September 27, 2005 2:23 PM PDT

Theater piracy law snags first victim

A new federal law aimed at discouraging camcorder-equipped movie pirates has snared its first catch.

Federal prosecutors said Curtis Salisbury, 19, pleaded guilty on Monday to using a camcorder to record movies in a St. Louis, Mo., theater and distributing his recording on the Internet.

When Salisbury worked in the box office of a theater, he and others entered the projection booth after-hours and used a camcorder and audio recorder to tape "The Perfect Man" and "Bewitched" in June, according to the plea agreement. Sentencing is scheduled to take place in a San Jose, Calif., federal court Feb. 27.

Salisbury appears to have been the first person prosecuted under the Family Entertainment and Copyright Act, which Congress approved in April in an effort to curb online piracy. One section of the law stipulates that any person who uses an "audiovisual recording device" to tape a movie in a theater can be fined up to $250,000 and imprisoned for up to three years. The charge of Internet distribution could carry additional punishment.

Although the Department of Justice wasn't divulging many details, a representative of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of California said Salisbury was caught as part of an undercover operation being conducted in the San Francisco area. That investigation, called Operation Copycat, resulted in indictments against four men this summer. Salisbury's recordings, among others, were transmitted to servers in the San Francisco Bay Area.

The movie studios applauded the government's announcement. "We want to thank the U.S. Attorney's Office and the FBI for their efforts to crack down on movie pirates," said John Malcolm, a vice president at the Motion Picture Association of America and a former Justice Department official. "Their attention to this growing phenomenon is crucial in our fight to protect copyrighted materials."

Applause also came from Rep. Lamar Smith, a Texas Republican who supported the antipiracy measure in Congress. "This conviction is a victory for America's creators," Smith said. "Copyright thieves are now on notice that stealing intellectual property will not be tolerated."

The stiff criminal penalties were controversial when they were being considered by politicians, with critics saying such punishments, which are usually reserved for violent crimes, may not be the best way to engender respect for copyright law.

60 comments

Join the conversation!
Add your comment (Log in or register)
i feel sorry for them
why would you record those movies any way?? no one wants to even download those for free!!! i wouldnt! haha
Posted by digitallysick (103 comments )
Reply Link Flag
They were unique...
That's why he recorded them. Because of the simple fact that they were not already available online. This made them worth his time to record. Otherwise the video was already there and so no point to record it.
Posted by zaznet (932 comments )
Link Flag
i feel sorry for them
why would you record those movies any way?? no one wants to even download those for free!!! i wouldnt! haha
Posted by digitallysick (103 comments )
Reply Link Flag
They were unique...
That's why he recorded them. Because of the simple fact that they were not already available online. This made them worth his time to record. Otherwise the video was already there and so no point to record it.
Posted by zaznet (932 comments )
Link Flag
Not a victim but a criminal
I definitely wouldn't call this guy a "victim", he pretty clearly violated copyright as well as was behaving unethically.

When people try to defend the actions of criminals like this, it dramatically hurts the cause of those fighting the MPAA/RIAA/etc for justified reasons (fair use rights).

Saying this guy should be able to get away with making a crappy camcorder recording of a crappy movie hurts MY case for being able to make a backup of a DVD I paid for.

Please stop making the MPAA/RIAA seem reasonable and fair by comparison.
Posted by raitchison (103 comments )
Reply Link Flag
No, not a victime, but
I think the problem people have is that if this kid gets 3 years in jail while child rapists get probation, it's going to cause a huge swell in illegal activities specifically targeting the MPAA. How fair is it that he would suffer such a huge penalty and violent offenders typically would get a lesser sentence?
Posted by ballssalty (196 comments )
Link Flag
Not a victim but a criminal
I definitely wouldn't call this guy a "victim", he pretty clearly violated copyright as well as was behaving unethically.

When people try to defend the actions of criminals like this, it dramatically hurts the cause of those fighting the MPAA/RIAA/etc for justified reasons (fair use rights).

Saying this guy should be able to get away with making a crappy camcorder recording of a crappy movie hurts MY case for being able to make a backup of a DVD I paid for.

Please stop making the MPAA/RIAA seem reasonable and fair by comparison.
Posted by raitchison (103 comments )
Reply Link Flag
No, not a victime, but
I think the problem people have is that if this kid gets 3 years in jail while child rapists get probation, it's going to cause a huge swell in illegal activities specifically targeting the MPAA. How fair is it that he would suffer such a huge penalty and violent offenders typically would get a lesser sentence?
Posted by ballssalty (196 comments )
Link Flag
But Sandy Berger Only Fined $50K
Let's see now. Sandy Berger stole secret documents from the National Archives, took them home, then destroyed them. The documets dealt with Clinton's handling (or mishanldling) of Osama bin Laden. For the theft, Sandy pleaded guilty, was fined $50K, and sentenced to 200 hours of community service. Now we have a teenager who taped Bewitched in a movie theater. If guilty, he faces a a 250K fine and 3 years in jail. Yup, sounds like we have our priorities straight.
Posted by Stating (870 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Max penalty comparison
The maximum penalty in Berger's case was life in prison. So please compare apples to apples and not actual sentences to maximum sentences. What will he get? Let's see probably no background, no other crimes. Probably a fine and some probation.

Also, this guy's no "teenager" other than the fact that he's nine-TEEN. He's an adult with all privileges and responsibilities of his age.
Posted by sanenazok (2950 comments )
Link Flag
But Sandy Berger Only Fined $50K
Let's see now. Sandy Berger stole secret documents from the National Archives, took them home, then destroyed them. The documets dealt with Clinton's handling (or mishanldling) of Osama bin Laden. For the theft, Sandy pleaded guilty, was fined $50K, and sentenced to 200 hours of community service. Now we have a teenager who taped Bewitched in a movie theater. If guilty, he faces a a 250K fine and 3 years in jail. Yup, sounds like we have our priorities straight.
Posted by Stating (870 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Max penalty comparison
The maximum penalty in Berger's case was life in prison. So please compare apples to apples and not actual sentences to maximum sentences. What will he get? Let's see probably no background, no other crimes. Probably a fine and some probation.

Also, this guy's no "teenager" other than the fact that he's nine-TEEN. He's an adult with all privileges and responsibilities of his age.
Posted by sanenazok (2950 comments )
Link Flag
Large Fines...
These large fines make me think that Congress is trying to impose a fine against all offenders through each one caught.

It would be like having a $25 fine for speeding, but since you were the only one caught out of 1000 speeders that day you have to pay $25,000 to cover everyone's offense.
Posted by zaznet (932 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Large Fines...
These large fines make me think that Congress is trying to impose a fine against all offenders through each one caught.

It would be like having a $25 fine for speeding, but since you were the only one caught out of 1000 speeders that day you have to pay $25,000 to cover everyone's offense.
Posted by zaznet (932 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Sad...
Oh, of all the movies to take the bullet for recording, why'd it have to be bewitched. Terrible movie...
Posted by (6 comments )
Reply Link Flag
On the other Hand...
If teh MPAA let Salisbury get away with distributing his camcorder copies maybe mmore than eight people would have actually seen "Bewitched".
Posted by Scottitude (17 comments )
Link Flag
Sad...
Oh, of all the movies to take the bullet for recording, why'd it have to be bewitched. Terrible movie...
Posted by (6 comments )
Reply Link Flag
On the other Hand...
If teh MPAA let Salisbury get away with distributing his camcorder copies maybe mmore than eight people would have actually seen "Bewitched".
Posted by Scottitude (17 comments )
Link Flag
It's about the money
In a society, you will always have crime. Crime goes hand in hand with society. That's the way it is. that's the way it's always been. The key is to minimize it to an acceptable level. 0% is a pipe dream, but 5% or less is a workable dream.

Bootlegging isn't a new concept, but distributing them through the internet is. People before would record music concerts and share them with friends. Everyone did it and although it was illegal, it was allowed to happen because it wasn't hurting anyone'se bottom line. Now, with the help of the internet, it hurts the bottom line of every major music company and movie studio because one person, thanks to the internet, can distribute a cd or dvd to about a million or more of his close friends!

In conclusion, piracy will always exist. The goal should be to lower its popularity down to an acceptable level so that the big companies can make their profit but users can still share things with close friends.

Now, how do we do that?
Posted by thedreaming (574 comments )
Reply Link Flag
You still shouldn't be illegally sharing with anyone.
If you own the movie you can lend it to a friend. But you still don't have the right to give copies to each other.
Posted by lingsun (478 comments )
Link Flag
It's about the money
In a society, you will always have crime. Crime goes hand in hand with society. That's the way it is. that's the way it's always been. The key is to minimize it to an acceptable level. 0% is a pipe dream, but 5% or less is a workable dream.

Bootlegging isn't a new concept, but distributing them through the internet is. People before would record music concerts and share them with friends. Everyone did it and although it was illegal, it was allowed to happen because it wasn't hurting anyone'se bottom line. Now, with the help of the internet, it hurts the bottom line of every major music company and movie studio because one person, thanks to the internet, can distribute a cd or dvd to about a million or more of his close friends!

In conclusion, piracy will always exist. The goal should be to lower its popularity down to an acceptable level so that the big companies can make their profit but users can still share things with close friends.

Now, how do we do that?
Posted by thedreaming (574 comments )
Reply Link Flag
You still shouldn't be illegally sharing with anyone.
If you own the movie you can lend it to a friend. But you still don't have the right to give copies to each other.
Posted by lingsun (478 comments )
Link Flag
off with his head
:)
Posted by Lolo Gecko (131 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Cut his arm off like they do in Muslim countries.
Cut his arm off like they do in Muslim countries.
Posted by lingsun (478 comments )
Link Flag
off with his head
:)
Posted by Lolo Gecko (131 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Cut his arm off like they do in Muslim countries.
Cut his arm off like they do in Muslim countries.
Posted by lingsun (478 comments )
Link Flag
The idiot could be sued for millions too
Hope the criminal gets what he deserves.
Posted by lingsun (478 comments )
Reply Link Flag
The idiot could be sued for millions too
Hope the criminal gets what he deserves.
Posted by lingsun (478 comments )
Reply Link Flag
I don't support piracy, but...
I think that if the MPAA is going to be able to go after these people,
then the door should also be open for class action suits to get
reimbursements for people who waste $10 or more, are forced to
watch 30-45 minutes of commercials (commercials, not just
trailers!), and then are stuck with crappy movies like Bewitched.
Posted by (4 comments )
Reply Link Flag
I don't support piracy, but...
I think that if the MPAA is going to be able to go after these people,
then the door should also be open for class action suits to get
reimbursements for people who waste $10 or more, are forced to
watch 30-45 minutes of commercials (commercials, not just
trailers!), and then are stuck with crappy movies like Bewitched.
Posted by (4 comments )
Reply Link Flag
It's sickening
A 19 year old young man with his whole life ahead of him records a movie on a camera, making no money off it whatsoever, creating an abysmally poor recording of it usable only as a preview and the entertainment industry grinds his life into dust.

He's now a felon, he will probably see jail time where he will be victimized by career criminals and thugs and after he gets out he's an ex con with all the problems that creates when it comes to trying to build a decent life for himself.

All that because the entertainment industry bought and paid enough politicians to pass gut-wrenchingly disproportionate and awful laws like the one used to commit this judicial assassination.

Copyright as it was first created over a century ago was plenty good enough as it was. These current laws that make a vast portion of the citizenry "unprosecuted criminals" are not geared towards the greater good of the citizens, it is geared towards making large corporations already vast profits greater. I find that revolting, and am very pleased not to be a citizen of the now laughably called "land of the free"...
Posted by lorcro2000 (70 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Perhaps...
"He's now a felon, he will probably see jail time where he will be victimized by career criminals and thugs and after he gets out he's an ex con with all the problems that creates when it comes to trying to build a decent life for himself."

Perhaps he should have thought of that before.

Perhaps his buddys will.
Posted by Sboston (498 comments )
Link Flag
It's sickening
A 19 year old young man with his whole life ahead of him records a movie on a camera, making no money off it whatsoever, creating an abysmally poor recording of it usable only as a preview and the entertainment industry grinds his life into dust.

He's now a felon, he will probably see jail time where he will be victimized by career criminals and thugs and after he gets out he's an ex con with all the problems that creates when it comes to trying to build a decent life for himself.

All that because the entertainment industry bought and paid enough politicians to pass gut-wrenchingly disproportionate and awful laws like the one used to commit this judicial assassination.

Copyright as it was first created over a century ago was plenty good enough as it was. These current laws that make a vast portion of the citizenry "unprosecuted criminals" are not geared towards the greater good of the citizens, it is geared towards making large corporations already vast profits greater. I find that revolting, and am very pleased not to be a citizen of the now laughably called "land of the free"...
Posted by lorcro2000 (70 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Perhaps...
"He's now a felon, he will probably see jail time where he will be victimized by career criminals and thugs and after he gets out he's an ex con with all the problems that creates when it comes to trying to build a decent life for himself."

Perhaps he should have thought of that before.

Perhaps his buddys will.
Posted by Sboston (498 comments )
Link Flag
Revenge of the Sith would be worth the effort
But I'd buy ROTS on DVD anyway. That guy was an idiot; why bother filming that piece of crap movie? I saw it and it TOTALLY sucked, and I'm a big Will Ferrel fan! Maybe this lamo wanted to please himself with cheap images of Kidman. Jim Carrey is a spitting image of the TV actor that Ferrel took the place of, and think he would have been better in that role.
Posted by (2 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Revenge of the Sith would be worth the effort
But I'd buy ROTS on DVD anyway. That guy was an idiot; why bother filming that piece of crap movie? I saw it and it TOTALLY sucked, and I'm a big Will Ferrel fan! Maybe this lamo wanted to please himself with cheap images of Kidman. Jim Carrey is a spitting image of the TV actor that Ferrel took the place of, and think he would have been better in that role.
Posted by (2 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Bewitched?
the dude is going to jail for taping the movie bewitched in the theaters?

come on..hasn't the guy suffered enough by having to sit through that bad film?
Posted by jachamp (81 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Bewitched?
the dude is going to jail for taping the movie bewitched in the theaters?

come on..hasn't the guy suffered enough by having to sit through that bad film?
Posted by jachamp (81 comments )
Reply Link Flag
Privaleges...
... and by "Privileges and responsibilities..." you mean he can be drafted and he can smoke. Any chance teenagers could forfeit one for the other?
Posted by im_thatoneguy (10 comments )
Reply Link Flag
 

Join the conversation

Add your comment

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Click here to review our Terms of Use.

Inside CNET News

1-2 of 12

Scroll Left Scroll Right

What's Hot

Discussions

Shared

RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.

Markets

Market news, charts, SEC filings, and more

Related quotes

Dow Jones Industrials (0.00%) 0.00 12,874.04
S&P 500 (0.00%) 0.00 1,351.77
NASDAQ (0.00%) 0.00 2,931.39
CNET TECH (0.00%) 0.00 2,049.14
  Symbol Lookup