Lady criminally charged for 20 sec theater clip
Posted on 07/08/07 00:25 by Seán Byrne                             
Lady criminally charged for 20 sec theater clip

While most are well aware that the movie industry are seriously clamping down on camcorder based piracy in cinemas, it is not until now we see just how serious they are with this news about a lady who was convicted of illegally capturing a 20 second clip with her digital camera.  Jhannet Sejas went to the cinema with her boyfriend to celebrate her 19th birthday to see the matinee showing of "Transformers", which is located in Ballston hall in Arlington, Virginia. 

She tried taking a video clip to later show her 13-year-old-brother, but got a nasty surprise when police officers showed up with flashlights during the movie, ordered the two out and confiscated her camera as evidence.  She was charged with illegally recording a motion picture and faces up to a year in jail and a fine of up to $2,500.  The trial takes place later this month.  She has also been banned for life from the movie theatre she was caught at, which she regularly visited.

According to the general counsel for the Washington-based National Association of Theatre Owners, movie piracy costs the movie industry billions of dollars.  He said that because of this, there is a zero-tolerance policy at the theatre level and theatre mangers cannot distinguish between good and bad stealing.  According to the EFF, while they usually hear of people being thrown out and having their equipment confiscated; this is the first criminal arrest they heard of for someone filming for personal use. 

From what I can see, if people are going to be treated as criminals for taking short video clips in the cinema, this is potentially going to scare more people from going to the cinema.  All it takes is one successful camcorder recording somewhere in the world (where the movie is in the theatres) for a movie to go widespread online and this could easily be done at a cinema in a remote area which may be less strict about people using devices during the movie showing.

Thanks to DamnedIfIknow for leting us know about this news, who made the following comment: 

Absolutely RIDICULOUS!!   This is what they are spending the taxpayers money on?  Gotta love the MPAA quoute: "It's happening all over. And there's been a rash of camcording in the Washington area of late."  Hmmm......one word.....EVIDENCE?!?!? Just supposed to take your word for it? Not likely.

Reactions
Discuss this article with your fellow community members! We appreciate your valuable input, but please keep the reaction policy in mind and make sure your reaction is constructive.
By Some Random Guy, Tuesday 07 August 2007 03:49
Some Random GuyArrested for a 20-second clip? That's more like free advertising than copyright infringement.
By rla, Tuesday 07 August 2007 04:36
Seems to me a complete boycott of Regal Cinemas Ballston Common movie theaters would be in order. Now if the consumer sheep would just get some balls and go with it. Sheesh!
By Sux (guest), Tuesday 07 August 2007 11:47
While it does clearly say at the beginning of the movie against recording anything, and simple common sense should take these warnings properly so I am not excusing someone's actions, Camera phones right now are pretty mediocre and it is hardly likely a few random clips taken on said phone are going to cause any loss of sales - ever. They aren't even going to make it into a 'scene' release.
By Ian@CDRLabs.com, Tuesday 07 August 2007 13:30
Ian@CDRLabs.comThe trial takes place on August 21st.. not July 17th. That's when it happened.
By DukeNukem, Tuesday 07 August 2007 14:38
DukeNukemGee, I wonder what'll happen to her.
edited. removed picture
By Undertaker (guest), Tuesday 07 August 2007 18:13
edited
more blah blah blah obscenities
By neo1918, Tuesday 07 August 2007 18:42
Common sense also dictates that recording a 20 second clip should not be an arrestable offense and a reason for the police to steal your camera.
By DukeNukem, Tuesday 07 August 2007 19:23
DukeNukem@ Undertaker Just what exactly are you trying to say? I'm not getting your drift. In any case, I see you being visited by the EDIT Fairy very soon. Smilie
By Undertaker (guest), Tuesday 07 August 2007 20:58
edited
blah blah blah
By Whaledad (guest), Tuesday 07 August 2007 21:03
"From what I can see, if people are going to be treated as criminals for taking short video clips in the cinema, this is potentially going to scare more people from going to the cinema." How do you figure that? As long as you don't record the movies, you have nothing to fear.
By DukeNukem, Tuesday 07 August 2007 21:17
DukeNukem@ Undertaker You'll be edited because of your potty mouth. If you have something to say then you won't be censored UNLESS you use profanity. I'm actually surprised your comments are still unedited. I guess the admins are off watching Star Trek or something. Damn, I wish I was an admin. @ Whaledad Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. Stick Out Tongue
By DukeNukem, Tuesday 07 August 2007 21:30
DukeNukem"F**K THE POLICE!!!" I'm with you. Sting can't sing anymore. This comeback tour was a bad idea. puke
By r_saotome, Wednesday 08 August 2007 02:43
r_saotomeWasn't the movie released all over the net anyway? Seems to me the movie theater is going to loose out, more than the lady. Maybe she should just in the future, save $ on going to the movies & use that $ to put together a nice Home Theater. Then rent or buy the flick when it comes out.
By Rich86 (guest), Wednesday 08 August 2007 06:37
Good grief. Don't the police have anything useful to do? Although I have no desire to record a movie with a camcorder - the more the entertainment industry pulls stunts like this, the less motivated I am to attend a movie theater - or purchase their overpriced and rather shoddy quality products. Big money may be able to buy the courts and the police, but fortunately my little money can still avoid products from the folks who think the MPAA and RIAA gestapo tactics are good for their business.
By DukeNukem, Wednesday 08 August 2007 17:30
DukeNukemHey, why remove my picture admin? I think it adds a bit of life to this "new and improved" site that most people feel sucks. Maybe we could take a vote on the issue. Frown
By Hindikush (guest), Thursday 09 August 2007 13:57
Yes, Admin's please allow pictures, or something, this new format rather sucks, I'm w/ DukeNukem. This was stupid for the girl to bring a camcorder to a movie theater & even stupider to tape anything, geeze. leave that to the theater workers that have access all day to record & post the rip, doh. Who watches cam rips anyways, they look like poop on top of the fact there really has not been any GOOD movies out, that I could not wait to see on dvd. Content sells technology, technology does not sell content, only sheep buy technology thinking it will make content better. "Yummy, Mutton" MPAA quote, lol.
By RepealCopyright (guest), Friday 10 August 2007 06:37
Frown Past time to repeal all those piecemeal increments of copyright law and bring it back to it's original 7 year span of protection. Copyright protection was instituted to release protected works to stimulate industry, not to enforce a multi-lifetime monopoly. Sorry, Hollywood, this is America and these are OUR rules.
By Cage (guest), Friday 14 September 2007 01:51
Seems a bit stupid to me to do it in the theater anyway. It would have been just as easy to go to the Apple site, check out one of the trailers for the movie. It would be better quality and easy in your own home. AND...might even be longer than the 20 secs. For all those who say she may not have the internet, please........a 19year old that does not have some sort of access to the internet, I doubt it.
Name: Email:



Your comment:

Receive notification on new comments?