HardOCP News
[H] News
- Joined
- Dec 31, 1969
- Messages
- 0
Did you download “Hurt Locker” or the amazingly-awesome “Far Cry” movie? If you said “yes” you should expect to get paperwork like this anytime soon.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.
'Hurt Locker' Sharers: Expect Docs Like This
- Thread starter HardOCP News
- Start date
- Status
WhiteZero
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2004
- Messages
- 3,638
$1500 to settle in a certain time or $2500 thereafter? Nice racket.
The only other time I heard about this movie before these lawsuit articles came up was when I'd read about how a soldier said the creator of the film had been embedded with him overseas, and that the creator of the film stole his life story and even a term he came up (so he knew it was about him) was used in the film. I wonder if that ever got settled. The studio is accused of stealing the story, and now they're accusing others of stealing the movie - does it invoke 'what goes around, comes around' to anyone else?
I love it when movie/music studios blame losses on piracy after having a flop of a release. Hurt locker was mediocre. It wouldn't have won any awards if we weren't at war right now, and 80% of its recognition was because of the Oscar.
Even with piracy, if you make a good film, it will sell. Look at Avatar. Supposedly the most pirated movie in history..but yet somehow is the highest grossing film ever already? I don't see any movie execs using that as an example.
If they spent all this time and money they spend on lawsuits on making higher quality films instead, maybe their revenues would increase. Too bad we'll never find out.
Even with piracy, if you make a good film, it will sell. Look at Avatar. Supposedly the most pirated movie in history..but yet somehow is the highest grossing film ever already? I don't see any movie execs using that as an example.
If they spent all this time and money they spend on lawsuits on making higher quality films instead, maybe their revenues would increase. Too bad we'll never find out.
While I can empathize with the guy, if you leave your gun laying about your home, loaded, and some kid shoots himself with it, you are at fault.
He did not bother to secure his wireless Internet access, but he knew enough to know it was not secure...and thus he is at fault.
It sucks, but people need to start actually taking care of their own things, whether it be a gun or wireless Internet access.
He did not bother to secure his wireless Internet access, but he knew enough to know it was not secure...and thus he is at fault.
It sucks, but people need to start actually taking care of their own things, whether it be a gun or wireless Internet access.
fasterthanlight
Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2005
- Messages
- 677
I didn't even know FarCry was made.
Oh well, serves anyone right for downloading it.
Now will you think twice? Probably not.
Oh well, serves anyone right for downloading it.
Now will you think twice? Probably not.
Hmmm I thought that was the movie "Jarhead".
I have to agree with Cybrsage. It's one thing for someone to have an ISP setup their Internet and the wifi is open (I've run into cases where they install a wifi DSL modem and the homeowner didn't realize it had wifi), but he knew. If you want to run an open wifi network, that's your call, but you've got to be prepared for the consequences.
Gorankar
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2000
- Messages
- 11,307
Not if the kid had no business in your home, and just came in anyway because you forgot to lock the door. He may not have even knew the door could be locked.
I think people with unprotected wifi are dumb, but to end up in court over it, or pay $1500/2500 is plain stupid.
Parmenides
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2006
- Messages
- 6,578
Not exactly. An unsecured hot spot, is not a loaded gun. It's not lethal. And anyone who leaves their loaded gun around knows full well of the implications of leaving it around. Anyone who leaves their router unsecured does not know the implications. There are plenty of very intelligent people who don't know the first thing about networking. I don't expect my grandfather to make sure his network is secure. Fortunately I can do it for him. But he shouldn't be held accountable for a lawsuit if we went to best buy and bought a router, plugged it in and found that "it works." He knows about guns.... and if he left one laying around when the younger grandchildren were around, then and only then should he be held accountable.
If there were laws that prohibited open networks then a lawsuit might be considered valid.
RyanLucier
Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2006
- Messages
- 667
How is this not extortion?
You would still be liable, many lawsuits have proven this.
Anyone who knows their wifi is unprotected knows full well the implications of having it that way.
Point is, if you let people have access to your belongings and they use them in a crime, you are responsible for its use. Be it a gun, car, or Internet access, it is all the same.
An edit to my previous post:
The only way to prevent culpability is to be able to prove you did not know the person was going to perform illegal actions with your property. Having your property stolen (as it would be in the case of unprotected wifi) is one way to do this. HOWEVER, he would have to PROVE it was not him who did it.
Good luck to that.
The only way to prevent culpability is to be able to prove you did not know the person was going to perform illegal actions with your property. Having your property stolen (as it would be in the case of unprotected wifi) is one way to do this. HOWEVER, he would have to PROVE it was not him who did it.
Good luck to that.
I always find it hard to believe that when people say that unless they had been living under a rock or something. There were previews for it all over the place, it won awards so was in the news for that, Its has been in the news because of it's director, and it has been talked about on here a few times.
I could see people not knowing about Far Cry, that is another Uwe Boll production. However i myself thought that one was ok to watch for a mindless action movie. sure they changed a few things around but it was still atleast partly the same story from what i could remember. Dr is on island making super soldiers, guy goes to island with reporter to save somebody, she gets kidnapped, he then goes off to save her. I seen people bitching that it wasn't the right type of island, or the super soldiers didn't look correct or stuff like that. but if your not some anal person like that and can just sit back and enjoy a mindless action movie it is ok at that.
of the other movies listed, i never heard of thoses
Far Cry 2 a movieMust have been a box office bomb.I think I have Hurt Locker at the house.Never watched it.
It was based on the first Far Cry not Far Cry 2.
Court settlements happen all the time before a case reaches trial.
Say a lawyer dude representing a copyright owner believes you have been caught red handed "sharing" a copyrighted movie.
Option A is to file a lawsuit, which is a very real possibility since the alleged infringer has been identified by name and address. The infringer can be found liable for up to $150,000 per work, or more + jail time if it was for commercial gain. Considering the expense of a defense, this is not a good option if you know you did it.
Option B is to settle for an amount far less than even starting a trial defense. If you think you can beat it and opt for A above, good luck (LOL @ Jammie Thomas, you poor liar). If you did it and go to trial, the failure rate is 100% so far in music/movie infringement lawsuits.
If you really didn't do it (for real!!!), you're probably in a bad (and rare) position.
Which just shows how far the laws have been stretched to favor media companies - 'guilty until you prove you didn't do it' rather than 'innocent until proven guilty'.
My sister and her husband have two adult children (both are in their mid 20's) living in their home. These children are constantly illegally downloading music and movies. I have warn and try to educate that if someone comes looking they won't go any further than the name that pays the bill, so far it has fallen on deaf ears. I hope and pray nothing like this happens to them because I don't think they'll win.
Insula Gilliganis
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2007
- Messages
- 1,470
Far Cry movie trailer - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2AgFecNaks
No reviews on http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/10008959-far_cry/.. I guess no one else knew this movie existed!!
No reviews on http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/10008959-far_cry/.. I guess no one else knew this movie existed!!
griff30
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2000
- Messages
- 7,746
The movie didnt just jump up and put itself on the net. They release tons of screener DVDs without security. They need to watch what they are doing too.
I think it really discredits the "seriousness" factor when you sit there and say that rather than the hundreds of thousands we feel you've caused us to lose, we'll just take $1500 and call it even. If you want to be taken seriously, act serious or stop lying about and exagerating how much loss you actually have incurred from the torrent users.
AaronP
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2005
- Messages
- 11,527
That's basically extortion.
Makaveli@BETA
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2004
- Messages
- 2,433
That shouldn't be that much of an issue, even if the parents are paying the bills. Those 20 year old are adults not 12 year old children they can take full responsibility of their actions. I know if I was those parents I wouldn't be taking the fall for something my adult children did.
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2003
- Messages
- 1,962
don't.use.public.trackers
RumpleForeSkin
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2008
- Messages
- 228
That doesn't matter in the eyes of the Law. YOU pay the bill that is in YOUR name.. than that account and all that goes down on it is in fact YOUR responsibility as YOU have the contract with the ISP for the service, not the actual suspects in question.
not picking on you man but that is how it will be looked upon by any legal body.
Actually, the burden of proof should be on the person making the positive claim. That is, while the IP address may indicate where the packets originated, it doesn't indicate WHO actually downloaded the films. In a rational society, it would be up to the plaintiff/prosecution to prove that the computer using the unprotected wifi network and receiving the data for the films belonged to the defendant. You know, that "innocent until PROVEN guilty" thing or that "preponderance of evidence" thing.
That's how the legal system is SUPPOSED to work, in order to prevent things like the Salem witch trials.
In my spare time I work at a gym for a free membership and we have free wifi in the lobby. I know a couple individuals who come there for whatever reason just to use our wifi. So are some of you saying that if some douchenozzle comes into my work and uses our wifi to download music/movies illegally, my gym would be the responsible party if the RIAA chose to come after someone in this case?
If so thats f'd up.
If so thats f'd up.
Makaveli@BETA
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2004
- Messages
- 2,433
So If I rent out a house and say I live in another state and can only check on the property every few months and my tenants decide to start growing pot in the basement and they get booked I'm responsible for that?
- They aren't getting charged with murder so the analogy stands, regardless of its lethality.
- Ignorance is not an excuse, under the law.
- Depending on where you live, keeping an unsecured network may be considered negligence if it is used for illegal purposes.
Except the media companies have the ISP records--they have the proof. Defendants have to refute it.
don't.download.copyrighted.materials
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2006
- Messages
- 9,484
Watch out Steve! They could sue you and HardOCP for copyright infringement there.
The gun analogy doesn't make sense to me. Most states require at least a background check to buy a gun and some states require safety training. People who own guns know the risks, how to use them, and at least some proper safety precautions when it comes to handling and storage.
There are no mandated training courses before buying a wireless router. By default security features are turned off. There is no warning that people using your wifi can get you in trouble. Many people are tech illiterate and just don't understand the consequences.
Far Cry 2 a movie
I have never heard of Far Cry 2 either. It must have been one of those movies that was shown in SyFy on a Saturday night.
As for Hurt Locker: I picked up the movie used on Blu-Ray at Blockbuster. While it is a "Good Movie" about the war. It just was not up to snuff for me. It def did not deserve the Oscar instead of "Avatar".
IANAL, but I agree with AaronP that it is basically extortion. The case law on this topic is very open to either side, and it is a long-known tactic that representatives for large copyright owners are trying to staunch the pirate "losses" by lawsuits that take advantage of easy, small, likely defenseless targets. That they are only probably accurate legal broadsides are inconsequential immoralities from their standpoint as long as cash is flowing in and the targets aren't likely to fire back with anything dangerous.
I understand cybrsage's argument, but the law is too porous to hold the personal responsibility logic. For example: municipalities and Starbucks provide free wifi. So if they provide unlimited "loaded guns" on every street corner and are seemingly immune to lawsuit and arrest for their association with the alleged copyright violations, why should individual private citizens get repeatedly nailed to the wall for copyright violations if they are doing a smaller version of the same thing? (Yes their ISP can sue them if they are breaching their service terms, but that is a unrelated legal pickle.)
Class action suits against these vexatious litigants will eventually win, especially after the swiss cheese laws are addressed, but that's gonna take many, many years.
I understand cybrsage's argument, but the law is too porous to hold the personal responsibility logic. For example: municipalities and Starbucks provide free wifi. So if they provide unlimited "loaded guns" on every street corner and are seemingly immune to lawsuit and arrest for their association with the alleged copyright violations, why should individual private citizens get repeatedly nailed to the wall for copyright violations if they are doing a smaller version of the same thing? (Yes their ISP can sue them if they are breaching their service terms, but that is a unrelated legal pickle.)
Class action suits against these vexatious litigants will eventually win, especially after the swiss cheese laws are addressed, but that's gonna take many, many years.
Not really, I never heard of Hurt Locker til my brother mentioned it to me and that was about the lawsuit regarding Hurt Locker. I don't really look up movies most of the time. I'm more game oriented.
I didn't know about Far Cry either... I might've read something... possibly, but that's a vague memory that might've just been fabricated since I look at a lot of far cry vids of the fire in it's engine.
This case is retarded.
- Status