day in Iraq, the bad taste that it left in your mouth was from it trying to portray itself as otherwise.
 
i stopped torrenting after i got a letter from charter!!!

burned by batman....
 
I liked the movie just fine. Some parts had me a little eyeroll-y, but Avatar almost gave me a seizure due to my eyes rolling so far back in my head.
 
I really enjoyed this movie and thought it deserved the award. I even bought it to add to my DVD collection. However, i'm not sure this is a movie I could watch again as it isn't that type of movie. That said, I really wish these guys would just sue the uploaders instead of going after the people downloading.
 
I downloaded movie and watched it. If they want me to pay my $15 (cost of the DVD), I'll pay..,
 
I just found everything so telegraphed in that movie.

Hey, that guy's going to their vehicle - alone - to get another wrench... *bang*
Hey, that guy's standing up when there's a possible sniper over... *bang*
Hey, I wonder if he's going to have a hard time adjusting to life back home... *snore*
 
bah oscars don't mean much... Maybe I am just a common shlutz but most movies that win awards bore me to death. There are exceptions but as a general rule the award givers try and give awards to crappy movies just to show us we dont' know the "art" of film.
 
dandirk said:
bah oscars don't mean much... Maybe I am just a common shlutz but most movies that win awards bore me to death. There are exceptions but as a general rule the award givers try and give awards to crappy movies just to show us we dont' know the "art" of film.
Click to expand...
I can't wait for Transformers 3 either!!!!!1
 
I find that arguement that wouldn't have paid to see the movie to be a weak arguement. Same goes for people that download music. If it sucks and you don't think it is worth money, they when are you wasting time and space on your machine downloading it? So you don't think a movie is worth $10 a person to see in a theater or $15-$25 on DVD/blu-ray then rent it when it comes out. There are the redbox / blockbuster devices all over for $1 rentals or netflix or other rental programs for monthly cost. You must have thought the movie was worth watching if you bothered to download it. Not unless you were planning on burning it to sell illegal copies of it.

Same goes for music when people try to use that arguement. if you think the music is crap and not worth $0.99 then why bother downloading it and listening to it. Again, there are unlimited music services that you can pay for if you want unlimited music by legal methods.
 
I liked the film. Didn't think it was an all time great or anything, but definitely an enjoyable movie.

As far as the movie suing bittorrent users, that is a failed strategy. The film didn't gross so poorly because of pirating, it grossed so poorly because no one heard of the movie until it won an Oscar. Either that or because it wasn't in 3D.
 
saw the movie and it wasnt that great. No clue how it won. I seen better movies in 2009.
 
they have bit blockers and some clients have blockers built in, as far as the movie when i saw it i thought( NO Joke ) that it was a good direct to dvd movie. that whole movie is based on a real person that coined the phrase Hurt Locker and i believe taking legal action for the makers of the film for ripping him off. thats why they need the money and also believe that not nation but domesticaly only made like 16 mil., caint wait for power of the dark crystal, i dont care at my age that seems CREEPY.
 
People that use Bit torrent deserve to get caught and sued. Has anyone learnt a lesson during the past 4 years?
 
The approach they are trying seems like the common RIAA 'shakedown' technique. They don't really want to go to court in thousands of cases due to the obviously high legal costs that would incur. Instead they'll probably offer these people the chance to settle out of court for a decent amount of money, which a lot will probably accept.

Yay for a broken legal system that allows for the equivalent of email spam!
 
pigwalk said:
Just watched it today. I wasn't bad, but it wasn't THAT great either.
Click to expand...
The critics claimed that it was one of those movies that "got everything right". Apparently those critics overlooked the fact that the film had no real plot.

'Watch these guys do things' was effectively the premise of the entire film. I saw it, but I wouldn't pirate it if given the opportunity.
 
bit torrent is a legit way of transfering upload and download big companies like blizzard use bit torrent for thier clients to recieve updates and patches alot of companies use it for large downloads.
 
Mr. Miyagi said:
Seriously, I don't know how this didn't win.
Click to expand...

I didn't like Inglorius Basterds at all. It was very boring to me. The story just sucked and jumped around as well. "Classic QT" is what they say, but you've got to be a QT fan I guess... I've never really liked his movies, but the people that do are diehard fans.

That said, Hurt Locker wasn't bad, but it most certainly was not good. Not good enough to win an award. It only did so because small budget, small time- produced a halfway decent movie. If you look at the movie itself, it wasn't good enough. Avatar should've won over that one.
 
orangeblue said:
The approach they are trying seems like the common RIAA 'shakedown' technique. They don't really want to go to court in thousands of cases due to the obviously high legal costs that would incur. Instead they'll probably offer these people the chance to settle out of court for a decent amount of money, which a lot will probably accept.

Yay for a broken legal system that allows for the equivalent of email spam!
Click to expand...

I don't know, I see it as incredibly efficient, since you and I, as taxpayers, do not have to foot the bill for the judges etc for a full lawsuit, the wrong-doers get off easier than they probably would have while avoiding court costs and attorney's fees, and the movie folks get $$, advertising and some measure of preventative maintenance.

Seems everyone wins in this scenario...
 
Hurt Locker is overrated just like most of the best picture winners..

I saw it last year before it was nominated for anything and thought it was run of the mill and forgettable..
 
That's the problem isn't it? These people are really crying about revenue they never would have realized to begin with. Suing people to pay for a movie they never would have gone to see in the first place seems silly. Good luck with the shakedown.
 
High definition copies of this movie were available on the internet 6 months... heck maybe even longer than that, BEFORE it came out in theaters in the USA.


That spells disaster, try not leaking your stuff.
 
most of QT's movies jump around agreed, but so do almost all classic novels. he directs his movies like one would read a book with things like foreshadowing, when the reader or in this case viewer knows whats going to happen to the character before the character knows.to me he puts novels unto screen better than most alot of people say read the book it was better, but with QT i think i would rather see the movie then read his book or script, 'That said, Hurt Locker wasn't bad, but it most certainly was not good.' will 100% agree with that.
 
Modred189 said:
I don't know, I see it as incredibly efficient, since you and I, as taxpayers, do not have to foot the bill for the judges etc for a full lawsuit, the wrong-doers get off easier than they probably would have while avoiding court costs and attorney's fees, and the movie folks get $$, advertising and some measure of preventative maintenance.

Seems everyone wins in this scenario...
Click to expand...

Everyone except those who believe in their constitutional rights....
 
demingo said:
Everyone except those who believe in their constitutional rights....
Click to expand...

Which constitutional right would that be?

"The right to steal shit and have no accountability for it because stuff is on the internet and therefor up for the taking."

You know they cut that one off the list right before signing the constitution right?
 
demingo said:
Everyone except those who believe in their constitutional rights....
Click to expand...

Uh... whose constitutional rights? WHICH constitutional right?

All I see is a copyright infringement suit settled out of court. Seems square to me...
 
In that case..

You downloaded a video I made. Please mail me $5000 to settle.
 
Bgrngod said:
Which constitutional right would that be?

"The right to steal shit and have no accountability for it because stuff is on the internet and therefor up for the taking."

You know they cut that one off the list right before signing the constitution right?
Click to expand...

No, the right to a trial. Extortion is illegal. Threatening someone without basis in order to get money out of them is illegal. The companies that have been doing this have already taken a ton of flak in the UK. There have already been countless examples of people being targeted wrongly. My favorite was when the RIAA sued an 83 year old woman who never used a computer... the best part, she was dead too. Guess Gertrude Walton had no accountability either when she died without ever using a computer. She should have paid the RIAA incase she pirates something in her next life...
 
I have a feeling that this is going to backfire on them.

phide said:
The critics claimed that it was one of those movies that "got everything right".
Click to expand...

critics are dumb. I watched that flick with my brother-in-law and a buddy of his (who just got back from a tour in afganistan and did two previous tours in Iraq) and they were beating it up pretty bad.

Still a good movie though... kept me on on the edge of my seat
 
they whined about the vcr recording, they whined about dvr today, they whined about people dubbing tapes in the 80's,i make backups of all my dvd's and etc... I have the right to , i bought it, didn't rent it, i feel like its mine forever. not going to go out and repurchase it ever couple of years becuase of a scratch and such, if i were to say buy an xbox which i wouldnt i'll turn it into a missle guidance system if i want to thats. i dont believe when i make a full purchase transaction that its still thiers im not renting i just bought.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top