 Thomas Dunlap |
This man may soon know your name.
Thomas Dunlap is the attorney representing at least a dozen independent movie studios, including the makers of the Oscar-winning film, “The Hurt Locker.” If you illegally shared any of his clients films online then Dunlap, a founder of the law firm Dunlap, Grubb & Weaver may have collected your Internet protocol address. He may at this minute be requesting a subpoena that compels your Internet service provider to turn over your identity.
Dunlap and his firm, which also operates as U.S. Copyright Group, will then likely file a copyright complaint against you in federal court. But before that, he will give you an opportunity to settle the case for maybe as much as $2,900. This has already happened to many of the 5,000 people Dunlap has accused of pirating “The Hurt Locker.”
Dunlap appears to be the Gung ho kind and well suited for the copyright wars. Educated in Switzerland, fluent in French, the former U.S. Army Captain has a license to drive a tank. He has a Master’s degree in biotechnology in addition to his law degree and enjoys kickboxing and piloting aircraft. He has almost single handedly revived the practice of suing individual file sharers for copyright violations, which appeared to die when the music industry dropped their five-year litigation campaign nearly two years ago. Now, even the adult-film industry is trying to adopt a similar antipiracy strategy.
Face it, the ONLY time anyone would have seen Hurt Locker is if they pirated it to see what the fuss was all about.
The movie is utter crap and certainly NOT worth the praise and Oscar it won.
Well its just like these companies going after copy write infringements.
I guess the only way to make money these days. I am all for people paying penalties for copy write violations. But only within reason.
COICA
In the United States, a new law proposal called The Combating Online Infringement and Counterfeits Act (COICA) was introduced last week, and there will be a hearing in front of the Judiciary Committee this Thursday.
If passed, this law will allow the government, under the command of the media companies, to censor the internet as they see fit, like China and Iran do, with the difference that the sites they decide to censor will be completely removed from the internet and not just in the US.
I followed EOD teams in Angola and Afghanistan and I think The Hurt Locker was not very accurate but then real life is almost never very interesting. It was more like a good cop action film: we know that cops don’t have 100 mph chases on NYC streets but it makes it a lot more interesting to watch.
The thing I find really interesting about this is that it has been alleged the producers stole pretty much the whole thing to begin with. I think the claim is the movie is based and modeled on a real guy who was not compensated.
I bought a “used” copy of The Hurt Locker from the video rental store for $5. I liked it. It was worth the $5. Did I commit a crime?
It’s hilarious how people defend their illegal downloading with the argument that the movies are crap. Then why are you downloading them?
“Luc said,
I like free just as much as everybody else, but suing file sharers is The Right Thing To Do. How would YOU feel if people were stealing your hard work left and right?”
This is correct- but I think it’s time we questioned the actual value of the entertainment being taken without paying. I believe in America we have placed television/movies/music on too high a pedestal, and we’re too emotional about it. I think the rampant file sharing is *devaluing* this stuff properly, showing how truly inconsequential it is. This fluff is the bread and butter of the media companies, thus all the fervent prosecution of thieves, but this activity doesn’t lend it any true value.
#26,
HOW DO YOU feel about watching a movie that was crap?
How do you sample MORE then a few shows, to see which you will enjoy?
HOW do you find a NEW genre, that you hadnt tried before, that you may like?
HOW do you sample a KIDS movie, BEFORE your kids see it?
Do you have enough money to BUY more then 60 of the released shows in 1 year? Thats 5 per month.
BEFORE cable/sat, there was FREE BROADCAST TV..there still IS FREE broadcast TV. Many of those channels you watch, USED TO BE FREEE! in different areas, were different sets of channels…ASK TURNER BROADCASTING. thats how they got started. What PAID for the TV?? COMMERCIALS…NOW? you PAY for the channel.
#27,
you got most of it. The question is Profit, and HOW MUCH is enough. Also, how many FINGERS are in the pot.
#9..
I like the thought.
But do you understand something.
A CORP is taking your money, as you work for it, when they DONT give back to the employees. Wages go UP at the top, but Never at the bottom.
Look back 15 years, until the last Min Wage increase. NOTHING changed on the bottom or even UPTO and including middle class. the TOP got wage increases. WHERE a 1% increase is $1000′s of dollars to millions.
In the last 10 years, Look at the cost of food. its risen about 50%. Min wage went up from $5.50 to $7.. Does the lower income GAIN anything? NOPE. Are ANY of the upper wage earners taking a CUT in wages? NOT in the USA. Japan Airline, CEO cut his OWN WAGES below those of pilots, to keep his airline IN THE AIR. In the USA? WE GAVE MONEY to delta to keep them in the air, and THEY raised wages to the TOP WAGE EARNERS.
For a few here, KNOW.
There are CLOSED markets in the USA. YOU CANT GET INTO THEM, without Paying threw every orifice. Music, movies, SUGAR CANE, and many more.
#9,
let me say it this way.
You make a CHAIR.
You PRICE the Chair.
You Add lawyers to PROTECT the chair.
You add a security system to protect the chair.
You ship it to any/every person who WANTS this chair. With added price.
Your Chair cost with PROFIT, $5.
After you add in all the rest..PLUS seller profit your chair is OVER $20.
ALSO..The Chair was in PARTS..All you did was put it together. You didnt MAKE all the parts. You PAID about $0.35 for the parts.
The Glue and nails you bought.
What a douche. I didn’t plan to see the movie but I think I’ll go and DL the movie just for spite.
I rarely go to the movies anymore. It is expensive and often unpleasant.
Loud people behind you, kids kicking your chair, phones ringing and people answering them…
I’d rather use NetFlix. I can wait a few months.
Legal, fairly priced, much nicer surroundings and pause for bio breaks.
A message to this tool, and the tools he represents. Come up with a legal way to view first run movies, and illegal sharing will drop like a rock.
I would gladly pay a big premium to enjoy a first run movie in my home. While I’ve had some good experiences in theaters, all too often I have to listen to people speaking, sticky floors, crying children, overpriced snacks, and overdriven sound systems.
Stop letting the theater operators dictate movie distribution terms.
Content creators should be able to offer their work for whatever terms they care to offer it. If the terms are not fair, then I feel free to ignore their work.
Besides, there is plenty of free content online for the asking. There are podcasts, Hulu, and open source software. I don’t need to pirate anything.
I did download a book once on Bit Torrent. That was only because the printers mangled the end of the book that I did purchase. I just wanted to see how the book ended. The author still got paid for his book. Ultimately the bookstore replaced the book, but I didn’t want to wait until the next day to read the last chapter.
Good thing I have no interest in watching such a crappy movie to begin with, huh?
I can’t wait to finish up law school and start defending people guys like this sue.
And what will your defense be?
#36 MikeN:
“And what will your defense be?”
That they have no verifiable proof that your client did anything wrong. And they don’t. End of story. A free and open internet is FAR more important to our species than all of these shitbag media corps and shyster fuckbags all combined and multiplied by a fucking hundred billion. A free and open internet is more important than your silly ass religion and your dick-flag waving country. All temporary at best, and there’s no contest between them and the free flow of information and ideas necessary for the long term advancement of humanity. File sharing is just something that will have to be put up with, it’s not that important, and the fuckwits trying to stop it are of no consequence. None. We put up with automobiles and the tens of thousands killed and maimed EVERY YEAR by them. A free and open world wide communication medium is at least as important as the car. I can’t really give a shit about these greedy parasites whining about “piracy” when at least 95% of the people downloading stuff wouldn’t have ever bought their product even if they couldn’t have downloaded it. And these pink handed bastards have days that beat your year dollar wise to begin with. Screw ‘em.
Get Smart–with the internet providing all kinds of free information how come you don’t understand file sharing/copyright violations any better than you do? Or even how lawsuits work?
“Verifiable proof?”—Ha, ha. Thats a laugh. But then, prison is full of people yelling: “You can’t do this to me.”
Even while our corp, err–government, is doing it as I type.
>File sharing is just something that will have to be put up with
Yea, that’s about right, and obvious, like many other things that are criminal activities. The point is, if it is made legal, then their is little incentive for people to produce anything. Spend $100-200 million to make a movie, and you get the box office sales, and the sale price of one dvd, which will be copied and put online for anyone to download for free. People would not be paying $1 for itunes if they could get a reliable legal free download.
THe companies tried suing the filesharing companies, and the complaint was this is a legit technology that can be used for legal means, so no case. So now they go after individual filesharers, who are the ones committing the crime, and now you say that is not acceptable either. Perhaps legally there is no proof. You’re declaring it doesn’t make it so. Could you clarify this a little? Are you going with the shared router defense? Or perhaps the it’s legal to share with friends?
I think a third option for the media companies is to go on these file sharing things themselves, build up a bit of a reputation, then plant viruses. Hey, you’re just downloading a copy from a friend, right? YOu can’t complain if he gives you a virus.
In a world without copyright we had Shakespeare. In a world with it, we have this movie…
What exactly is worth protecting here?