MPAA spots a Google Glass guy in cinema, calls HOMELAND SECURITY

An Ohio man is crying foul after he was detained and interrogated by the feds – because he wore a Google Glass headset in a movie theater. The bloke, who wishes to remain anonymous, said he was pulled from a screening of Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit at the AMC Easton Town Center in Columbus by men who he claims identified …

[Dan Paul]

According to the Law.....

You have a right to confront your accuser. I suggest that he sue the MPAA for fraud & kidnapping and attempted rape. Two different charges, one to get attention from the press and one to win.

[Thorne]

Re: According to the Law.....

"fraud & kidnapping and attempted rape"

Which charge was the real one and which one was to get the press?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: According to the Law.....

So that's being assumed as guilty until you can prove your innocence then...

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: According to the Law.....

Why was homeland security involved? This is not an immigration issue. Why didn't he have a lawyer present? Why didn't they check his glasses first instead of hours of questioning? Is having a prescription pair of Google glasses probable cause to detain someone in a theater?

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: According to the Law.....

It's mentioned in the Article why Homeland were involved,

To quote

"The US Department of Homeland Security polices piracy through its Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) branch and the National Intellectual Property Rights Center. The office works with movie studios and cinemas to stop the reproduction and distribution of pirated films."

[gap]

Re: According to the Law.....

Aren't Customs / ICE part of the larger Homeland Security department?

[LarsG]

He was lucky

They didn't just shoot him first and ask questions later....

Just wait until the first suicide bomber uses a pair of Google glasses....

They'll be the fashion accessory you will never wear.

[Anonymous Coward]

In Tennessee or Kentucky he would have been shot first, skinned and made into lampshades.

[Anonymous Coward]

This reminds me of the old cautionary joke

A woman who is on holiday with her husband on a fishing trip, well the husband goes for the fishing and the woman for some peace and quiet. One day the husbands been a dick or some such so she decides to take the boat out onto the lake and read a book. The boat of course still has the husbands fishing gear on it. (who knows why, it all seems like a suspicious set up to me)

Anyway after a couple of hours the park ranger or whatever it is that patrols this sort of thing rides his boat over and asks her whether she has a permit to fish, she says she hasn't, the ranger type informs her he's going to fine her as she has the equipment for fishing, she responds that she'll report him for rape as he happens to have the equipment for raping. The ranger goes on his way.

[Charles 9]

Re: This reminds me of the old cautionary joke

Then imagine the chagrin when the Ranger informs her he DOESN'T have the equipment, having been emasculated, AND that he's now adding false accusation to the charges.

[Grogan]

Americans try and paint everything as a threat to national security. Copyright infringement is a threat to national security because imaginary property is about the only thing the USA has left.

Pathetic bullies whose influences are waning.

[Anonymous Coward]

Wo there little hoss, I'm an american and I can state right here, right now, what you said is not true for all of us. Sure, we got a f'd up system and many of us are sick of it, but we are powerless to do anything about it. Yeah, you can vote about it but all your doing is replacing one evil idiot for another. Money talks, nothing else. We do what we can, we f up quite a bit, but everything I just described applies to a hell of a lot of other places in the world. So don't go pointing at our dirty laundry without looking at yours first. If you want to swap laundry detergent ideas, rock on. If you want to be ignorant, well, there are plenty of sites for slurs.

Hey! And no down vote for you!

[Anonymous Coward]

If your political system no longer reflects the wishes of the people and you are no longer able to affect positive change then you are no longer in a democracy Mr. Taylor 1.

"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty. "

"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? "

"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."

"Of liberty I would say that, in the whole plenitude of its extent, it is unobstructed action according to our will. But rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add “within the limits of the law,” because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual."

All quotes from Thomas Jefferson. A man who saw oppression, refused to accept it was inevitable, and helped found your country. He was an American. I see very few like him today.

[I. Aproveofitspendingonspecificprojects]

Actually old boy,

"Thomas Jefferson was an American."

He was British and a traitor.

[Charles 9]

Re: Actually old boy,

No, he was fully American: born and raised in Virginia.

[P. Lee]

Re: Actually old boy,

>"Thomas Jefferson was an American."

>>He was British and a traitor.

>>>No, he was fully American: born and raised in Virginia.

... and that made him British.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Actually old boy,

Forget the words and any sense therein, concentrate on his nationality.

Simple concepts, better for tweets, sound bites, ignorant plebs with short attention spans.

break for adds....

I can't help feeling that is a better insight into the current problems than I could articulate.

[JEDIDIAH]

Re: Actually old boy,

>>"Thomas Jefferson was an American."

>>>He was British and a traitor.

>>>>No, he was fully American: born and raised in Virginia.

.> .. and that made him British.

No. That made him a Virginian and he would have told you so.

That's something else that people tend to overlook about the States, the fact that we are distinct states. You would think the name would be a clue. Apparently not.

[Dodgy Geezer]

Re: Actually old boy,

Treason doth NEVER prosper - what's the reason?

If it doth prosper, none dare call it treason....

Sir John Harrington. 1561-1612

[Purlieu]

Re: Actually old boy,

Born in 1743 so British, mwerr

[sparkiemj]

Re: Actually old boy,

Thomas Jefferson is known as an American - a founding father esp. of the American Constitution and one of the Presidents of USA ..

Even the White House calls him an American so u with ur pathetic ill-knowledge shouldn't declare him British or otherwise thereby distorting your own country's history and facts as well as making yourself look like an ignoramus and getting many down votes !!

[Amorous Cowherder]

Re: Actually old boy,

"Thomas Jefferson was an American."

He was British and a traitor.

--------

You're thinking of Thomas Paine, he was radical corset maker from Norfolk I believe, he influenced Benjamin Franklin and Jefferson as they were forming the fledgling US congress. Well worth reading his books, they're as relevant today as they ever were, especially when he has a go at religion being there simply to repress people. He famously got invited to join the post revolutionary French government and refused to learn a word of French!

[apjanes]

If your political system no longer reflects the wishes of the people...

Beautiful sentiments Mr. Anon. Unfortunately I'm not sure we are much better off on that front in the UK. You may have the power to change the faces at the front for other faces that look pretty much the same, but the same old bureaucracy still rules underneath :(

[steamrunner]

Re: If your political system no longer reflects the wishes of the people...

To slightly divert from the topic:

Those familiar with the 'history' of the comic character Judge Dredd will be aware that the mechanism by which the last government (President) of the United States finally fell, in the year 2070, was none other than [the wording of] the Constitution of the United States itself. The Judges invoked the constitution to take over from the (rigged) elected US government. That outcome has always struck me as beautifully ironic.

S.

[mrobaer]

actually...

This representative democracy we're subject to has taken quite a lot of power out of our hands. And because there are so many of us, it would have to be a very serious uprising of united citizens to even make a change. We seem to not even be able to agree that we're disagreeing in this country.

[Scott 62]

I read this in a Fargo accent, for some reason.

[David 14]

But... it is the USA...

You know... the same place where property rights as so sacred that it is considered acceptable in many states to kill a person with a gun if they are sealing something from you. Only in the USA does theft of "stuff" mean so much that death is considered an appropriate punishment.

Yet for some reason, John Q. Public of the USA would be at the front of the demonstration that was fighting against cutting of a persons hand for stealing if it were to happen in a Middle Eastern country.... go figure!

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: But... it is the USA...

Again, not sure where your from but, obviously, you've never been to the USA. You just can't kill someone for stealing, and if you do, you damn well better have a good story ready and be ready for an uphill battle.

This statement isn't even in the lines of the original story, just rants about America. First things first, not all states allow guns. Second, even the states that do, doesn't mean the wild west, there are restrictions that damn near make it not worth having one. Third, if you do live somewhere that you can have one and you shoot someone for stealing, you will go to jail. Period. You damn well better have a good reason, some connections, and some money to get out. You simply can't shoot someone in the back and plant an iPhone on them.

Hey, I'm all for cutting a thief's hands off, many of us are, its actually been done here and debated about to do so again. I think you are simply another ignorant foreigner who gets their "edumakation" from the local old men telling folk stories and probably the internet.

I hate guns, grew up with them all my life and never cared for them, but Pandoras box was open waaaaay before I was born and guns are not going away, and When someone is getting ready to do you or your family harm, I think I'd rather have one and take my chances.

Again, if you have some other ideas, by all means, let us know. Want to point a finger and bitch, then expect to be treated as such.

[croc]

Re: But... it is the USA...

What state doesn't allow gun ownership? (Are you sure that you are a 'merkin'?)

More to the point, what other nation would send around a glorified customs agent to shake down someone for a civil penalty? I mean, what was the guy trying to sneak into the country? Or out of it? I mean, it wasn't a how-to movie on terrorism, now was it?

[br0die]

Re: But... it is the USA...

Name me a state that doesn't allow guns. There isn't one. The 2nd Amendment has that one pretty well covered (and no, NYC is not a state).

Secondly, you absolutely can use lethal force in defense of property, in many states. Castle Doctrine, Stand Your Ground, and Make My Day laws make this possible.

[Alan_Peery]

Re: But... it is the USA...

You're confused -- those laws aren't there to protect the *property*, but your life and status to be unmolested on said same property. Were you to drive by and see someone in your living room when you knew no one else would be home (including your pets), those laws wouldn't apply as you can leave safely.

Of course, having seen someone in your living room last week would give added credence to the charge of self defense/"Castle Doctrine" should they come around when you are at tome.

[jamedoughotmail]

Re: But... it is the USA...

Castle Doctrine or Stand your ground laws do not apply to defense of property. Those laws are in place so if a person reasonably fears imminent peril of death or serious bodily harm to him or herself or another then they are not legally required to attempt to retreat. They can "stand their ground" and use force, lethal if warranted, to defend themselves.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: But... it is the USA...

> Castle Doctrine, Stand Your Ground, and Make My Day laws make this possible.

Is the last one related to the Do You Feel Lucky Punk law by any chance?

[Jake Maverick]

Re: But... it is the USA...

you're not powerless, you still have your guns....

[JEDIDIAH]

Re: But... it is the USA...

> You know... the same place where property rights as so sacred that it is considered acceptable in many states to kill a person with a gun i

No. You can be shot for committing the violent act of burglary. The notion of "home invasion" being a crime of violence is an idea that we inherited from that country that founded our original colonies.

It's not about "stuff". It's about being enough of a man that there's a place you don't have to retreat from.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: But... it is the USA...

> It's not about "stuff". It's about being enough of a man that there's a place you don't have to retreat from.

Ah, yes, the Mucho Macho thing. It works so well in practice.

Just what's wrong with fucking off for the time being and calling the Old Bill to deal with the intruder, hopefully in a reasonably civilised manner? Would that hurt your pride or something?

[gefitz]

The American Government tries to paint everything as a threat to national security. The American public simply goes along...when they question "why", the answer is inevitably "Because 9/11." This still causes the American public to reply "Oh, well then. Carry on." without a care in the world. Except for 9/11, of course.

[Oh Homer]

In a nation owned by corporations...

...all corporate interests are matters of "national security".

[Dan Paul]

Americans are not your "Pathetic Bullies"

American POLITICIANS ( some of whom have been bought and paid for by the MPAA and RIAA)try and paint everything as a threat to national security.

There, fixed it for you.

You really should try reality, instead of stupidity; it just works better. By the way, who's going step in when you really need them to? Do you trust anyone else?

[Lost In Clouds of Data]

Going to be a painful future

Just as the plods are busy spying on us, the rest of the world is going to be spying on them. If they haven't worked it out yet that Google Glass is just the tip of the iceberg, then they're going to have a hell of a wake up call.

I blame Governor Kasich myself. We've been going downhill ever since the idiots voted him in.

[ThomH]

Re: Going to be a painful future

Agreed in principle. What American*, no matter how frightened of terrorism, actually wants their tax dollars spent on getting Homeland Security to rough up people in cinemas? No politician of any party is going to stand up and defend this.

That said, supposing the man had started filming as security approached him then the likely outcome would have been that (i) since he has now taken video footage without permission in a cinema, obviously he's a terrorist and can go straight to jail; and (ii) his device would have been confiscated before he had a chance to send footage anywhere.

(* or anyone else, anywhere else — this just happens to be an American story)

[Goldmember]

Re: Going to be a painful future

"fucking hell what american* actually believes that homeland security are roughing up people in cinemas -- in utah of all fucking places -- because they're wearing google glasses???"

Did you bother to read the article or just skip straight to the comments?

[Lost In Clouds of Data]

Re: Going to be a painful future

Gawd, for an AC you're monumentally stupid.

First off, it's OHIO - that's in the Midwest, not freakin' Utah - that's over the western part of the US! How can we expect you to have anything worthwhile to say when you can't get the fucking state correct? Just because I-80 happens to go through both doesn't mean it's the same bleeding state.

Secondly, http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2014/01/21/google-glass-at-easton-theater.html. Columbus Dispatch - well regarded newspaper in our humble state.

For fuck's sakes, stop being a blithering troll and try using a brain cell next time (your other one is apparently desperately lonely).

[David 14]

Re: Going to be a painful future

Hmm... I live in Newfoundland, Canada. Most Americans I speak to have no idea where that is... I guess their ignorance of geography means they have no right to other opinions?

[Lost In Clouds of Data]

Re: Going to be a painful future

When one makes a statement like "in utah of all fucking places" then one are signifying knowledge of the locale. Thus, one sounds monumentally stupid.

[nexsphil]

...sounds monumentally stupid

A bit like saying "when one ARE". Don't fuck up grammar when trying to insult others' intelligence.

[turnbulld]

Re: Going to be a painful future

You made a geographical mistake as large as saying something that happened in St Johns actually happened in Saskatoon and then brushed it off because Americans don't know geography. Well, one, you gotta have a lot of something to screw up that badly and blame the offended party for your mistake and two Americans know all the geography they need to know. Making sweeping generalizations about over 300 million people is about as accurate as stating that all Canadians are mild mannered, overly polite, Tim Hortons addicts. Clearly, neither position is so accurate.

[That's it man, game over man, game over!]

Re: Going to be a painful future

Mmmm I miss Tim Horton's, need to book another holiday to Canada.

[TheRealRoland]

Re: Going to be a painful future

Not necessary, just drive/fly to Detroit, or drive from Indianapolis to the east for 80 miles or so. a number of Tim Horton's to be found. some are collocated with a Wendy's. I also came across some while driving from Buffalo to Vermont.

[Hollerith 1]

Re: Going to be a painful future

I was just home to Alberta for a break last month and my first stop was a Tim Horton's. It was good to be back! Oh, and nice to see the folks, too.

[Vic]

Re: Going to be a painful future

> Americans know all the geography they need to know

You are having a fucking giraffe!

Vic.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Going to be a painful future

I guess their ignorance of geography means they have no right to other opinions?

That must be why we see so few opinions posted by Americans... oh hang on.

[Paul Smith]

Re: Going to be a painful future

Their ignorance of geography does not mean the have no right to other opinions, but when ignorance is publicly demonstrated in one area, it can safely be assumed in others, so it shouldn't be a surprise if their opinions are not given the respect they believe they deserve.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Going to be a painful future

Their ignorance of geography does not mean the have no right to other opinions, but when ignorance is publicly demonstrated in one area, it can safely be assumed in others, so it shouldn't be a surprise if their opinions are not given the respect they believe they deserve.

Yes, but the world needs to get over the fact that ignorant opinions get expressed, it happens all the time. All of humanity is ignorant of somethings, whilst being knowledgable about others. That's the very nature of humanity. Stating people aren't allowed to express opinions because the one they express is ill-informed, offensive, or just silly, is completely and utterly ridiculous, and in and of itself fairly offensive.

[apjanes]

Another NEWFIE??!

@David14: Wow, although I now live in the UK, I spent the first 19 years of my life on The Rock! Who would have thought our little island with a mere 525k population would have representatives that actually meet on El Reg's forum! Have a Screech (or Black Horse more like ;) ) on me

[tom dial]

Re: Going to be a painful future

It is not quite clear how the state governor is involved in a matter that seems to have involved theater management and goons from the MPAA and DHS.

[Anonymous Coward]

> While we’re huge fans of technology and innovation, wearing a device that has the capability to record video is not appropriate at the movie theater

So, like most people's phones then.

Or the human brain for that matter.

Make sure you have your memory switched off then.

Seriously though, Department of Homeland Security? Their losing their sanity in the old US of A.

[Grogan]

Don't so much as hum "Happy Birthday to You" from memory, in public, or you'll be infringing.

[Anonymous Coward]

There was a group that was collecting video of members of congress and judges singing happy birthday but I don't know what happened to them.

[Allan George Dyer]

Re: group that was collecting video of members of congress and judges singing happy birthday

Was Marilyn Monroe a member?

[Thorne]

"Make sure you have your memory switched off then."

I've tried to for some movies and for some I've tried to wipe the memory. Damn you Halley Berry in Cat Woman....

Beer icon cause I'm still trying to wipe it.

[MrDamage]

Damn you Halley Berry in Cat Woman....

Is it Halley Berry you are trying to wipe from your mind, or just those fantasies you had about her in that tight suit, and then learnt that a lot of those scenes were played by a male stuntman?

[Thorne]

Re: Damn you Halley Berry in Cat Woman....

No just the whole movie (which was god awful). The plot was more rancid than week old road kill and less substantial than a budget porno.

Worst movie ever.

[Elmer Phud]

Re: Damn you Halley Berry in Cat Woman....

" and then learnt that a lot of those scenes were played by a male stuntman?"

and?????

[Elmer Phud]

"Damn you Halley Berry in Cat Woman...."

Damn you for the ease at which an image I have copied into memory from a screen has popped up again.

It may well be that over 75% of people reading your comment will now be looking at sending screenig money to the studio.

And still that image remains (not that I'm complaining - at least it doesn't have adverts or the usual boring 'copying is worse than shagging baby goats' text)

[croc]

Who in hell is Halley Berry...? (And why should I care?)

[asdf]

Halley Berry

Geeks know her as the actress playing Storm in the Xmen movies. She is still one of the few people to win both an Oscar and a Razzie.

[Pookietoo]

Re: Who in hell is Halley Berry

You mean Halle Berry? She is the only African American woman to have won an Academy Award for a leading role.

[Eddy Ito]

What he meant to say was; "While we’re huge fans of technology and innovation, we don't understand any of it and have determined wearing a device that appears to have the capability of recording video is not appropriate at the movie theater."

Off to buy a 3D printer so I can print out dozens of unGlass frames to hand out to patrons at the movie theater.

[Anonymous Coward]

BTW, I call myself out on the awful grammar: their->they're

Sorry.

[asdf]

f*cking 9/11

Many empires don't have a hard date when everything went to shit but the US empire sure does. F*cking 9/11 pity gave us the most useless government department in US history Homeland Security. It also destroyed more American's civil and political rights than any other event in US history. In many ways it destroyed what the US stood for. The terrorists won in the end and this is just more proof. Doesn't matter which clown is running the show. The US is starting to learn how the Brits felt losing their empire. Neither country looks like its getting better any time soon.

[Hollerith 1]

Re: f*cking 9/11

I figure you got that about right. And it turns out that the only thing to fear is fear itself -- the 'home of the brave' kissed goodbye to a lot of what they say they hold dear for an illusory security. Their fear overcame any sense of restraint. I feel for them -- when the big rich kid first gets punched in the nose (and please insert her obligatory condemnation of terrorist acts) it can be a big shock.

[P. Lee]

> Seriously though, Department of Homeland Security? Their losing their sanity in the old US of A.

The devil makes work for idle hands.

[Turtle]

Personally.

Personally, I think that anything that discourages people from wearing surveillance kit like Google Glass is good.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Personally.

You're right. In 20 years, with 2,000,000,000 billion people wearing something similar, we will all become movie stars!

[bazza]

Re: Personally.

"You're right. In 20 years, with 2,000,000,000 billion people wearing something similar, we will all become movie stars!"

In which case we'll all be able to be start charging a fee to appear in the movies!

[Idocrase]

Next thing you know, they're going to be confiscating watches at the door...

[Anonymous Coward]

There's plenty of places (like cinemas) where it is illegal, unwise or just plain antisocial to use a video recorder. Glassholes are just going to have to get used to taking them off or risk upsetting a bunch of people.

It's astonishingly naive to imagine that a cinema wouldn't react. If the idiot had been sat there with an actual video camera instead of his Google Glasses he surely wouldn't be surprised if the same reaction happened. The cinema isn't going to permit them just because they're unobtrusive, are they!?

[ThomH]

I think the issue is more that what should be just a civil wrong was met by several government agents, apparently under the control of the MPAA, with the man being detained and questioned for an hour before they could be bothered to do even the most cursory inspection of the evidence.

[Anonymous Coward]

"aww cute you actually think that government agents are prowling america's cinemas for people using google glasses :*"

Do you really think in this day and age that cinemas haven't got the technology to spot lenses?

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/FutureTech/story?id=1139800&page=1

That story is 8 years old now. No prowling by anyone required at all. I'm assuming they don't bother with the jamming part. It would be better to disguise their technique rather than give it away by actually zapping a laser at someone in the audience.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Do you really think in this day and age that cinemas haven't got the technology to spot lenses?"

Do you really think in this day and age that savvy snappers haven't got the technology to block out the blinders, using say filters to block out infrared wavelengths? Perhaps that's why we haven't seen much of this tech recently, because it would be too easy to defeat, and the only way around it is to use an unblockable wavelength, which inevitably means visible light, and given how sensitive some people are to light pulses, SOMEONE will react adversely.

[The First Dave]

Oh, but you forget, he: "voluntarily answered questions" so that was all totally okay. It's not like he missed the movie that he had paid good money for, or was in any way threatened with being taken into custody...

[JEDIDIAH]

Swatting flies with a shotgun.

It was a real "Judge Dredd" style of over reaction. The guy should have just been asked to leave.

[Graham Dawson]

Prescription lenses.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Prescription lenses"

It's alright officer, I'm allowed to break the law because I need prescription lenses.

Get real. How do you think that would get you off a charge?

[Mark .]

He wasn't breaking the law.

[Adrian 4]

Probably everyone in the cinema had a video camera in the form of a phone. Why pick on just one of them ?

[Sanctimonious Prick]

Re: Yeah no offense to anyone but

Down voted, bud. Get with the times!

[Lost In Clouds of Data]

Re: Yeah no offense to anyone but

Well, apart from the fact that ICE Homeland Security Investigations is responsible in part for combating piracy and counterfeit goods.

Crazy, perhaps but there it is. Perhaps you may want to investigate before sounding off...

Paris, cause she's apparently got more clue's than you do...

[RobKC]

Re: Yeah no offense to anyone but

These ICE duties are part of the Customs duties that came over when the agencies were merged. MPAA pushes aggressively with funding, and ICE wants some stats that don't relate to the poor record with deporting illegal aliens - their main role of importance to America.

[tom dial]

Re: Yeah no offense to anyone but

Actually, ICE has set new and larger records for deporting illegal aliens almost every year since the first inauguration of President Obama, staunch supporter of immigration reform.

[Colin Brett]

RE: @AC, 22Jan14-01:03 GMT

A prime candidate for Flame of the Week? He missed the RANdoM CapitALs but, other than that, a fine effort IMO.

Colin

[P. Lee]

Re: Yeah no offense to anyone but

> CE wants some stats that don't relate to the poor record with deporting illegal aliens

I suppose they reason that a Jack Ryan film makes piracy a terrorist related offense.

[MrDamage]

Re: Yeah no offense to anyone but

Did you read the bit where it stated they were fitted with prescription lenses?

No? You've decided not to let any facts get in the way of a good rant I take it?

[veti]

Re: Yeah no offense to anyone but

Perhaps you missed the part where the MPAA confirmed all those details you're sceptical of?

Like it or not, this is exactly how your tax dollars are being spent.

[dan1980]

Re: Yeah no offense to anyone but

@AC 22/1 - 01:03

Consider yourself unique.

I have been posting to this site for 6 months and this is the FIRST post I have ever down-voted. I am against it, personally, as most people on here are fairly clue-y and down-voting on the basis of disagreement is not really my style.

However, your post was an almost perfect storm of:

• Wilful ignorance (you clearly didn't read the article properly)
• Disrespect to the author (refer to the above)
• Unnecessary swearing (I am not adverse to 'colourful metaphors' but there is really no justification here)

Short version is that if you go on a rant that more-or-less accuses the author of being one or more of:

• Stupid
• A liar
• gullible
• misinformed

Then you better have at least read the article.

I hope it's another six months (or more) before I read another comment so bad as to prompt a down-vote; Certainly yours will take a lot of beating.

[Vladimir Plouzhnikov]

Re: Yeah no offense to anyone but

"Let's see this guy provide any evidence, including that he wasn't recording it."

Yes! Well said. None of that liberal presumption of innocence here. Let's just pick 'em up randomly in the streets and see what evidence do they have that they are not terrorists! Hell yeah!

"Assuming he was, why the fuck would Homeland Security be getting involved?"

Right to the point - that is precisely the question which everyone has been asking ever since!

"I strongly suspect he wasn't ripped from the theatre by the fucking MPAA either. What are they doing, logging the location of every pair of Google Glasses in America and swooping every time any of them is on in a cinema?"

Spot on again! That's the NSA's job.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Yeah no offense to anyone but

"Why the fuck would he be sitting watching a film through Google Glasses? Assuming he was"

Prescription Glasses, what a knob you are

[Someone Else]

@AC, 22Jan14-01:03 GMT Re: Yeah no offense to anyone but

I see that reading comprehension is not your forte...it's not even your mezzo-piano....

[Dave Oldham]

Did he mount his Glass on a tripod?

Wow! Who wouldn't want a pirate copy of a film made from a camera mounted on someone's head??? I mean who can keep their head perfectly still when watching a film? Not me or anyone I know!

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Did he mount his Glass on a tripod?

Most of the pirate copies of movies were taken with small handheld video cameras. They aren't mounting those on a tripod. Modern cameras can mostly correct for shake, though you can still see a bit of that in these videos. One would assume Google Glass would have a similar capability to minimize "camera" shake.

I have no doubt that pirates would turn to this method of recording when Google Glass becomes more widespread, if theaters decided to ignore people wearing them. Supposedly some have equipment that can detect reflections off the CCDs used in modern digital gear, so they would equally detect the CCD in a handheld camera, a cell phone camera, and a Google Glass. If you have a recording device pointed at the screen, they can't tell if it is recording or not, but are within their rights to ask you to leave.

None of this justifies the type of response this guy is alleging. This had to be some sort of setup. Seems too convenient that the feds just happened to be hanging around this theater when the guy showed up. Either he's been there before someone wanted to make an example of him, or he's making up the story for his own reasons.

[Cpt Blue Bear]

Re: Did he mount his Glass on a tripod?

I have it on good authority that most cams are shot from tripod in the projection booth...

[ElReg!comments!Pierre]

Re: Did he mount his Glass on a tripod?

> Most of the pirate copies of movies were taken with small handheld video cameras. They aren't mounting those on a tripod.

Yes, in most cases they are. When the cam is not on a tripod it is stuck between seats so that it won't move. Footage from a head-mounted cam is guaranteed to be absolutely unwatchable, and I'm not even talking vibrations or small movements here. I encorage you to test for yourself: if you pay attention, you'll notice that at times you actually look away from the screen.

[Charles 9]

Re: Did he mount his Glass on a tripod?

I encorage you to test for yourself: if you pay attention, you'll notice that at times you actually look away from the screen.

I have. I've also learned I'm perfectly capable of moving my eyes around while keeping my head still. No matter where you position the camera there will be the risk of it being jostled: usually by someone passing the camera's position in one form or another. Not much you can do about that if the theater's crowded.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Did he mount his Glass on a tripod?

Try keeping your head still for 2 hours. :) <- A face and head that can keep perfectly still.

I only really wanted to post to go on about the amazing visual system of the brain and eyes. But I guess I'll save that for another day.

[Alan_Peery]

Re: Did he mount his Glass on a tripod? -- agent arrival

Regarding the arrival of the agents: The story gives the location as Columbus Ohio, where there is an international airport. As the agents arrived "an hour into the show" per the coverage at http://the-gadgeteer.com/2014/01/20/amc-movie-theater-calls-fbi-to-arrest-a-google-glass-user/, there was plenty of time for them to get just about anywhere in a city like Columbus of about a million people.

[DiViDeD]

Re: Did he mount his Glass on a tripod?

For a Jack Ryan movie, my head would be perfectly still after it had sent me to sleep. Of course, you might end up with 2 hours of HD carpet and feet shots if the old noggin droops!

[Mark .]

Re: Did he mount his Glass on a tripod?

On the plus side, you get to watch the movie without risk of interrogation and detained by police. Once again, paying customers get treated worse than people pirating... (I wonder if he'll even get a refund.)

[John Bailey]

Re: Did he mount his Glass on a tripod?

Shhhhh..

You should know better than to ask sensible questions here.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Did he mount his Glass on a tripod?

I have to wonder what happens when DHS learns of video cameras where the lens isn't obvious because it's hidden in the frame between the eyes and is equipped with an IR filter that would block out blinders. THOSE have been in existence well before the innovation of Google Glass, and now have more than enough storage to record even a full-length feature.

[Herby]

Makes me want to...

...conjure up a nice fake Google Glass just to see what they would do. Not that I could use them anyway. I don't focus that near, given my age.

First the cops, now this. Doesn't anyone have any sense. (Hint: I suspect not!).

Business plan: Make knockoff Google Glass. Profit. Retire

[jnemesh]

you missed something...

The people here who can't believe that the DHS did in fact detain and interrogate this guy must have missed the fact that the MPAA and DHS both confirmed that the incident did indeed happen. Yes, the US govt really IS out to get you filthy pirates! Even if you did nothing, they have the power to bypass that pesky constitution thingy and do as they want.

[henrydddd]

Oh!

Here is a math equation for you math fans. This equation holds true in the US. NSA + MPAA + Homeland security = a police state

[Anonymous Custard]

Re: Oh!

NSA + MPAA = A SAMPAN

Conclusive proof we're all being spied on by the Chinese?

[Barry Rueger]

Why? Why?

I have to ask, who on earth would want to watch a videotaped version of a movie screening a theatre?

No, I've never bothered to download a camcordered movie, and doubt that I ever will. I can't imagine how it could be anything but awful, and (in my limited experience) I can't think of anything that I would want to watch that badly that I wouldn't just pay to see in the theatre - or wait for a DVD or screener to show up on Pirate Bay.

As an aside, a couple of months ago we saw an remarkably dimwitted woman arguing with the theatre employees when they busted her for videotaping the credits at the end of the movie.

I don't if she filmed the whole film, or just the credits (plausible enough), but standing in a movie theatre with a video camera AFTER THE HOUSE LIGHTS HAVE BEEN TURNED UP is about as dumb as it gets.

[Cpt Blue Bear]

Re: Why? Why?

Personally, I agree. But there are people out there - I know a few - who will put up with the horrendous picture and diabolical sound quality in order to watch a film that has not been released here yet. And there lies your clue: staggered release fuels this.

[tom dial]

Re: Why? Why?

So to prevent some thousands of people from unauthorized viewing of a movie the MPAA and the Department of Homeland Security employ some thousands of people to monitor and prosecute the enablers. This when hundreds of thousands or millions pay full (and outrageous) price in the theaters and many more either buy the DVD or see it on Netflix or cable, with part of their fees kicked back to the MPAA participants. It boggles the mind. Street beggars produce more actual goods and services than these buffoons.

[MacGyver]

poor

I've heard stories told of people, people without a lot of money (or none, read: unemployed teens), that when given the option between nothing or a cam version, that pick the crappy cam.

The funniest thing is that ANY film going to China is going to be ripped by a top of the line camera on a tripod in the middle of the theater and be available that afternoon on the street and there is nothing the DHS can do about that, yet it is ok for the DHS to harass and detain a citizen at the request of a cabal of studio lawyers. I don't think the civil liberty violations are worth the 3 day delay they may get by harassing citizens wearing Glass, a cam will always come out from a foreign country anyway.

[DiViDeD]

Re: Why? Why?

"I have to ask, who on earth would want to watch a videotaped version of a movie screening a theatre?"

Actually, they're getting a lot better in recent years (or so I'm told, he hastily added). Arrangements with the projectionists, together with improvements in camera technology, have led to well framed, stable video, often shot from somewhere other than the theatre seating (projector windows, which have a field of view perfect for the purpose, and have become increasingly redundant as the need for multiple projectors disappears), together with Telesync audio.

But you're right - screeners are always better and have proper multi channel (AC-3) sound rather than the FM rebroadcast you get on TS-Cam recordings. Allegedly

[Allan George Dyer]

Accessory opportunity

Market a highly visible clip that covers the lens to Google Glass wearers with prescription lenses. Cinema can verify they aren't pirating the film, everyone's happy.

[TheRealRoland]

Sigh...

Brown shirts.

Yes, invoked godwin's law myself.

Sad...

But not thinking this will be any different in any other country.

Sign of the times.

[Martin Huizing]

Future of technology.

I have downloaded movies, but only because I live in China and some movies are just not released here. Accidentally I also downloaded cinema recorded (or cam movies) and, over the years, watched the quality of these get better and better. I also like to keep up with recording tech, and I can say this; the future is either you have to go trough a metal/recording device detector or mandatory body/cavity search before able to enter the movie theater. Wearable tech is the future. Samsung's wrist camera already has a great resolution.

Add high capacity storage and ant-shake tech to the mix and those cameras will be easier and easier to be carried inside a theater to record movies in much better quality than ever before, instantly uploaded into the cloud.

I, myself love going to the movies and enjoy them on the big screen. IMAX 3d still blows me away. High ticket prices prevents me from going more than once or twice a month though. Downloading movies here is as easy as a click on a button.

[hapticz]

comments

as we read this some 10 year old chinese smart arsse kid is busy designing a body wearable, 1024p video capture device with 3 terabytes of cheap 2.5 inch low power capacity storage. the builtin processor will automatically de-shake, straighten, and balance the video and simultaneously extract the audio, recognize the voices and add subtitles in 6 languages while the wearer munches on $6.00 popcorn and a $5.00 5 ounce syrupy beverage, after paying $13.00 to see the screening. his friend outside will pick up the 1024bit key encoded wifi signal to be streamed straight to the central distribution office of the local branch of the russian mob. (or any other global site). is this doable? highly likely and probably already in the works. (and the 10 year old chinese kid is doing this with spare parts from scrapped surpus we send back there for recycling)

[Winkypop]

People still go to the movies?

Wow

[Evan Essence]

Re: People still go to the movies?

Yes, the MPAA are doing everything possible to keep people going to the cinema, and to persuade people who've drifted away to return. Clearly.

[Charles 9]

Re: People still go to the movies?

Yes, because NO business will be satisfied with a one-and-done. Repeat business is where the real money lies.

[dan1980]

Not on. Just not.

"While we’re huge fans of technology and innovation, wearing a device that has the capability to record video is not appropriate at the movie theater."

How about get fucked, hmm?

This kind of thing doesn't really happen in Australia, thankfully (I'm not suggesting it couldn't happen), so I say that in support of the good, ordinary, law-abiding people of the US, who I feel deserve to right to watch a damned movie in peace.

And really, is it that common that someone in one of the largest cities in the US is going to be doing this, rather than someone in a smaller area (where MPAA types are unlikely to be hanging around), or in another country?

Maybe it is - who am I to say, but I am pretty sure I could walk into any cinema in Australia, set up a personal video camera and proceed uninterrupted. I like in Sydney (the most populous city over here) and plenty of times I haven't even had my ticket checked (presumably the chap was in the bathroom).

But yeah, all that aside, fuck off and leave people the hell alone.

There has to be a set of rules that the authorities have to follow in these instances as it is just not civil to march into a a cinema, where some has paid their money to watch a movie, demand that person leave and then question them.

I am rarely moved to bouts of overt patriotism (that's not really the Australian way - bogans and their Southern Cross tattoos aside) but I love Australia. we have our problems but I'm pretty sure that if someone identifying themselves as an employee of the MPAA of AFACT (the Australian arm*) called up the local police station and asked them to come straight away to the local cinema because someone might just be filming a feature presentation . . . well, let's just say they would likely be polite and tell them they would be there once they were able but would find more (or less) important things to do.

Hell, even known sources of copyright violations, such as the markets in Chinatown in Melbourne are pretty much ignored by the fine officers of the law (I mean that - our cops are fantastic**) who largely have better things to do than shakedown a few people doing no real harm to anyone.

* - For all intents and purposes

** - The overwhelming majority that is - there are always a few corrupt/vindictive/overbearing/self-important w$#kers in any position of authority.

[dan1980]

Re: Not on. Just not.

Sorry all - I have to apologise for the multitude of errors in that post; I was on the train on my laptop and it was getting close to my stop. (Any excuse eh Dan?)

People in the US deserve the right to watch a movie in peace, I live in Sydney, and of course it is the MPAA orAFACT.

That said, I do like Sydney and the MPPA and/of AFACT can still fuck off.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re. head mounted pirate rig

Heh, so will cinemas have to deploy ultrasonic sensors to detect spinning hard disks?

Alternate idea seeing as most of these cheap cameras aren't shielded just detect the 13.5 or 14.3 MHz used for the colour encoder, in fact this method is used a lot by The Folks with the Dumb Sounding Acronym.

I did look into using a method like this to detect hidden surveillance devices, the problem is all the new ones use spread spectrum and are damn near impossible to pick up even if you know they are transmitting.

This is with a $100K spectrum analyser and a sensitive front end, it barely shows up at all.

The even newer ones detect, time shift and retransmit with a variable inaudible delay existing RF signals ie from radio or TV as a 2nd generation FSK so unless you know the secret key used it is impossible to distinguish a genuine DAB or FM signal from the fake one with the temporally shifted key containing the compressed and encrypted video data.

One interesting approach is to use a companion transmitter, ie heterodyne three different signals so that they only decode correctly at one location whereas anywhere else it just shows up as gibberish.

This approach is used a lot by CHQG and 6IM apparently.

source:- Classified.

[Sanctimonious Prick]

Re: Re. head mounted pirate rig

it just shows up as gibberish.

Damn! So did your post.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Re. head mounted pirate rig

Heh, so will cinemas have to deploy ultrasonic sensors to detect spinning hard disks?

Forget that. Flash drives are solid state and have no moving parts. Wrap them in EM shielding and it'll be hard to tell you even have one on your person.

And why bother transmitting to a station outside? Just keep the recording on your person and pass it along once the movie's done. If they can't detect the camera, they certainly won't be able to spot an 8+GB flash device.

[Steve Davies 3]

Geek wearing some dorky kit gets his 15 nano seconds of fame

Is this really news? Move along there or the NSA will be sending these around to make sure that you toe the MPAA laws --->

[John 98]

I'm not American, but - IF the facts are roughly right - I would be worried about (i) how private corporations are getting to spend my tax dollars and (ii) the stupidity and arrogance of the agents. In my travels, including behind the Iron Curtain (and no, I wasn't a fan) about the rudest officials I ever met were in the US. Not all ,but some

[tom dial]

I am American, and the facts probably are roughly right. Every seat of a government is a center for lobbyists to petition for special favors and for legislators and agency employees to grant them. The periodic extension of copyright, and the ability of the MPAA and RIAA to employ federal police to hunt down violators is only one of many results.

[Anonymous Coward]

Prescription lenses means he couldn't take them off!

Cunning Google, and often people don't have spare glasses with them, so the MPAA will rapidly become swamped once this becomes popular!

He is still a Glasshole, because I still don't like the idea of cameras permanently in public; mobiles, Police, and public CCTV included! Cameras in cars are mostly OK, provided only used to observe the road, and other vehicles while driving.

Anyhow the MPAA, and bodies like it, are obsolete and should be made powerless and irrelevant, because the whole concept of public IP, is contradictory, state backed, BS.

[Evan Essence]

Meh. He was treated lightly by American standards. He was lucky not to have been shipped to Gitmo.

[Frankee Llonnygog]

He was wearing Google Glass

I say he got off lightly.

[Anonymous Custard]

Contradiction in terms?

...because he wore a Google Glass headset...

The bloke, who wishes to remain anonymous...

Aren't those two points mutually exclusive?

[JimmyPage]

Is anyone surprised ?

Gosh, a story where laws intended to prevent "terrorism" are being misused.

This is so 2004.

(Waves across the pond) "Hello USA. Glad you could join us"

[Michael H.F. Wilkinson]

Overreaction indeed

They should simply have called the fashion police

Sorry, couldn't resist. I'll get me coat

No not the Armani one, the cheap one next to it please

[Anonymous Coward]

Dear America...

To all the Americans ranting here that this story is not true, that it simply could not be true: your ignorance and blinkered trust in your country are the very reasons this story is true.

You have not been watchful.

Hundreds of years ago you were gifted a hard-won and far-sighted constitution and bill of rights, but you are letting them rot. Perhaps you cannot fully comprehend their value. If you think the wars on Iraq and Afghanistan (et al) were the right things to do, that free healthcare is unamerican, that Snowden was a traitor, or that this story cannot be true, wake up and start asking questions. Waco. Ruby Ridge. Guantanamo. Bradley Manning. NSA.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Dear America...

You forgot 11/9 - you know the one where the US gov blew up their own buildings with cruise missiles and used a media conspiracy to create the illusion it was all done with aeroplanes.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Dear America...

So you're saying the US has the capability to hack flesh eyeballs, too? Recall that it was more than electronic eyes that witnessed the events, and especially in such a populous place as New York, enough of them were probably off the grid to not be subject to propaganda.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Dear America...

Perhaps you should do some more digging then, because there are plenty of eye-witness statements at the time that said it was either a small aircraft or missile (cruise missile has wings).

Not to be mistaken for a jet-liner I wouldn't have thought.

[Charles 9]

Re: Dear America...

A small aircraft or cruise missile with a 100-foot wingspan? Please... Plus if it HAD been a missile, you'd think they'd set up the warhead to explode such that it would cause an IMMEDIATE collapse (No Witnesses...) If the war hawks had wanted endless war, why not just set off a nuke on US soil and make everyone dump their pants? Ultimate nightmare scenario for anyone of age: Cold War turns Hot! Duck and Cover! You'd have the entire US in your pocket.

There are plenty MORE that corroborate with the news footage: not all of whom were American (and thus not subject to American laws--remember, the United Nations is in New York, not far from Ground Zero). Next ask, what happened to the passengers of the flights in question? It would be hard to "vanish" some 200 people without a trace unless things happened just as described.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Dear America...

Whatever. I suppose you also have a ready answer how the Beeb managed to announce the collapse of building 7 whilst it was still standing in the camera shot behind the presenter?

Like I said, you need to do some more digging - there is a lot of analysis of the public footage that makes a good case for a direct contradiction of the supposed facts.

I don't suppose you've seen the video of the missile strike that hit the pentagon that was leaked a few years back either? I don't know if that's fake or not, but it's so hard to tell these days isn't it?*

*Which is my point

[Crisp]

Meanwhile: Real terrorists proceed unmolested.

The american stazi have got an awful lot of free time on their hands if they can waste resources like this.

[Smarty Pants]

I am slightly confused

Are the MPAA (motion picture association of America) legally allowed to detain and question you, are they legally allowed to be involved with a Federal Investigators detention and questioning of you? Have they become some sort of paramilitary force able to arrest detain try/convict and sentence you? will they be responsible for your incarceration. will they run prisons? if they run prisons will you be able to watch movies whilst in prison? would they only be prison movies? 24/7 stir crazy / the green mile / brubaker / shawshank redemption, would that count as cruel and unusual?

do i need more or less coffee? answers on a beermat please

[Pascal Monett]

No, but ...

The MPAA is apparently allowed to whistle and Homeland Security will come a'runnin' to bitchslap the terrorist motherfucker who dares to attempt to bring prejudice to the Glorious Land of IP Protection.

It is not the MPAA that detained the bloke, it was DHS. The DHS has the right to detain anyone they just suspect has been talking to anyone they might feel needs a bit of detaining (like a journalist learned to his detriment a few weeks ago). And they bloody well have the right to ship you off to prison for terrorism if you sneeze too loud.

So keep your buttocks well clenched, citizens of The Land That Used To be Free. Otherwise, Homeland Security will probe you like the alien you might be.

Idle question : when will DHS agents wear jackboots ? It's about time they did, isn't it ?

[Gadgeteer]

" wearing a device that has the capability to record video is not appropriate at the movie theater...."

I would argue that not wearing glasses when you need them to see at the movie theater is inappropriate!

What next, arrest you for holding your phone in your hands because it has the capability to record video???

[Anonymous Coward]

Not for the video...

Most likely when the DHS begins to inspect the contents of mobile products, they will claim that the the citizen-owner is under suspicion of recording some form of copyrighted audio...such as the movie soundtrack. This would also work for any public event where audio recording is prohibited..

[Catweazle666]

Remarkable that a story about the possible pirating of intellectual property has degenerated into a competition to see who can slag off the USA most, isn't it?

Anybody would think the USA had never produced any of the technological benefits that the staggers-off were using to do the slagging, never mind the vast amount of other technological improvements the USA is responsible for. Mostly jealousy, I expect.

And to those who seem to believe that they have a right to invade other peoples' property and steal their possessions without any sort of retribution, well, I advise you not to try it in the more rural parts of the UK either, you would be astonished at the number of legally held rifles and shotguns about.

[Dylan Fahey]

Excuse me

Excuse me, did you say anything worth a fuck? No, I thought not.

[JaitcH]

What's next? Plod movie patrols?

Perhaps someone can explain the difference between a "police state" and the USA as it is today.

Notwithstanding the USA has a Constitution, this abuse continues. What will happen to UK moviegoers when ACPO thinks of another way to invade UK citizen (subject) privacy space?

Thank goodness I live in an 'authoritarian' country where the police only stir when they need a money top up and where downloading is free. Bittorrent and PirateBay rule!

Hell, we feel quite left out - we don't even have an NSA listening station (Cambodia and Thailand do).

[David 45]

Heavy-handed

Surprised he wasn't stood up against the nearest wall and summarily executed!

[noominy.noom]

I smell a rat. As f&%#@d up as the USA is today, it has not come to this. I live in the midwest and I simply do not believe that the DHS was involved in this. I do believe the man was questioned by some people, and I do believe the MPAA would stoop to absolutely anything. But I still think this story has some gross errors and/or exaggerations in it.

[ElReg!comments!Pierre]

Your sense of smell is way off

> I simply do not believe that the DHS was involved in this

Erm, despite them confirming they were? How are these rose-tinted glasses working for you?

[RobKC]

Perhaps if ICE was this prompt detaining illegal aliens (their main job)???

[Anonymous Coward]

From a Central Ohio resident

I live in Central Ohio, and it is very boring here. We have to justify spending millions of dollars for Homeland Security somehow, even if its just to use them as mall cops.

[Mike Unthertz]

Jack booted thugs protecting big Hollywood business

Wow, imagine that. Homeland security cannot stop an illegal alien from walking across the border in broad daylight, but they have time to drag citizens out of theaters, search them, detain them, violate their rights, threaten them, all in the name of protecting big dollar Hollywood..........

Shows who runs the country and what our tax dollars are used for.

For the record, if confronted by thugs, say "Am I under arrest" "May I go please", "Am I under arrest?" "May I go please?"............ and on and on. You DO NOT have to show identification!

Wake UP people. Are you lemmings? Sheeple? Pussified Wimps doing everything you are told to do?

[Sanctimonious Prick]

Re: Jack booted thugs protecting big Hollywood business

You DO NOT have to show identification!

Hate to pull you up on this one, but in my part of the world (and others - source; moofies), when asked for ID by any (damn, what's the word...) law enforcement agency (that's it), YOU HAVE TO provide ID.

[pete 22]

Wait a minute

Wait a minute. These guys couldn't do anything about some clown bombing the Boston Marathon, despite having the case handed to them. And yet they are at the theater in *seconds* to apprehend and grill an otherwise innocent man? Its obvious who has been bought and paid for.

BTW its also obvious that many people didn't read the article -- and if they did, the fail at reading comprehension. The man offered his glasses during interrogation, and none of the movie was found -- only some family pics. Aslo, the ICE/DHS/FBI absolutely does have jurdistiction -- however the way they went overboard for the MPAA is suspicious.

Under the law it absolutely is legal to make a personal copy for ones own private use al long as one has paid for/ has a license to the original BTW but that never stopped the MPAA. They want a nickel every time *anything* is viewed.

[Anonymous Coward]

???

How many people actually watch screeners and when did this become such a problem, that homeland security was given jurisdiction?

[Anonymous Coward]

Precedent-setting by the overseers...

Suspicion of copyright infringement is an excellent excuse to use, if one wishes to inspect the content of a random citizen's GGlass storage. If this particular citizen had indeed recorded a few snaps of the movie...opening credits, perhaps...then there would have existed sufficient "probable cause" for the DHS to obtain a warrant to search and perhaps take mirror images of all the disks in all of the computers in his home. In the UK, the thought police could also demand that the GGlass owner surrender passwords to any and all encrypted files. Not sure where 'merica stands on password rights, at present. It's just a matter of time until DHS minions can walk-up to any citizen in the presence of copyrighted visual or audible recordable material, and demand a copy of any electronic storage media that said citizen happens to have on his/her person. ("Do you haff your papers with you, old man?")

[JEDIDIAH]

Re: Precedent-setting by the overseers...

...as if I already didn't have plenty of reasons to stay out of the local movie theater.

[Dylan Fahey]

Re: Precedent-setting by the overseers...

You have nothing to fear from Zee JerMains !

[Mahou Saru]

For the price of a Google Glass...

I'm sure that they could have brought a decent hidden set up and a hearing loop recorder with change to spare!

[Roby]

It's only a matter of time before wearable cameras become commonplace and even undetectable, like in Charlie Brooker's Black Mirror. The MPAA etc. will need to adapt. The idea that a recording is worth something will only be eroded as time goes by.

[Sanctimonious Prick]

The MPAA etc. will need to adapt.

Err, rely on up to the minute updates on position location of Glasshole wearers from the NSA!

[Anonymous Coward]

If we really want to protect copyrights.....

What about mind wiping all movie goers with a massive dose of barbiturates so that they don't even remember seeing the movie in the first place. After all they commit a number of copyright infrigements for example, they could talk about it, they could write spoilers on facebook or in their blogs or - god forbid - they could criticize the movie ...

In fact such a mind wipe law would be doubly beneficial as no one would ever get bored of reruns !

~~ (Ooops did I just give an idea to the MPAA?) ~~

[Vic]

Re: If we really want to protect copyrights.....

> In fact such a mind wipe law would be doubly beneficial

It certainly would have been welcome after "The Counselor" the other day...

Vic.

[Charles 9]

Re: If we really want to protect copyrights.....

n fact such a mind wipe law would be doubly beneficial as no one would ever get bored of reruns !

Damn! The perfect business model. Exhibit entertainment then force everyone to forget the moment they leave! With the right ads you can make people see it again and again. Nearly guaranteed repeat business.

[Richard 32]

Looks like the Motion Picture Ass. of America has given yet another reason to skip the theatre and wait for Netflix. Why wait in line, pay $40+ for tickets and refreshments when you can pop it in your Queue and watch at your leisure.

[Dylan Fahey]

Am I being detained? Am I free to go, RINSE, REPEAT .

Am I being detained? Am I free to go, RINSE, REPEAT .

I hereby invoke and refuse to waive all of the following rights and

privileges afforded to me by the U.S. Constitution:

•

I invoke and refuse to waive my Fifth Amendment right to

remain silent. Do not ask me any questions.

•

I invoke and refuse to waive my Sixth Amendment right to an

attorney of my choice. Do not ask me any questions without my

attorney present.

•

I invoke and refuse to waive all privileges and rights pursuant

to the case Miranda v. Arizona. Do not ask me any questions or

make any comment to me about this decision.

•

I invoke and refuse to waive my Fourth Amendment right to be

free from unreasonable searches and seizures. I do not consent to

any search or seizure of myself, my home, or of any property in my

possession. Do not ask me about my ownership interest in any

property. I do not consent to this contact with you. If I am not

presently under arrest or under investigatory detention, please allow

me to leave.

•

Any statement I make, or alleged consent I give, in response

to your questions is hereby made under protest and under duress and

in submission to your claim of lawful authority to force me to provide

you with information.