Ohio Prison Shows Pirated Movies To Inmates 186
An anonymous reader writes "Richard Humphrey was sentenced to 29 months in prison for selling pirated copies of movies through the subscription-based USAWAREZ.com. He was later sent to the Lorain County prison in February for a parole violation and while he was a prisoner, he says guards showed inmates Ride Along and The Wolf of Wall Street before they were released on DVD. A spokesperson for Lorain County Correctional Institution Warden Kimberly Clipper said prison officials are aware that pirated movies are being shown to prisoners and the issue is being investigated. But she said she couldn't comment further because the investigation is ongoing."
Odd Selection (Score:5, Funny)
Is The Wolf of Wall Street the kind of movie you should be showing prisoners anyways?
Re:Odd Selection (Score:5, Funny)
If you want violent felons to have any hope of being rehabilitated, you need to show them what true criminals look like.
Re: (Score:3)
They need to be shown how to steal the legal way.
Re:Odd Selection (Score:5, Funny)
Is The Wolf of Wall Street the kind of movie you should be showing prisoners anyways?
Well, probably better Tango and Cash, Demolition Man, or Escape from Alcatraz.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Odd Selection (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Are you thinking what I'm thinking, that TWoWS is cruel and unusual punishment?
Is it? A friend that I generally trust recommended it to me, but I haven't gotten to it yet.
Re: (Score:2)
Couldn't you make the argument that enticing an inmate with pirated movies is cruel and unusual punishment to an inmate that was convicted of pirating movies?
Wouldn't it be the same if they lock up an inmate for drug use, and then offered him the same drugs while in prison?
Re: (Score:3)
I don't think movies make people become criminals, but these people don't need to become criminals; they're alredy there. I do worry about movies undermining attempts at rehabilitation by glamorizing the criminal lifestyle.
Re: (Score:2)
You do realize that 'voluntary Ritalin usage" is another way of say methamphetamine abuse.
Re:Odd Selection (Score:5, Informative)
You do realize that 'voluntary Ritalin usage" is another way of say methamphetamine abuse.
Well no, it's not, actually. The active ingredient in Ritalin, methylphenidate [wikipedia.org] is quite distinct, chemically, from amphetamine, methamphetamine, or any of the related close derivatives [wikipedia.org]. While methylphenidate and methamphetamine both start with the same four letters, their biochemical effects are different. (For example, both compounds are dopamine reuptake inhibitors, but only methamphetamine is a dopamine releasing agent. The two compounds have opposite effects on neuronal firing rates. And so forth.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Cash's songs didn't glorify being a criminal though. They were all about how much being in jail sucked.
Perfect! (Score:2)
Well, these are criminals, after all (some of them may be actual pirates).
Arrrgh... Of course they should be shown pirated movies.
Re:Perfect! (Score:5, Funny)
They should show them pirated pirate movies.
Re:Perfect! (Score:5, Funny)
I'm guessing those are rated Arrr?
Re:Perfect! (Score:5, Interesting)
Can you imagine if you were in jail on copyright infringement charges and the prison you were in was showing pirated movies?
Re:NN Now (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Can you imagine if you were in jail on copyright infringement charges and the prison you were in was showing pirated movies?
Can you imagine if you were in jail on drug offenses and there was an illicit drug trade going on in the prison? Oh, wait...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Just don't show them the pirate movie "cutthroat island" ( http://business.time.com/2012/... [time.com] .) After all, cruel and unusual punishment is unconstitutional!
Re: (Score:2)
Well, these are criminals, after all (some of them may be actual pirates). Arrrgh... Of course they should be shown pirated movies.
Uh, I think you perhaps missed the entire point of this article.
Richard Humphrey was sent to prison for pirating movies.
Finding the prison system engaging in the same illegal activity isn't just ironic, it's a slap in the face, and actually justifies a lawsuit.
Re: (Score:2)
So, now he's an official convicted real pirate so he should be able to watch pirate movies.... aarrrrgghhh!
Off ye go, now!
Re: (Score:2)
Breakin' the law, Breakin' the law...
Prisons are Sanctioned Crime (Score:3, Insightful)
Prisons break laws constantly, they are expected to violate rights, violate laws, etc... they are there only for punishing poor people.
Show me millionaires that are in prison that go to general population prison.
Prisons Breaking Rights (Score:3)
Prisons break laws constantly, they are expected to violate rights, violate laws, etc... they are there only for punishing poor people.
Show me millionaires that are in prison that go to general population prison.
Um... not quite. Rich people are less likely to go to jail period (because they can afford better lawyers, are targeted less, and less frequently have incentive to commit crimes like bank robbery and burglary that get people caught). You really have to look at rich people who are convicted of burglary and poor people who are convicted of burglary before saying that the jails really just exist to punish the poor.
As for rights, yes, prisons frequently violate rights, but consider the *flipside* of that. In
Re: (Score:2)
It's not like prisons are trying to violate rights--they're generally trying to [fill in the blank]
Of course not. What it IS like, is prisons are trying to turn a profit (lots of them are, anyway) and in doing so reduce the costs to the point where they (guards, admins, etc) have no choice but to abuse the prisoners just to keep them all in line.
Re: (Score:2)
"less frequently have incentive to commit crimes like bank robbery"
Why rob a bank when you can pay off a politician to make it legal for you to sell them rigged products and yank money out of the banks legally?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
oh yeah... (Score:5, Informative)
as some of you know, i've spent time in the florida prison system...this stuff is SOP...prisons are basically just the streets with much higher prices.
imo, its great that inmates get to watch illegal movies, brought in the guards, while smoking their illegal weed, often brought in by the guards (and of course through other less...sanitary? ways), while talking on their illegal cell phones, often brought in by...well, you already know.
it's all mostly a big game...now i'm not saying people don't belong in prison, lord knows i've met plenty who do, but a dude running a pirate movie site?
not really, imho at least.
Re: (Score:3)
Is there anyone living in Florida that hasn't been to prison? It's illegal to blink there... lol
Re: (Score:2)
:)
Re:oh yeah... (Score:5, Funny)
1) :) ;)
2)
3) ???
4) Free movies!
Re: (Score:2)
Ride Along? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Apples and Oranges (Score:5, Informative)
If it is a for profit prison, this actually would be showing pirated movies for profit.
Re:Apples and Oranges (Score:5, Interesting)
Well if the prison guards are actually showing pirated movies, it isn't piracy for profit, but it isn't exactly piracy for personal use either.
Given that the prisons in Ohio are privatized, yes anything provided to the inmates would be legally and practically "for profit". Still not sure why they would bother offering them anything but super old DVDs and VHS movies that have been scrapped at the local library, but one thing that comes to mind is a guard curtailed a favor from an inmate in exchange for something recent to watch. It will be interesting to see if the investigation turns anything up.
Re: (Score:3)
" It will be interesting to see if the investigation turns anything up."
Don't hold your breath. If anyone remotely powerful is involved the standard tactic is to delay, I mean "investigate", until everyone's attention span has given way.
Re: (Score:3)
I think you mean curried... you curry favor, you curtail bad behavior.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Only the higher security prisons are private, I believe. The county jail where I am (somewhat rural Ohio) is still staffed by county employees.
So? What'd ya get? They let you surf /. in county?
Re: (Score:2)
Only the higher security prisons are private, I believe. The county jail where I am (somewhat rural Ohio) is still staffed by county employees.
Jail != Prison...
Re: (Score:2)
According to wikipedia, only two are privatized: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O... [wikipedia.org]
This particular prison mentioned in the article is not privatized: http://www.drc.ohio.gov/public... [ohio.gov]
Here is an example of a page according to the ohio gov site that shows one that is privatized (it says privately operated near the address):
Re:Fair Use (Score:5, Informative)
I don't think that's considered fair use :) It's pretty much illegal. Even if they bought a legal DVD, they're not licensed for public performances.
Re: (Score:2)
Wan't there some standard exception for oil rigs, prisons, schools etc in the normal licensing?
law code isnt analogous to computer code (Score:3)
It's not illegal at all for a preschool teacher to show kids a movie...at all...it's done everyday across the country and it'll never be challenged.
I showed National Geographic films all the time when I taught Geography and Current Events.
Showing prisoners films can indeed have as much an "educational" or "scholastic" aspect as showing films to pre-schoolers, and it's wrong to challenge its use. The only reason we're having this discussion (and for my downmod) is that tech-dorks like to show how smart they
Re: (Score:2)
I see what you did there....
Definitely Fair Use (Score:2)
"teaching"
you give them a quiz at the end of the video about the major characters and their roles in the narrative...reinforces retention/comprehention and social skills
done....even the most pedantic, non-lawyer, tech dork who loves to make himself sound smart by misapplying laws about tech...even YOU can't counter that...FAIR USE VICTORY
no school district or prison has ever been sued for fair use and your logic wouldn't fly b/c conjuring a "educational" or "scholarship" reason is easy...
Fair Use Troll FAIL
Re:Prison == New Free Cinema? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Prison == New Free Cinema? (Score:4, Interesting)
I've wondered why we don't allow prisoners to play some kind of FPS (or ideally MMO) type games in prisons, and let them sort out their turf wars and aggression using that.
-- quite a few MMO players live very similar to convicts, in that they stay isolated in their cell for 20 hours a day.
-- shanking someone in a game would be far better than in real life.
Putting people in a confined space with no outlet and nothing to do for 20 hours a day -- and those who didn't already have violent or criminal tendencies will have them in short order. And the recreation they do find will not be something we want them to be doing.
China is ahead of us on that. (Score:2)
There was a thing a few years ago where Chinese prison guards were forcing prisoners to farm WoW gold for them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
A) yes. You have angry people, conservative the balk at actual rehabilitation, so you need to distract them.
Also, just being in prison is pretty harsh punishment, even with TV.
B) That is not what a prison is for. At least not if you want one that's good for society., It's for rehabilitation. They idea of punishment for the sake of punishment is an idea of small minded people who have learned nothing form history.
Yes, the topic should be a corrupt guard system and how privatization of prisons has lead to the
Re: (Score:2)
you've spent so much time psychologically jerking off to your own fantasies that you've completely forsaken reality.
...just like Norwegians, apparently. Perhaps he should move to Norway?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
- should these guys actually be watching movies or entertainment of any type?
And what do you suggest should be done for prisoners for hours and hours of the day? Are you also surprised that prisoners get exercise time and books as well if they exhibit good behavior? Also how do you think guards and prison officials feel about showing them movies; I would bet you they are in favor as it keeps the population calmer.
After all, they are in prison to reflect on their crimes and suffer for it.
I'm sensing that you don't have a sense of what prison life is like. Watch any documentary on current prisons. Hell, watch any movie about prison life like the Shawshank Re
Re: (Score:3)
People go to prison because they did something wrong and have to be removed from society for a while. The best thing a prison can do is "fix" the person so that they can integrate with society again.
You can't fix a person by taking away their humanity. So yes, they should get to watch TV, play video games, read books, have (consensual) sex. A "correctional facility" should do just that: correct a person. In a more perfect world criminals would come out of prison actually loving their fellow man. Or at the l
Re: (Score:2)
instead of cherry picking just one state, why not cherry pick 30 states. http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/press/rprts05p0510pr.cfm [bjs.gov] sure only 77% repeated within 5 years... but hell i was messed up for 20+ years and nothing worked until i was diagnosed and medicated. sure i didn't 'break' many laws and was only in police care until they could transport me to psychwards etc. and they were trying to help me. i would say they did good, because now i am stable and i'm a heavy streaming media user, rather than a h
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Difference (Score:5, Interesting)
Generally, you are right — the particular prisoner's case is different. However — content-owners have tried to make "non-profit" infringers (people making copyrighted material available for free to others) into examples by suing them for large sums of money (though no jail-time).
And second, the prison officials aren't just watching the material themselves — they are showing it to a large number of people (entire prison population). This is something, which you can not legally do even with a DVD you purchased in a store — they are only licensed for private viewing.
They should be busted and, ideally, someone ought to end up in the cell next to the protagonist — even if for a shorter sentence.
Re: (Score:3)
The code clearly states that distributions by unauthorized person is a crime. charging is irrelevant.
If I where to print my own copy of Game of thrones, and then give the copies I printed away, I would be in violation
However, the people buying the books would not have violated any current laws.
Re:Difference (Score:5, Informative)
False. Though all unauthorized distribution is illegal, not all of it constitutes a criminal offense. To make the perpetrator a felon, according to paragraphs; 506 federal Title 17 of the United States Code [copyright.gov], the distribution must be committed:
Our protagonist qualifies for the first item above. And so do his current jailers. Small-time non-profit distributors — such as torrent-users, who keep the stuff they just downloaded available, but not for long enough to qualify for the second case — do not.
Re: (Score:2)
As I read case 2, you would need 50 people to download from you within 180 days, if you keep your ratios 1:1, that's one download every 3 days, that seems pretty likely for casual use of torrent.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, sounds about right. Do not do it.
A, B or C. (Score:2)
Small-time non-profit distributors --- such as torrent-users, who keep the stuff they just downloaded available, but not for long enough to qualify for the second case ---- do not.
I disagree.
OR
by the distribution of a work being prepared for commercial distribution, by making it available on a computer network accessible to members of the public
Re:Difference (Score:5, Insightful)
This is something, which you can not legally do even with a DVD you purchased in a store — they are only licensed for private viewing.
Although there is wording on DVDs to the effect that they are "licensed", this is not true. If you purchase a copy, you own that copy and retain all first-sale rights.
The actual phrasing in 17 USC concerns "public performance". If these DVDs had been legally purchased (instead of definitely pirated), it's possible the prison performance would not be considered "public". After all, can you just walk in and watch movies with the prisoners? Remember that size of audience is unimportant for determining "private" or "public". A wedding with 500 guests where only people with invitations are allowed in is "private", while a bar with seating for 3 people is "public".
Re: (Score:3)
This is interesting... Could you offer a link, where this legal quirk is convincingly explained? Because right now it sounds like one of those "you don't have to pay your income tax" proclamations...
If, indeed, I can do anything I want with the purchased DVD, as you claimed at the b
Re:Difference (Score:4, Informative)
The fact that the DVDs are sold, not licensed, means that the copyright holder does not have the legal authority to impose extra conditions upon the buyer.
The "public performance" provision, however, is imposed not by the copyright holder but rather by the law itself. That's where the difference lies.
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, I see the distinction, but I don't see a difference. One way or another even a legally purchased DVD can only be used privately. (Whether showing it to inmates is still private, is another question.)
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, I was only trying to address the question you asked directly, not the point you were making further upthread.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If that's true, why is DVD ripping illegal in some countries?
Re: (Score:3)
Because the laws are different in other countries, and citing examples from other countries does not refute claims made by someone citing U.S. Code.
Re: (Score:2)
Because of the - rather idiotic if you ask me - distinction between the DVD content and the encryption "protecting" the DVD content.
I go into a store and buy a DVD. I then rip that DVD and store it on a hard drive for only my and my immediate, living-in-my-household family's use. Storing it on a hard drive wasn't the crime. It was breaking the encryption on the DVD disc that was illegal.
Actually, it might not even be me ripping the DVD that's illegal. Depending on local laws, this might be perfectly fin
Re: (Score:2)
If you purchase a copy, you own that copy and retain all first-sale rights.
Could you offer a link, where this legal quirk is convincingly explained?
You got told copyright trumps first sale and you actually _believed_ it?
109 . Limitations on exclusive rights: Effect of transfer of particular copy or phonorecord [copyright.gov] (a) Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106(3), the owner of a particular copy or phonorecord lawfully made under this title, or any person authorized by such owner, is entitled, without the authority of the copyright owner, to sell or otherwise dispose of the possession of that copy or phonorecord. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, copies or phonorecords of works subject to restored copyright under section 104A [doesn't apply, chase the link yourself.]
First sale was settled in 1908 by the Supreme Court, and it's been statute law since copyright was codified in 1976 [wikipedia.org]. Anyone who claims to know anything at all about copyright and feeds you that line is playing you for a chump.
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe I shouldn't be mixing broadcasts vs. DVD but aren't there examples of churches, private parties, etc. being told they are infringing when offering to host Super Bowl parties or World Series showings?
The example I am thinking of is here [washingtonpost.com]. Is the difference that technically anyone could walk in off the street into a church and watch? Would they have been in the clear if the showed it in a private room in the church and limited invitations to the current congregation only?
I'm not disagreeing with you, I d
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect anyone who walked off the street or read about the event would be able to watch at the church, effectively making it a public event. If it were a private event, you never would have heard about it, and neither would have the NFL.
Re: (Score:2)
I think there is legal precedent here though. It's a complex issue and there are various laws that are both specific and vague. It really is not so simple to say what is "public performance" or not, in fact the rules for audio-only versus audio-visual are different. There are even legal rulings that seem to disagree with each other. One problem is that most sites you find that discuss public viewing are from the film industry and so can't really be trusted.
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/... [thefreelibrary.com]
Overall though
Re:Difference (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
There are rules about how many speakers, size of screens, and such, before it's considered public performance at a bar. (the "homestyle exemption")
Re: (Score:2)
taking money for entertaining(and guarding) a group of people and then showing them copied stuff kind of counts as selling.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think it's ok, because the guards showing the pirated movies are already in jail.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't find it unlikely at all. It's amazing what can be pulled off in the name of a "good cause".
Somewhere in the chain, a distributor says to give the movies to somewhere good, intending charities or schools. Someone further down the chain considers a rehabilitation program to be a good charity, and somebody then considers the prison to be just as good as a rehab program. I'm not going to opine on whether these equivalencies are correct, but when you have a supply chain as long as that of a prison (or an
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
...but should a private prison be considered a rehab program when determining whether it's a charity deserving of special price breaks and benevolence?
Again, I'd rather not weigh in my opinion, but I can definitely see some grey area. Sure, ideally, prison is going to the noble cause of rehabilitating criminal members of our society. On the other hand, is it really just for prisoners to get early access to movies and other special treatment?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Not neccessarily pirated (Score:5, Informative)
From TFA:
In some cases, Humphrey said the movies appeared to have been illegally recorded by theater-goers. "You could see people walking in front of the camera," he said.
That's a pretty good sign it's not legit.
Re:Not neccessarily pirated (Score:5, Insightful)
Showing CAM rips?
That's gotta count as cruel and unusual punishment.
Re:Not neccessarily pirated (Score:5, Interesting)
It is possible that the Ohio prison in question got itself listed as a budget theater and was able to get legal copies of those movies between the main theatrical release and the DVD release.
I find that highly unlikely, but it is possible.
Don't have to get listed; just have to give enough money to the distribution companies. If you have your own copy then you can also get a discount - e.g they charge extra to send you a copy to use that you then have to return. How much you pay depends on how well you can haggle the price; can easily be $350 (with DVD) or $700 PER film. Funny thing is, if you try to reach out and cannot get any traction then you've also done your "due diligence" and can just go ahead and show it - been there with Disney licensed Anime films. (We had a budget, wanted to pay them, but couldn't get anyone to stand up and take the money.)
So even if they did do a cam rip (probably bit torrent copy from somewhere), they very well may have had a license to show it.
And, at least in the Anime world, many of the distribution companies will even let you do it for free (e.g Pioneer, RightStuf) if you show all the ads they have on the DVDs and have asked them for permission to do so.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Other ways to get movies (Score:4, Informative)
They were cammed. According to TFA, you could see members of the audience occasionally blocking the movie.
Re: (Score:2)
Sovereign immunity doesn't apply to private corporations, and apparently Ohio's prisons have all been privatized.
So that makes two suits. The first would be the MPAA against the prisons for multiple instances of showing pirated movies for profit. This demonstrates a pattern of violations, not just a single incident. If it took place repeatedly, and at multiple prisons owned by the same firm, then it's a pattern of corruption that management has either failed to halt or possibly actively encouraged.
Then s
Re: (Score:2)
See http://idle.slashdot.org/comme... [slashdot.org], I seems that most (including the one talked about) are not actually privatized.
That said, I also don't think Sovereign Immunity applies to local governments. In the Netherlands, it only applies to the State, and my reading of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S... [wikipedia.org] is that in the US it applies to State and Federal governments only. If it's a county prison I would guess that the local County is responsible, and hence that you can sue either the prison or the county.
Re: (Score:2)
Warden squeals: "eeeeyay! just what I've always wanted! Bubba; you be warden now; punish me"