The nomadic DVD peddlers in Chinatown and other urban areas seem virtually unstoppable, but that hasn't kept Hollywood studios from launching various attempts to prevent movie piracy. Boing Boing reports on the rumor that at least one theater has been silencing the soundtrack in Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull throughout the film in order to mess with potential bootleggers trying to record the thing. If true, it's got to be one of the most brain dead attempts at security since the rise of quart-sized bags. When you really get down to it, most two-bit criminals with camcorders in their laps don''t really care if the quality of the movie they're recording suffers, since the resulting product will already feature lo-fi video, the overlapping sounds of laughter and other audience reactions, and silhouetted cameos from patrons venturing to the concession stands or taking bathroom breaks. With all that, the intermittent exclusion of music doesn't sound like a major concern for the bad guys.

Studio anti-piracy measures are notoriously ill-conceived. Premieres and all-media screenings often force critics and even the filmmakers themselves to undergo intense evaluations before they're allowed to enter the theaters, while films open to the public, where pirates are more likely to show up, don't take any precautions. Granted, multiplexes wouldn't help their business if attending them felt like entering an airport terminal, but that doesn't mean there isn't a better way to prevent the crimes from taking place. Anyone care to offer some ideas?

[Via Movie City News]

If someone were to get caught illegally recording a movie in New York City today, he would get charged with a violation (like a speeding ticket) and hit with, at most, a $250 fine. Not much of a deterrent, I daresay, for folks who make a criminal enterprise out of making and selling bootlegs. Furthermore, only the folks actually in the theater with the camcorder would get in trouble -- everyone else, like the people doing the selling, get off scot-free, assuming they're not breaking any other laws.

New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo was joined Monday by Tina Fey and a couple of other movie types for the unveiling of the "Piracy Protection Act," which would make piracy either a misdemeanor or a felony, depending on whether you're a first-time or repeat offender, and punish it with actual, y'know, jail time (up to a year for first-timers). They're hoping to have the law in place within the month. So, uh, if you're in New York City and you're planning to bootleg something, I'd recommend doing it now.

This law is obviously a result of movie industry lobbying, as evidenced by MPAA president Dan Glickman standing by Cuomo's side at the press conference. Does the new punishment fit the crime? Will harsher punishments make a difference? (I'm not so sure -- especially not if New York law enforcement doesn't dedicate more effort to actually ferreting out the bootleggers.) And are you surprised to hear that up until now people could record movies with virtual impunity, even if they got caught?

ed note: Corrected Attorney General's name

Once again, it seems search titan Google is being asked to look into itself a little more closely. When Google bought YouTube in October, 2006, several big Hollywood players -- most notably Viacom -- asked Google to take a little more care in the presentation of copyrighted material. Now, says the Hollywood Reporter, an open letter to lawmakers released Wednesday sees the independent watchdog group, the National Legal and Policy Center alleging that Google's servers and services are still a too-convenient haven for pirates.

The math is pretty compelling -- an NLPC review of Google conducted between Sept. 10th and 18th found over 300 apparently pirated films that had been viewed some 22 million times. Multiply 22 million by an average ticket price of $10, and you're talking some serious money. Extrapolate those 10 days into a full year, and you're looking at a sum of 8 billion dollars -- that exceeds Google's annual revenue of 7.5 billion and is four times their 2 billion dollar profit.

It'd be easy to see this as yet another veiled swipe at the internet's cavalier attitude towards intellectual property by big studios -- except for the fact that the NLPC is a wholly independent group with no apparent ties to the film industry. For it's part, Google claims that any and all copyrighted material found on their sites and services illegally is removed as soon as a copyright holder makes their displeasure known. However, the NLPC's Ken Boehm says that's not good enough: "We are hoping to shame Google into doing something. What they are doing is inexcusable corporate behavior. When big companies do something unethical, it sends a message to everyone else that it's OK." Google also claims to be working on better content filtering that they hope to unveil as soon as possible.

For the second time in as many years, the Director's Guild of America, which represents not only directors but unit production managers and assistant directors, has said no to the Hollywood studio's policy of for-consideration screeners being mailed to its members for the 60th annual Director's Guild Awards. This decision finally puts to rest the question left form last year when the Guild said it would not allow screeners for the 59th annual awards but might consider them for the 60th -- which take place on January 26th.

According to The Hollywood Reporter, for the 59th Awards, the Guild initially indicated that it would allow screeners to be made available to its members. But then, almost immediately afterward, reversed the decision. At the time, it did allow for the possibility of screeners being sent out to members for this year's awards but now that's obviously not going to happen. "The DGA recognizes that this decision is different from what was stated last year," the Guild said in the article, "However, closer examination of the issue revealed concern among members that films sent out on DVD might have an unfair advantage over films that were not able to be sent out due to limited marketing budgets or other financial considerations."

Ok, I guess those reasons make sense. Still, as a member of the Director's Guild, I always felt it was an unusual policy to not allow screening copies as virtually every other union or guild does allow it. In addition to the reasons stated above, maybe the ban is meant to help stem the tide of pirated DVDs being sold all over the world? Or, perhaps the Guild actually expects its members to go see films under consideration in a movie theater instead of on DVD? Or maybe it's because the DGA just likes to be different? I don't know, but whatever the reason, even if we don't get screeners mailed to us, at least we still get to see screenings of films at DGA HQ, which is nice. So I guess I shouldn't complain too much.

The news from Hollywood Reporter isn't merely that The Simpsons Movie has been pirated -- it's no surprise that a big summer movie has been illegally copied and distributed, and that you can find bootleg DVDs easily in China. The newsworthy aspect of this piracy, however, is the country where it originated: Australia this time. Twentieth Century Fox traced the source of an illegal online version of the film to a man in Sydney, and had him charged with copyright infringement. The video pirate worked fast: the version was discovered within 72 hours of the animated film's release Down Under. Although the original illegal copy was removed from the Internet even before The Simpsons Movie was released in U.S. theaters, the file had already been viewed or downloaded more than 3,000 times, so you know it's probably still out there somewhere.

What I find amusing is that the guy used his mobile phone to record the movie. How much of a threat to box-office is something that poor in quality? Do people really think, "Oh look, a crummy and barely watchable version of The Simpsons Movie taped off a cell phone ... now I don't have to pay to see it in a theater!" The people I know who boast they can find illegal copies of movies online seem to find these downloads a kind of amusing novelty, and the bootleg files don't appear to have any effect on their desire to see these movies in theaters or on DVD. I can't even stand old commercial videotapes of movies these days -- I can't imagine trying to sit through a cell-phone recording made in a theater.

The Australian who illegally recorded the movie faces up to five years in jail, if convicted. As a longtime fan of The Simpsons TV show, all I can think about is the episode "Bart Vs. Australia" where Bart is sentenced to "the boot" by the Commonwealth Parliament as punishment for international telephone fraud. I know they don't really have "the boot" in Australia, but it would be a delightful irony to watch an online video (perhaps recorded with something higher quality than a mobile phone) of the offending video pirate getting "the boot" from the Prime Minister, or from Rupert Murdoch.

I think it's safe to say that the fear of movie piracy has officially gone too far. On July 17th, Marymount University sophomore Jhannet Sejas (pictured) was celebrating her 19th birthday with her boyfriend at a screening of Transformers. Sejas, a Bolivian immigrant working two part-time jobs to support her education, was loving the flick. She wanted to show her little brother a clip from the film to get him excited to see it, so she took out her digital camera and recorded 20 seconds of the climax. The assistant manager of the theater saw her use the camera and reported it to the general manager. The general manager decided to bypass such reasonable steps as a) asking her never to record in the theater again, b) asking her to erase the footage or c) asking her to leave the theater, and simply telephoned the police. Within minutes, two police officers entered the theater, confiscated the camera, and charged Sejas with the crime of "illegally recording a motion picture."

Sejas says "I was terrified. I was crying. I've never been in trouble before." Sejas has been banned from the theater (where she frequently paid for and viewed films) for life, and she has to go to trial for the incident this month. She faces up to a year in jail and a fine of up to $2,500. The Regal Cinemas Ballston Common 12 Theater decided to prosecute the case, which is a first for Arlington police. Kendrick Macdowell, general counsel for the Washington-based National Association of Theatre Owners, says that there has to be a "zero-tolerance policy at the theater level," adding "We cannot educate theater managers to be judges and juries in what is acceptable. Theater managers cannot distinguish between good and bad stealing."

You know what? They can, actually. It's part of being a manager. This story really infuriates me. Do they really think this girl intended to sell a 20-second clip of a movie that had been out for two weeks? Where's the market for that? If anything, she was trying to give these people more money by getting her little brother psyched to see the film. If they really need to make an example of somebody, why don't they go after the people who actually do pirate entire movies, and leave this poor girl alone. Or better yet, how about we hold off on calling the police until, I don't know, there's a friggin' emergency! See, because that's what the police are for. Disgraceful.

"A friend hooked me up with it." This is what a fifth-grade teacher told his class right before he showed them a bootlegged copy of Shrek the Third. And he may have even gotten away with it if one of his female students didn't run home and write Dan Glickman a scathing email. Okay, I'm kidding -- but she did tell her father what had happened, and he subsequently told MSNBC that he is pissed -- not because his daughter was shown an illegal bootleg of a film still in theaters -- but because the teacher in question was actually screening this film in replace of whatever the lesson plan should've been for that day. And I whole-heartily agree.

The school, located in Peekskill, New York, is currently investigating the issue, and Superintendent Judith Johnson issued a statement saying that, essentially, it is against school policy to show a pirated video. No word yet on what will happen to the teacher, Lovell Quiroz, but personally I feel he should be sent to some sort of moron jail. I mean, c'mon dude -- was it that important for you to look "cool" in front of a bunch of fifth graders? Next week, during show and tell, will you pass around that bag of pot your friend hooked you up with as well? And it's actually quite comical, because this is exactly where I think the MPAA should be focusing a lot of their efforts. In a couple of years these kids will be wizards of the online world (if they aren't already), and they'll most certainly learn how and where to download illegal movies. If you want my opinion, the MPAA should set up some sort of program where actors (or what have you) travel around to different elementary schools to talk about the disadvantages of movie pirating. Get to these kids while they're still young and naive.

And as far as this teacher goes, I'm not sure what should happen to him. Should the guy lose his job over this? Should he be given a warning? If you were the parent of a child who was in that classroom, what type of penalty would you suggest?

It looks like the DVD pirates have found their next big target. Movieweb is reporting that copies of Hostel Part II have already hit the streets for sale in Los Angeles. According to the first person account of an B. Alan Orange, he managed to snag a $5 studio-grade copy of the torture flick. The sequel to the 2005 film centers the action this time on a group of girls kidnapped and tortured in a remote European location. The movie is expected to be a big success, but could a few crappy street DVDs really hurt the opening weekend profits? Not to worry, Roth seems to lining up plenty of projects for the near future. Just today, Monika reported that the director was looking to expand on his Grindhouse trailer, Thanksgiving, as well as the slightly nutty concept film Trailer Trash - The Movie.

Hostel Part II is not the first high profile summer movie to have been hit by piracy. Just this May copies of Spiderman 3 were supposedly flooding the market before the film had its North American release. In the end, Sony released an official statement denying that copies had flooded the market in Beijing for $1 a piece. At least Roth can take solace in the fact that his was going for five. But it's not like Spiderman suffered at the Box Office and I think the same will hold true for fans of Roth's particular brand of horror. Law abiding citizens who want to see Hostel: Part II will just have to wait until June 8th.

If you happen to be in the Washington D.C. area next February and are tired of seeing the usual tourist sites like The Lincoln Memorial, The Washington Monument or The White House, I've got an event you may want to take in -- especially if you're a fan of Hollywood executives pushing their agendas and complaining about how technological innovation, among other things, is destroying their bottom line. What not-to-be-missed event am I talking about? Glad you asked. Please, read on.

On February 9th, 2007 the motion picture industry will begin its assault on the new congress by staging a daylong series of conferences called "The Business of Show Business" designed to "educate" law and policy makers about how great and important the entertainment industry is. Dan Glickman, MPAA CEO had this to say about the event: "Policymakers need to understand more clearly the economic power of the movies, the incredible risk and investment involved in making a movie and challenges we face as an industry. An important event such as this is long overdue in Washington."

Some of the items on the agenda for the event include panel discussions on such topics as entertainment in the digital age, the impact of piracy and the economics of show business. Speakers at the event representing Hollywood and its interests include Peter Chernin, chairman and CEO of Fox, Michael Lynton, chairman and CEO of Sony Pictures, Barry Meyer, chairman and CEO of Warner Bros. and Ron Meyer, president and COO of Universal. So, powerful people with really long titles who basically run Hollywood -- and who have the most to lose if the industry continues to go South (economically speaking). In truth, I have a hard time feeling sorry for the studios because, in many ways, they are the cause of their own problems. But no matter what your feelings about the current state of Hollywood, this event really sounds like a good time, doesn't it? Sign me up.

[Via The Hollywood Reporter]

The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) has had a rough year, what with the documentary This Film Is Not Yet Rated exposing the long and confusing process of movie ratings and, more importantly, the problem of piracy isn't going away anytime soon. In 2005, the MPAA claimed a loss of $18.2 billion because of piracy. As a result the laws are getting tougher and the MPAA has launched a variety of 'education' initiatives to help out their cause.

Enter one of the more bizarre pairings of the last little while -- and I thought the DVD sniffing-dogs were a stretch. An article in Yahoo! movies has reported that the MPAA has partnered with the Boyscouts of America to create a program where scouts can earn anti-piracy badges--well we've come a long way from whittling haven't we? The program was launched with the Los Angeles Scouts where scouts learn the basics of copyright law and also includes visiting movie studios and making anti-piracy public service announcements--like the Ben Affleck ones weren't bad enough. So will boyscouts and DVD-sniffing dogs finally stamp out piracy? Doubtful, but what can they do with a growing audience that really doesn't care how they get the latest movie; just as long as they don't have to pay $12.95 for it.

[via Yahoo! Movies]