Leading UK Cinema Implements MPAA Laptop Ban
Written by enigmax on October 16, 2009Cineworld, the UK’s second largest multiplex cinema chain, says it provides an environment that makes cinema going a pleasurable experience, “which in turn encourages frequent return visits.” However, they have just alienated an award winning TV and radio broadcaster by refusing him entry because he had his laptop with him.
Let’s get something out of the way. The UK is not a premier source of ‘cammed’ movies, and it never has been. Although a few badly cammed copies have originated from British cinemas over the years, the overwhelming bulk of pirate copies have appeared on the Internet from other sources, particularly given that most big movies have traditionally premiered overseas.
However, for the paranoid movie industry the UK does provide somewhat of a unique worry. While the incidence of cams coming from Britain is particularly insignificant, there is no such thing as an “illegally cammed movie” in the country, because, believe it or not, camming a movie is not illegal.
Earlier this year, boss of Vue Cinemas Tim Richards wrote about his dilemma.
“We call the police and the police aren’t interested,” said Richards. “So we ask (the pirates) to leave and they leave typically with their cameras and sometimes with their film intact.”
With the law about as much use as a chocolate teapot, cinema chains are resorting to implementing their own “laws” to stop the virtually non-existent cammers and, just like enforced DRM, all they do is annoy paying customers.
Jeremy Nicholas describes himself as “an award winning TV and radio broadcaster, after dinner speaker, compere and media trainer.” Like many of us, he also enjoys a good movie.
After work on Wednesday this week, Jeremy went to watch the new Bruce Willis movie at a cinema belonging to Cineworld, the UK’s second largest multiplex chain. Like most people on his way home, Jeremy had items on his person that enable him to do his job – one of them was a Sony laptop, an item too expensive to risk leaving in the car, particularly since it contained his current work projects, “plus some half baked book ideas.”
Because he had his laptop with him, Cineworld refused him entry.
Jeremy pointed out that his laptop has no camera feature, or additional hardware to record movies. Then, as if it is any of their damn business, cinema staff then enquired why he had bought it to the cinema at all. He duly explained he was on his way home from work.
Cinema staff then conceded Jeremy could be let in, but only if they could take his laptop from him. However, the cinema offered no receipt for the hardware, so Jeremy declined.
“So despite them treating customers with suspicion, as though were are all bootleggers, we have to trust them to get our equipment back,” said Jeremy.
“I was looking forward to watching the new Bruce Willis film. I wondered what Bruce would do under pressure,” he continued. “I wasn’t wearing a white vest, but decided I wasn’t standing for any nonsense and called for the manager. After a short time a small boy appeared. Sorry I said, I want to see the manager.”
But the small boy was the manager, who told Jeremy that they were acting on new “guidelines” from FACT – the MPAA-funded Federation Against Copyright Theft, which advised banning laptops.
Although the manager said Jeremy could go in with his laptop after all, a query was raised over his cellphone which did have the ability to record a movie. He could take it in, he was told, as long as he had no intentions to cam Bruce Willis with it.
“Not the most rigorous interrogation and one that a determined bootlegger probably could have passed,” said Jeremy.
And then, just to show how ridiculous this ban is, Jeremy said as he was being questioned, a number of suspects customers walked past with handbags and rucksacks, any of which could’ve contained recording equipment.
But Jeremy enjoyed the movie in the end.
“‘Surrogates’ is about a future world where people have been replaced by robots. Everything ran smoothly for a while, but in the end it all went wrong because the robots were efficient but lacked humanity. Cineworld should show this to their staff as a training movie. (As long as none of them try and record it),” Jeremy concludes.
Perhaps it’s time for Cineworld to remove the statement below from their website:
Founded in 1995, our philosophy has been to provide a modern, clean environment that makes “cinema going” a pleasurable experience, which in turn encourages frequent return visits.
Previously: Pirate Bay Takes Bias Claims to Supreme Court
Next: Parliamentary Comms Group Says ‘No’ to UK 3-Strikes
66 Responses
Thank you for your email addressed to Sion Simon, about unlawful peer-to peer file-sharing. I have been asked to reply to you.
In the speech you refer to, the Minister for the Creative Industries was not saying that P2P technology was the problem, but the use of that technology in unlawful activity was. Unlawful peer-to-peer (P2P) Internet file-sharing is a major problem for the creative sector – the British Phonographic industry claims that it is costing the music industry some £180m a year in lost revenue, and the film industry is similarly said to be losing about £152m a year. And it’s not just an issue for the major businesses – as you’ll be aware, up and coming creators rely on copyright income to make a living.
That is why, in its recent Digital Britain White Paper, the Government outlined its proposals to tackle illegal downloading, and this was followed by the publication of a consultation paper on 16 June. The proposals set out in the consultation paper include placing a duty on Ofcom to take steps aimed at reducing online copyright infringement. Specifically Ofcom would be required to place obligations on Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to: notify their account holders that their accounts appear to have been used to share copyright material unlawfully; and collect anonymised information on serious repeat infringers to be made available to rights-holders together with personal details on receipt of a court order. This is to enable rights holders to prioritise legal action against the most egregious infringers.
Ofcom would also be given the power to specify technological measures which ISPs will be required to impose, such as bandwidth reduction. These ‘backstop’ powers (underpinned by a Code of Practice) will be triggered if the notification process has not been successful after a year in reducing infringement by 70% of the number of people notified.
Since the original consultation, the Government’s thinking on a number of these issues has evolved further. It therefore recently sought views on three additions to the consultation proposals: (i) giving the Secretary of State, rather than Ofcom, the power to decide if and when technical measures should be introduced; (ii) using legislation, rather than a Code of Practice, to allocate costs between rights holders and Internet Service Providers; and (iii) the inclusion of the option of suspending infringers’ Internet accounts as an addition to the list of technical measures that might be taken (as an action of last resort).
You will appreciate from these proposals that the Government is determined to take effective action to reduce the incidence of unlawful P2P file-sharing.
No final decisions have been taken on these issues. The consultation period ended on 29 September. We are currently considering the responses and will publish our response shortly.
Arf knobs
It’s funny that this is posted the same day the R5 for Surrogates hits the Scene
Although i visit the UK, *unfortunately* this has never happened to me… probably because i dont go to cinamas much anymore, but if it did happen to me I would really create a ruckus so that everyone passing to would hear our conversation and how ridiculous it is and I urge the next person that this happens to… to do exactly that.
Bunch of fu*king MPAA following morons.
[quote]the British Phonographic industry claims that it is costing the music industry some £180m a year in lost revenue, and the film industry is similarly said to be losing about £152m a year. And it’s not just an issue for the major businesses – as you’ll be aware, up and coming creators rely on copyright income to make a living.[/quote]
That is absolute fucking bullshit. What about the money that the RIAA and MPAA make from suing single mothers, and people that download a handful of tracks, care to explain why not a single cent of these costs goes to the real creators of the material? Care to justify why it is apparently fair to sue a single mother in Minnesota 80k per track when she downloaded 27 songs?
You are full of shit. If anything, File Sharing is the best thing that has ever happened to creative industries, and you damn well know it, you just dont want to share those figures.
[quote]You will appreciate from these proposals that the Government is determined to take effective action to reduce the incidence of unlawful P2P file-sharing.[/quote]
I am sure you could appreciate that all that we want to do is expose the RIAA and MPAA for stealing money every day from struggling artists, then not paying them what is rightfully theirs. BTW, I sent a check for 30$ to the last artist I bought a CD from, what have you done today to help the industry apart from cover up illegal actions that the RIAA and MPAA commit every day?
already posted
http://www.p2pnet.net/story/29865 ;)
I would take my laptop into a Cinema anyway =\ but theyre Idiots what do you expect heh.
wouldnt* lol
People still go to the movies? /:)
“Whoa, hold it there buddy! Lemme see what you got there in your backpack, yes?”
“Hmm … okay.”
“Riiiight, magazines, rubber gloves, some odd looking meat, several knives, a slighty decomposed human head…ok, no cell, no laptop, no camera. Very well then, enjoy your movie, sir.”
“Gee, thanks!”
*sigh*
Let me remind #1 that there may be quite a few of them, but there are a hell of alot of us! See you in WW3 mate! You cant convict 90% of the world mate!
Wow at the first commentor.. I stopped counting errors in the comment after the first two paragraphs.
I don’t understand how one could be so stupid to believe any lost sales figures from a source that is one hundred per cent BIASED.
That person didn’t lose anything because that movie really sucked..
What do you recommend they do, then?
Just let everyone cam and post bad prints so people save the ticket price and watch for free at home and cut theatre attendance far enough down that there’s genuinely less money to make films next year?
@12
Perhaps if they didn’t spend ridiculous amounts of money hiring Actors, Directors etc for movies, Production costs would be lower, therefore allowing lower charges for seeing Movies, DVD sales etc (Because they don’t need to be making as much money to turn a profit), which in turn would encourage more people to see them via legitimate means.
Of course, such a thing is blasphemy when they can get away with things as they are.
re no1, i like the bit: Since the original consultation, the Government’s thinking on a number of these issues has evolved further.
what they are saying is that the ‘we are ignoring the recomendations in the report and coming up with the ideas the ent. ind. have paid for’
cant believe they are admitting they are ignoring the original white paper!!
I think cams should be banned anyway. They are of very poor quality. Long live dvd rips and r5s etc.
If it wasn’t for Telesync Audio (CAM) You wouldn’t have R5 copies.
10 (Le Fake) said:
“I don’t understand how one could be so stupid to believe any lost sales figures from a source that is one hundred per cent BIASED.”
———-
Moreover, even the moment; the entertainment industries totally refuse to show any reliable and conclusive evidence that could support its claims about “supposed” lost sales, because there don’t exist any.
That all us if know very well are the reports of massive billion dollars profits that the movie industries have made in the last two years together (2007-2008).
As I already have said in other discussions…. All these false claims from the entertainment industries are simply a conspiracy of lies for taking away elemental civil rights from the people (in this case the inalienable right to share culture and information with others) and convert it in a lucrative and expensive business, that’s all.
16 – your a poorly informed moron.
R5 is a region and they only use cam audio when there is no LiNE audio available.
CAM = camera records both audio and video.
Telesync = camera records video and a direct source is used to record audio.
@Reasoned Mind
I simply refuse to see movies in theater because of the price they charge. I’ll rarely make an exception when a group of friends go to one but I cannot justify paying $10.00 for a two hour entertainment that contains an additional 25% of ads.
They’re greedy and I have no problem viewing movies weekly if they’d make it manageable. You can’t tell me that people are losing jobs because of pirating. When I download my movie I deprive them of $15-$20. When they pay Brad Pitt $2.5M+…. you can figure out the rest.
I don’t see what the deal is? Cammed films suck, wait for a DVDRip.
@19 Bravo my friend, nail on the head!!
in the past 8 years, there have been a total of 2 movies I’ve wanted to see in theatres.
in the past 8 years, there have been thousands of movies I would rather download (and have). Not worth a penny.
I’m about ready to boycott the MPAA in it’;s entirety, anyway. Movies are all reused old crap.
Ohhhh boy. See, now, THIS ridiculous behavior is why I don’t like movie companies, movie theaters, or anyone involved.
That, and the fact that you have to put up with other people if you see it in a movie theater.
That is the dumbest thing I ever heard. My laptop and cellphone have a 1.3 megapixel camera not exactly going to be up to IMAX quality anytime soon. Just because I have either of those in my possession why would it be A: any of the cinema busy. B: because I have these items why am I branded as an undesirable. The only thing being accomplished here is alienating your customers. @19 hits it on the head it is bad enough that not only are the prices to view the movie inflated but your “snacks” prices are criminal. Your average family can’t afford something that should be a cheap form of family entertainment. Just the gf and I it is $40 for 2 tickets and snacks to sit in shitty seats, shoes stuck to the floor from all the spilled crap then I have to pray i’m not surrounded by noisy idiots, someone kicking my seat because you crowbar every possible inch with seating….You wonder why people pirate…really?
go to the cinema and get treated like a criminal good one.
what about mobile phones whould of thought they posed more of threat.
a fella on slashdot were i saw this story yesterday went the cinema with his hd cams and digital camera he was stoped by these louts would not let in. and why you ask well would you believe they did not mind his cams but didn’t want him taking a drink in.
“But the small boy was the manager, who told Jeremy that they were acting on new “guidelines” from FACT – the MPAA-funded Federation Against Copyright Theft, which advised banning laptops.”
Movie theaters like to hire teenagers mostly. In 2007 I had a job interview at a movie theater in Arizona. I was out of work at the time. For some reason the guy who interviewed me stated that they have young people as managers and asked if I would have a problem taking orders from someone younger than me. I said I didn’t have a problem with that. I was 27 years old at the time. I never did hear back from them, probably ’cause they had only a couple positions opened and had alot of interviews. I’m also guessing I was too old for the job.
I bet if the guy left his laptop with the management, they might have turned it on to see what he had on it. You can’t trust strangers with stuff as important as a laptop.
@18
You sir are the moron. LiNE is the added audio track.
@24 dAe
“a fella on slashdot were i saw this story yesterday went the cinema with his hd cams and digital camera he was stoped by these louts would not let in. and why you ask well would you believe they did not mind his cams but didn’t want him taking a drink in.”
I think the reason behind that is, they don’t allow people to bring their own food and drinks because they then won’t buy from the snack counter, thus they actually lose money. I don’t think cams directly hurt them financially as much. Some People want to watch crappy cams to see if the movie is worth going to the theater.
Forgot this in my comment #27:
Most theaters have you buy a ticket before you can get in so they make money on the movie itself. But, food and drinks being brought in is more of a problem than video recording devices. They already get payed for the movie when people buy tickets, but they make less when people don’t buy their overpriced food and drinks.
@18 Doom
If there were no bootleggers and pirates fundamentally rejected all these sub-dvd quality rips, the film industry won’t even bother to release R5.
ITT Reading comprehension.
Losing money = ending up with less money than you originally had, NOT ending up with less money than you originally expected, but still more money than you originally had.
What they’re bitching about is a lower profit margin. I say, fuck them.
no no no reasoned mind [who does not have much of a reasoned mind] your wrong. you go to theatre and look at the prices for stuff especially food. you cannot honestly say that you would happily pay.
This is how Corporate Cock tastes like. Bon appetit!
I highly recommend doing what I’ve done.
1) Buy a 50″ flat screen LCD or Plasma HD TV.
2) Buy a dual/quad core computer system.
3) Install an HD video card with HDMI out on your computer and plug that in to your HD TV.
4) Buy an awesome 5.1 or 7.1 surround sound system.
5 Install a surround sound card with coax or optical out and plug that in to your awesome sound system.
6) Run out and purchase a leather sofa and love seat, snacks and drinks.
7) Download the MKV codecs and a juicy blu-ray ripped MKV file of your choice.
8) Call up your best friends and family.
9) Enjoy the FREE movie in HD, surround sound, cheap snacks, with good friends in the comfort of your very own home.
This is exactly what I do. It sure beats the theatre EVERYTIME. No wondering if you’re being watched, no creepy people with night vision goggles watching you, no one inspecting or confiscating your valuable property.
Now THAT’S the way to go!
@28
“I think the reason behind that is, they don’t allow people to bring their own food and drinks because they then won’t buy from the snack counter, thus they actually lose money. I don’t think cams directly hurt them financially as much. Some People want to watch crappy cams to see if the movie is worth going to the theater.”
No, if you take a drink in with you they don’t lose any money. They just don’t gain *extra* money from you on top of the extortionate ticket price. But then there is no guarantee they would have made money from you through sales of drinks anyway. When I go to a cinema I don’t buy any of their snacks or drinks because of the over inflated prices. So if i took my own it wouldn’t make the slightest bit of difference to the cinema’s finances.
@Sputem –
Actually, the theatre receives very little of the ticket price. In standard film leasing contracts, the theatre only receives 10-15% of the ticket price for the first 2 weeks, then the percentage goes up the longer the movie is out. In the days where movies stayed at a theatre for weeks and weeks on end, the theatre itself would make money on the tickets. This is when you could afford the concessions because the theatre wasn’t getting screwed out of all the ticket income because it all worked out over time.
However, in the present day where many movies will leave a particular theatre within 4 weeks and be on DVD in 4 months, they may only make %30 percent of that ticket price in that last week. Thusly, to stay in business they rely on people buying concessions. To keep their income the price of soda and popcorn has increased because just like any other business, they’re not going to lose money for their stockholders and/or start firing all their employees.
In summary:
Want to screw a studio? Don’t buy a ticket. But don’t expect them to like you stealing.
Want to screw a theatre? Don’t buy concessions. But don’t expect them to let you bring your own stuff in with open arms.
the news: Lilly Allen is not drunk!
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1220798/Lily-pink-Miss-Allen-brightens-night-new-love.html
“I’ve cut myself off from the internet too – you get into another world that’s not real and I want to live in this one. I’m not a monk, but I’m busy.” says Busy Lilly
..industry steals a little..government(s) steals a little..corporations steal a lot…its human nature..even the movie industry steals..why keep being brainwashed. Being threatened with fines and jail is what keeps Americans inline
@Reasoned Mind: If an industry cannot create a quality product of value, cannot price that product reasonably, cannot meet customer expectations, and cannot provide a friendly environment in which to enjoy that product, then yes I expect them to lose money. That is basic economics. If a corporation is faltering due to bad business decisions, why should I feel bad? Nobody is entitled to profit and if one industry goes under, only to be replaced by a smarter one with a better business model, then I propose that the market is working exactly the way it is meant to. So far as the corporate business world goes, bankruptcy is simply the law of natural selection at work. Life is cruel and harsh for everybody, not just you alone. Get over it.
What was mostly highlighted in this story is that simply complaining correctly almost always gets you what you wanted in the first place.
My local Cineworld is so badly thought out that you needn’t even bother to buy tickets for half of the screens as they are accessed via stairs from their bar and there has never been anyone there to check tickets let alone check if you have a laptop!
Part 1;
Go to a movie theater to watch movies, Not On Your Life… Cell phones ringing, some twat always wants to talk during the movie, the hassle of getting to and from the theater, can’t drink beer whilst watching the movie, can’t pause the movie to make a tequila sunrise, captive audience for advertising and I make mental notes to never buy those products,
Intermission.
Part 2;
Regurgitated movie themes and plots, *yawn*, so boring, remakes of old classics which are a blight on the original, overpaid actors which can’t act, exorbitantly priced theater tickets and DVD’s.
The third world Island where I live has DVD’s for purchase at 1$, yes they’re copies but they work fine and are priced realistically for content…Hollywood should be renamed to Hollytrash.
How the f**k can anyone shoot a movie with a laptop???!!! It is easier to shoot with mobile phones, so maybe they should ban them too!
Hmmm…is there a way to get many bad copies(cams) and interlace them so you have a good one at the end?
I think the focal point can be adjusted after the fact with some clever math algorithms and the noise can be reduced using other footage to sample certain areas to discover which pixel appears at that point more times.
Then they will have to ban cellphones, because if you go with 10 friends you could possible end up with a very good copy at the end LoL
They are wasting their times, some day people will be using glasses to superimpose images directly onto their real lifes(augmented reality) and we all will be using equipment capable of recording everything, will the industry says it have the right to charge every living person in the world then?
@13 Reasond Mind.
Being from the side of the movie house in the 80’s we used to prevent people from brining in outside food. We would tell people with big purses and bags that they could leave it at the entry way…the reason…movies MAKE NO MONEY FOR THE CINEMAS.
Let me say that again…opening weeks the movie studios make up to 80% of the gross from ticket sales for movies, so after taxes, ticket prices mostly go to the studios.
The main revenue stream for movies cinemas is through their concession stands and they have a value of revenue per person that all theatre try to uphold because the movie is just to get the people in the door as they don’t get anything (or almost nothing from the movie itself).
RPP for a good theatre was between $2-$3.50 per person…that ment that one person out of two would buy a popcorn and drink or whatever to make up that value.
When you look at movie theatres, they are their just to sell the confection to the attendance but need the movies to pull in those people to buy them….
Just think why all theatres now are “movie destinations” instead of movie theatres…they have mini golf, arcades, restaurants, etc…
Movies don’t bring in the money to the local economy…only the confections do.
So basically the movie theatres are paying studios to play the movies in the theatres so they can make a buck at the confection stand…
full disclosure.
Sorry I meant to add, that Movie theatres adapted because they realized that movies on VHS and DVD were more economical options for people then going to a theatre so they had to sell it as a Movie experience…forget the movie…it is a date night :)
IT’S POLITICAL CORRECTNESS GONE MAD
Death to the RIAA/MPAA Corporate Deathsquads!
@brummie mp(#1)..
The problem isn’t what to do with the Internet in relation to copyright. The problem is what to do with greedy, heavily monopolised industries now that technology and information exchange has superceded them and their business models.
The copyright laws have fallen behind, not in terms of their restrictiveness but in terms of their respect to freedom of information for personal use in the “information age”.
The answer isn’t wasting time, energy and OUR tax-payer money on pursuits that the Telecomms industry have already demonstrated will cost more than any amounts recovered… with the end result being lower GDP, 20% of Britain on crippled connections and filesharer’s credit ratings being ruined for life due to the industry’s relentless attempts to make examples out of people who refuse to be extorted and are prepared to stand up for themselves. (cases which fellow filesharers don’t seem to get intimidated over… so they only cause damage to the individual rather than actually solving a problem.)
1) Publishing and distribution overheads can be so low that they are near neglible, yet we are charged roughly the same as if we were to receive the physical product.
2) Publishing and distribution is now accessible to us all, we can all put our content out there, many of us have the software required to effectively have a reasonable home studio and increasingly independent talent is rising, with the art form rather than profit as their primary motivation.
3) This (Point 2 above) means the market is immediately saturated due to the slew of new, independent and often free content. The sheer scale of it has diminished the publicly perceived value of a single audio track to <20% of what it was 5 years ago. The market has expanded but the RIAA/IFPI/BPI/etc refuse to accept the devaluing of their product and continue to rip consumers off (just like the did with price-fixing a few years back – which in the UK … We were never even offered compensation for this thievery, like they were offered in the US!!)
4) The IFPI/BPI are yet to produce any empirical evidence of their claims of loss. They try to convince MPs that every downloaded track equates to one loss, the thing is: this thinking is flawed and any statistics based on this premise are therefore also flawed… as is any decision MPs will make upon these damned statistical misrepresentations.
That’s why I stopped going to cinemas. They must wither and die along with the whole corrupt industry.
I feel sorry that poor Tim Richards got harassed be those employees but I am glad they are implementing that law.
So the pirates that cam movies will stop stuffing up the search results with crappy movies=P
This is just like the goddamn speeding camera’s. The yorkshire ripper was caught in a routine traffic check, Bin Laden knows that if he drives under the speedlimit he can move unbothered through the entire nation .. but wait, grandma is accidentally driving 63m/h instead of 60!! Let’s go get that criminal wench!
It’s fucking ridiculous.
Any way whatever these cinema companies does, does not matter to me since I am not going to the movie theater anymore.
I am boycotting!
Boycott! I’m not giving MPAA/RIAA my money and i’m not going to waste my bandwidth on their crap either.
I’ll wait till someone will sue the cinema for violating personal rights.
Oh for gods sake. There are some completely ridiculous comments in here.
Cineworld were pressured by FACT to do this, if you walk into a Cineworld and the staff inform you that you can’t bring your laptop, don’t bloody berate them for it. They’re just doing their job. Go complain to FACT and besides, what was to stop the guy leaving his laptop in the boot of his car? Absolutely nothing.
If it’s a company policy, it’s a company policy. If you bitch about it, not only do you look like a tool, but you also hold up all the people in the queue (you know, those people who actually go to the cinema without being packed to the hilt with gadgets).
At the end of the day, even if all the people who actually brought laptops to the cinema were to stop going, I honestly don’t think it would make any significant impact on their sales.
Fair enough there is an air of “that’s not the point” about this whole thing, but still, seriously… Just suck it up and move on. This shit happens all the time, I’m sure the staff think it’s a pile of nonsense, but at the end of the day there’s nothing they can do about it.
P.S. For all I care, Cineworld could bend me over backwards and kick me up the cinema aisle into my seat anytime I go there, at the end of the day I still get to pay £13.50 a month to see all the films I want to see.
I was harassed too not in the same way but its completely wrong to do such things to a innocent person.It has effects that the movie industry wont like(Me never went to the theater again).
who cares about cams anyway :D
and I don’t know about the rest, but Cambridge Cineworld sucks and has ruined a few films for me with their “superb” audio system
I think a better idea to stop illicit recording of movies is to detain and search people after they watched the film.
@35
This is a good idea. To make it cheaper on some people there are DVI to HDMI adapters, they are like 3 bucks. That way you don’t have to purchase a new video card in most instances. Just something i thought might help someone. :)
Good on you cammers, save all of us paying for a bad film that doesn’t deserve the money if it is in fact a film that is sold because it’s advertised on pop drink bottles not because it’s a well written/made film.
@reasoned mind
It’s only illict recording cause your masters say it is, drone on reasoned mind, drone on :0)
@60
Most of HDTVs support DVI input, and if your VGA is incapable of sending audio stream via HDMI (natively or using a DVI-HDMI adapter), HDMI itself can be a real pain in the ass.
just plug the good ol’ trustworthy DVI. DVI comes with two manly screws on each side. HDMI is for pussys.
If the companies could get away with it, they’d probably do a strip and body cavity search too.
Profit over people. That’s capitalism.
Well, I wouldn’t have watched the movie and I’d never step on a movie theater from that company again. Good for their competition ;D
In the end if there were no cinemas left to go I’d download the movies and watch them home. Some1 in the comments said some truths: buy some kick ass hardware, call your friends/girlfriend and have a good time at home. No night vision googles, no MAFIAA getting between you and the fun. And what has MAFIAA accomplished this time? They made the cinemas lose money.
It’s like they think “I’m going downhill because I’m an asshole that just refuses to evolve and work with my consumers… So I’m gonna take my partners with me”.
Way to go MAFIAA ;D
BTW: Who the **** downloads cam rips? They’re usually the least seeded torrents and most users are always waiting for more decent rips.
It’s rather ironic that previews usually reach torrent networks, and they insist on releasing those.
http://www.mobilebenz.com/2009/10/12/grand-theft-auto-4-for-nokia-5800xm-n97-s60v5/
Responses are closed
All remaining responses will continue to be archived. Use the TorrentFreak forums if you want to discuss something.