Arrest in Caridi FBI Investigation 482
skillio writes "The FBI arrested one Russell Sprague in Illinois on Thursday in connection with the previously reported Carmine Caridi dvd screener leak investigation. Given the FBI's figure of up to 60 screeners a year provided by Caridi, and Sprague's clearly sophisticated setup, one can't help but wonder if this will prove to be the main, if not sole, source of these dvd screener leaks. Caridi has yet to be charged, but after he's admitted to supplying Sprague with screeners for the last 3-5 years, I highly doubt his innocence will remain unchallenged for very long."
What's with the cop talk? (Score:5, Funny)
Why is it that cops always arrest one of somebody? It's not like raids on human clone factories are that common.
Re:What's with the cop talk? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:What's with the cop talk? (Score:5, Funny)
I am Russell Sprague, not this Russell Sprague (Score:4, Funny)
I've had this
Re:I am Russell Sprague, not this Russell Sprague (Score:3, Interesting)
My name is Robert Hansen. I was born in Iowa, not far away from a city called Estherville.
Know who the other famous Robert Hansen from Estherville, Iowa is?
AN ALASKAN SERIAL KILLER WHO MURDERED TWENTY-ODD HOOKERS.
I discovered this while dating an Alaskan. You ever seen the Seinfeld episode where Elaine is dating a guy named David Berkowitz? You ever sat there on the couch with your Alaskan girlfriend, watched this episode, and felt enormous sympathy pangs for both Elaine a
Re:What's with the cop talk? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:What's with the cop talk? (Score:4, Funny)
Lets see em try to raid me...
Re:What's with the cop talk? (Score:4, Informative)
All screeners? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:All screeners? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:All screeners? (Score:4, Informative)
They say this guy released 60 screeners a year. There are a lot more than that a year being uploaded to usenet. So, I'm sure this will only make it so that all distributors of pirated screeners in the future will just blur any identifying marks from the film.
Re:All screeners? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not that simple. The identifying marks are red herrings. The real identifying marks will be obscured. This is easy to do with modern computing technology. Since they're already making multiple copies, and duplication is the hard part, they can stick assorted different symbols/logos into portions of the movie where they will not be noticed. Even easier; Chop specific scenes down here and there by a second or two. If you're writing the mastering software it should be easy to drop MPEG frames off the end of a clip, alter the header, and create your image for burning without screwing anything up. It would also be fairly trivial to add in assorted sounds which are not found in the movie normally, or time-shift them, by overlaying them onto the audio track later. Studios typically have not done this to date because it is harder than not doing anything, but they will start doing it, because they can't just stop sending out screeners (though screeners will typically be sent to less and less people, I think - maybe we'll start seeing more workprints, which must hurt their bottom line less) but they still want to discourage copying.
blanking lines data? Re:All screeners? (Score:5, Informative)
this is, among other things, how Panasonic VCRs can automatically set their clocks when you switch them to the local PBS channel.
all you have to do is put a dupe serial number in that retrace bar's timespace, between the horizontal sync pulses, and you've tagged the tape with a unique number.
it's a little harder to blur these out, because you have to replace the information or you break picture sync, putting an ugly hook in the top of the picture.
ain't worth my time to chase it further, but bet on the serials being there... and if MPAA is truly paranoid and in league with the shadows, the name of the intended recipient of the screener. if they use some sort of argument like, "it takes a month to cut these tape copies," bet big on it.
Re:All screeners? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:All screeners? (Score:5, Funny)
Yes, this Caridi guy was the sole source. Guess you can stop looking! Right, everyone?
Thank you.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Thank you.... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:This should be insightful. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Thank you.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Thank you.... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Thank you.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Why are actors paid $50,000,000 for doing a film instead of, say, $50,000 or $200,000? It's just acting. It's not like they're risking their life or health.
Well, $50M is a bit of an exaggeration -- you're not going to find many (any?) examples of that high a figure -- but some actors do get paid a lot of money, even millions of dollars, to do a film, yes. Why so much? Because that's what the market is. They're paid that much because the studios are willing to pay that much, and the studios are willing to pay that much because the filmgoing public is willing to pay what it pays. That's what our priorities are.
I think we're at the start of a trend which will end up with people who work in industries where copying is a problem being paid less, and people who actually provide something useful to society, such as teachers, nurses, etc getting paid more.
That would be nice; but it's hard to imagine. As long as people value entertainment more than they do education, public safety, or public health, entertainment will be where the money goes. And as long as the main contributing factor to the success or failure of a movie continues to be perceived (rightly or wrongly) as its acting lineup or director, directors and acting talent will get big money. However, it's certainly possible that some of that money that would otherwise go to foleys, carpenters, sound editors, costume tailors, etc. (which for a typical movie is comparable to the money than the acting talent earns, simply because there's a lot more crew than actors) will be spent on anti-piracy crap instead, with the result that the foleys/carpenters/sound editors/costume tailors/etc. make less.
That's why (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Thank you.... (Score:3, Insightful)
This is kind of misleading. Watching a movie costs less than $10 a person. So yes, our priorities are such that we are occasionally willing to pay somewhere around $5/hour for entertainment. That's not to say that any individual values acting talent in the millions.
That being said, there may be
Re:Thank you.... (Score:3, Insightful)
This is kind of misleading. Watching a movie costs less than $10 a person. So yes, our priorities are such that we are occasionally willing to pay somewhere around $5/hour for entertainment. That's not to say that any individual values acting talent in the millions.
I don't think it's misleading. The issue isn't that we value acting talent in the millions, but rather that we value it more than just about anything else. We're willing, as you say, to give that $10 to go see a single movie; but we're not
Re:Thank you.... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Thank you.... (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, if you include profit sharing (for the big name actors) then the numbers go way up. Take for example Tom Cruise, who has a profit sharing clause in his contracts. For Mission Impossible 2 he got a salary of about $25M and his share of the profit was around $75M.
And also thank you... (Score:5, Insightful)
Thank you to all the people I've mugged in alleys over the years for saving me thousands of dollars on cars, motorcycles, clothes, drugs, jewelry, and dinner with friends/family for providing the worthless crap that our materialistic society demands we consume.
I am a victim of a society gone rotten!
Re:Thank you.... (Score:2)
In the case of movies, I learned early on that very few movies were worth my (then) $10 in ticket and concession stand charges. Lack of decent content has kept me from renting. My DVD collection is mostly cartoons and anime.
Call me crazy... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Call me crazy... (Score:2)
Re:Call me crazy... (Score:4, Informative)
From the article: "The search of Sprague's residence Thursday turned up DVD copies of 11 films...
According to the FBI, Sprague admitted receiving screeners from Caridi and said that he used the software program Copy Guard Breaker to copy the VHS tapes to DVD and then returned the original VHS tapes and two VHS copies of each to Caridi.
Sprague said that he'd made as many as six duplicate copies of each DVD and distributed them to family and friends. He supplied copies to another friend in exchange for using a FedEx shipping account, the FBI said."
"Copy Guard Breaker"? (Score:2)
Re:Call me crazy... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Call me crazy... (Score:2, Informative)
An FBI search of Caridi's home resulted in the seizure of 36 original Academy VHS screener tapes and two DVD screeners. Caridi also told the FBI of eight other screeners he had received which were at another location, where agents subsequently picked them up.
The search of Sprague's residence Thursday turned up DVD copies of 11 films -- ranging from "Samurai," "Calendar" and "Mystic" to "X2: X-Men United" and "Cold Mountain"
emphasis mine.
Where are they? (Score:5, Funny)
We have a right to examine the evidence, right?
Re:Where are they? (Score:2, Informative)
sole source? (Score:5, Insightful)
If it were I'd kinda except all releases to have comen from the same group as well.
well, it's hardly likely that it will change anything. they might scapegoat him for all the huge losses of entertainment industry that they've invented with a random number generator though.
and you know what? sometimes the retail dvd is out in usa before the movie hits the big screen here in Finland. with phasing like that who needs screeners?
Re:sole source? (Score:3, Informative)
When I lived in Los Angeles, I was about as unconnected from the entertainment industry as you can get, being a molecular biologist for a living. (OK, I had an agent. And worked as an extra a couple of times. But everyone in LA has an agent from the mayor to the guy selling oranges on the freeway ramp.)
Anyway, even I routinely had access to Academy screening videos. Those things were everywhere. I can't imagine there's any s
Re:sole source? (Score:3, Informative)
At the very least, I expect they'll make an example of him which should have a very strong deterrent effect. Lend your screeners to the wrong person, and bam, you're out of the academy and on a lot of informal blacklists.
also covered on cnn.com (Score:5, Funny)
Re:also covered on cnn.com (Score:5, Insightful)
There's also this choice bit:
Among the movies being illegally sold off the Internet: "Master and Commander," "Last Samurai," "Matrix Revolutions," "Mystic River," "Gods and Generals," "Mighty Wind," "Matchstick Men," "Something's Gotta Give," "Love Actually," "Thirteen" and "Calendar Girls."
There is no evidencd he "sold" anything to anybody. Fuck CNN, they have no respectability anymore.
Re:also covered on cnn.com (Score:3, Informative)
Fuck CNN, they have no respectability anymore.
I lost all respect for CNN when they actually proposed it may be possible to clone Elvis [cnn.com] from a lock of his hair. That would be impossible because there is nothing but mitochondrial DNA in hair. The slightest bit of fact checking would have told them this much. Yet they ran it as a story and in the text gutter along the bottom of their newscast as a genuine possibility.
In regard to the current topic, perhaps it was someone's personal pipe dream to clone
Re:also covered on cnn.com (Score:4, Interesting)
"David makes movies"
"Alls I wants ta do is the bests jobs I cans"
Re:also covered on cnn.com (Score:5, Funny)
"David Goldstein makes movies" Like that makes me care more. Does anyone have a copy of that so I can download it and put it in front of the DivXs I download. I do want the full theatre experience.
Better yet, anyone wanna make a new one with me? I have a few ideas for some...
"John Smith pirates movies"
"Yeah - I uh, met my wife on IRC while downloading 'Lord of the Rings'. She was dressed up as Arwin when we met. I knew it was love then."
Y'know - it could be like those Apple switch ads.
Don't burn him (Score:5, Insightful)
I can't really believe that Caridi really knew that his screeners were being uploaded to the Internet. He's an older guy, I wonder if he's even familiar with the Internet, much less file-sharing. Anyways, if they were guilty wouldn't he let this other guy know, so he could get rid of the evidence before the feds showed up?
It's pretty safe to say he won't be voting for the Academy Awards anymore.
Re:Don't burn him (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Don't burn him (Score:2)
While not a term usually employed by the legal community, I think "criminally stupid" might be a better description.
Re:Don't burn him (Score:2)
At long last ... (Score:2, Funny)
Ok folks... (Score:2)
You heard it here first.
seinfeld (Score:2, Funny)
George: I'm a bootlegger.
Anna: You're a what?
George: I'm bootleggin' a movie, baby!
Anna: Isn't that illegal?
George: I can do hard time for this one. And community service!
Jerry: I don't care about Brody. I was up on 96th Street today, there was a kid couldn't have been more than ten years old. He was asking a street vendor if he had any other bootlegs as good as Death Blow. That's who I care about. The little ki
Caridi won't get time (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't know, seems to me that Caridi flipped and gave the cops the man they really wanted. I'll bet you they'll be some fines, community service, etc., but I doubt he's going to prison. Sprague is going to be sent up for a long time though.
What did Caridi get out of the arrangement? He denies receiving money, and says he just thought Sprague was a film buff. I wonder if all Caridi ever got from Sprague was praise and adoration: "I've always *loved* your work."
So is an apology coming from the industry? (Score:5, Insightful)
I Feel Safer Already (Score:5, Funny)
FBI Agent 1: Hey, I've got some evidence here that a massive terrorist attack is going to take place at...
FBI Agent 2: Not now! We've got to stop those damn dirty stinkin' hippie copyright infringers! To the FBImobile!
They will both serve lengthy prision terms (Score:5, Interesting)
Sprague (charged):
1) criminal copyright infringement, and
2) illegal interception of a satellite signal
Caridi (may be charged):
1) contributory copyright infringement
While I'm no fan of breaking copyright law (or any law for that matter), what pisses me off is that these two will be sentenced to terms longer than Bill Janklow (R,SD) [excite.com]. That fucker will get 100 days for killing someone AND his record will be expunged.
No wonder people have no faith in the judicial system.
Re:They will both serve lengthy prision terms (Score:4, Funny)
Stickler for the law (Score:2)
Wonder how they knew it was reconfigured for pirating satellite reception without seizing it or at least turning on the tv. Last time I checked warrant is only for the crime that it was issued to, pulling out the card or turning on the tv don't fall in scope with a warrant to search
Re:Stickler for the law (Score:2, Interesting)
Hey! FBI! (Score:5, Funny)
And see if you can get back my VCR and tape collection from the guy who burglarized my house.
Well this is certainly odd... (Score:5, Interesting)
Makes ya wonder tho, after all the commercials geared to make the American public feel guilt for pirating movies, how will the MPAA and such be taken seriously now that its been pretty much proven that one of their own is responsible for HUNDREDS of movie screeners getting out into the wild?
That would be like one of the RIAA people being found trading CDs on P2P networks in his off hours...
You really should seperate the RIAA and MPAA (Score:2)
Re:Well this is certainly odd... (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually, some record industry guys were merrily quoting from an independent report a few months back, and when the author of the report asked where they'd read it (as not many copies had been purchased), they went a bit red and admitted they'd been emailing copies of it to each other.
If they don't respect copyrights themselves, they really ought to realise why the general public don't seem to do so either.
it was a nice run- while it lasted (Score:3, Insightful)
I often wonder, the commodization of computers made the pricepoint go down.. who pays 3k for a computer any more? no one..
ever watch the original 'blob'? one great scene, where the kids are pulled out of the movie house by the local law enforcement.. they complain "ok sherrif, you've got out eighty cents"-- movies were a dime.. and until my adulthood, so were phone calls.. think about it.. movies and payphone calls were the same price at one point in time. and payphones held level for DECADES
could not the widespread of free movies have forced the studios to re-normalize (read, de-gouge) to a point where the value was obvious?
instead of selling popcorn/candy/soda/food at a huge markup, and forbidding bringing it in from outside.. charge enough of a price that precludes anyone from wanting to bring it in from outside.
instead of selling 10-20 bags at 1$ profit, sell 100-200 bags at 20 cents profit
The accused. (Score:5, Informative)
So it's bad for BIG BIZ to steal, only little guy (Score:3, Flamebait)
But average /.ers still think its hunky dory to go out to the net and download it. Everybody wants something for free, doesn't matter what it is.
We can all go on and on about the evils of big business, how all they want to do is rip us off. But most people also think that the rules that apply to us "little people" such as honesty and integrity should apply to Big Biz as well, no double standards. So why do most here still think it's OK to steal music and movies?
Re:So it's bad for BIG BIZ to steal, only little g (Score:4, Interesting)
Things you shouldn't do (again i'm speaking under some geek "we" umbrella):
oh, wait...
I'm very much of the belief that good movies are worth watching more than once, BTW.
Re:So it's bad for BIG BIZ to steal, only little g (Score:5, Interesting)
The settlement dictates that if you bought one CD, cassete, or album from a member of the RIAA between January 1, 1995, through December 22, 2000, you are entitled to 20 bucks. Max.
If you bought 300 CDs, you would get 20 bucks. Max.
If you bought a CD every day for those five years - 20 dollars. Max.
Please note, the RIAA admits to no wrongdoing. If the total to each claimant is less than 5 dollars, it all goes to charity. (And becomes a tax write off?)
You're right! I don't want 'double standards'. If I do something wrong, like infringe copyright - I want to settle for a fraction of the money a make each year, and admit no wrongdoing.
Just like the 'Big Biz'.
Why do you think it's so hard to justify? With the number of entities trying to screw me over on a daily basis, then 'admitting no wrongdoing' (catchphrase of the 21 century), I have a hard time caring about anything that 'hurts' big business.
Arresting the Criminals (Score:5, Insightful)
FBI has no business (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes I realize that recent laws have allowed this, but that doest make it right.
At this point the feds can go after anything they want, for any reason. regardless of how severe it isnt.
Re:FBI has no business (Score:3, Interesting)
You can check out the FBI's updated priorities here [fbi.gov]. I too don't see how the FBI got mixed up with movies. Maybe its just advertising, because the most I hear/see from the FBI on a regular basis is at the beginning of DVDs where the FBI warns me to be good with the content of the disc.
But hey, if the FBI is this aggressive for movie copyright violators, then terrorists,
Will this mark a change? (Score:4, Insightful)
However, because this year the screeners carried invisible markings for the first time, the studios were able to identify the Academy member for whom they had been intended.
If everyone who gets a copy of movies knows that they're traceable, wont this seriously cut back the amount of people willing to get screeners onto the internet? I know if I was given screeners and occaisionally leaked them, i'd stop right now (at least until I found out what these "invsible markings" were, and how to remove them)
Re:Will this mark a change? (Score:2, Interesting)
As I recall, Normally, they get two seperate copy's of a movie, and compare them, to find out whats different, then remove it from both copys.
or something, Y'know.
Re:Will this mark a change? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Will this mark a change? (Score:3, Interesting)
Good thing criminals are idiots (Score:5, Insightful)
If I'm doing something like he was and my "supplier" gets busted, everything I have is going bye bye. You still might get busted, but they're going to have a hell of a lot harder time prosecuting you if they don't have that stuff as evidence.
How is "interception" illegal? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:How is "interception" illegal? (Score:3, Insightful)
No. And if your neighbors might be wondering the same thing, I suggest you don't buy a cordless phone. Or a cell phone.
Mysterious Uploading (Score:5, Funny)
"The FBI affidavit does not explain how the films were uploaded to the Internet."
The FBI understands how the screeners were distributed and then illegally copied using elaborate equipment. As for how that digital information made it on to the interweb, they are still researching the possibilities. Their suspicions include the use of some kind of Computing Machine.
Double Standards (Score:5, Insightful)
People are complaining about wording in the article or from quotes (people suggesting they "stole" something). Does it really matter? Does the description of the act to a news reporter change the crime? If I describe a murderer's act as "He hurt the victims...", does that change the fact that the murderer committed the crime?
And for everyone complaining about how the big bad MPAA is going after people for these "littie" crimes. Remember, they are using the same laws that protect the Linux Kernel. When the community goes after a company that doesn't provide the source code they use, and don't follow the GPL, it's basically the same damn thing. We have rights they agreed to, and we expect them to act accordingly.
I mean, seriously, by suggesting that the MPAA shouldn't be going after these guys is tantamount to suggesting that the laws should be different for big companies and small companies.
Regardless of the current state of the laws in the country, that's just wrong. If these guys did commit crimes, nuff said. They should be punished.
Saying that they shouldn't be punished for committing a crime is just wrong.
Re:Double Standards (Score:3, Interesting)
Also I don't think you are correct in your assertion that the same laws are protecting the linux kernel, the laws being used here are criminal law
He should just kill someone (Score:4, Insightful)
I also like how the MPAA (and RIAA, for that matter) determines their statistics for stolen movies/songs. If you have a movie on your computer, thats money that the MPAA lost. But in reality, most likely you would never spend a penny on that movie anyway.
Stupid MPAA
summary of charges (Score:5, Interesting)
Sprague said that he'd made as many as six duplicate copies of each DVD and distributed them to family and friends. He supplied copies to another friend in exchange for using a FedEx shipping account, the FBI said.
The FBI affidavit does not explain how the films were uploaded to the Internet.
So they found the "source," and it was really Caridi, not Sprague. Caridi was getting "keeper" copies of all of the movies, so who cares that Sprague was making the dupes? Sprague was just the guy that had the equipment and expertise to do it, with a few buddies on the side. He didn't seem to have financial motive. One of his "friends" was kind enough to rip and upload his backroom work for him. Sprague's a hacker but now he faces three years for someone else uploading his hack.
Sprague's a pirate, no question. What he did was wrong. But three years of Federal-Pound-Me-In-The-Ass-Prison for copying movies? (It's probably be low security, but still...) Caridi is the violator and should be held liable for the movie piracy, especially after the agreement he signed.
Separately, DirecTV filed a civil lawsuit against Sprague in May over his alleged theft of its satellite signal. In 2002, Sprague had been named, along with hundreds of other suspects, in a massive crackdown on equipment that can be used to reprogram satellite television access cards, a method by which pirates illegally get programming for free. Paying customers are issued personally encoded cards with their subscription.
Sprague stole satellite TV and made cards for others to do it also... yes the whole debate about "you can't steal signals that reach everyone" will rage on, but there's no question they were defrauding DirecTV. On the other hand, that carries a potential five year prison term, is that appropriate for a first offense?
federal pound me in the ass prison (Score:3, Informative)
Maybe the sole source for one group (Score:3, Insightful)
The movies mentioned in the article (Score:4, Interesting)
Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World *SCREENER* - OBUS
The Last Samurai (2003) *SCREENER* - OBUS
Mystic River (2003) *SCREENER* - OBUS
Calendar Girls (2003) *LIMITED* *SCREENER* - OBUS
Thirteen (2003) *LIMITED* *SCREENER* - OBUS
Check the nfo of Thirteen [nforce.nl] for a nice description of how they recruit people.
"Do you have connections within the academy network and can you obtain academy screeners/dvd screeners during oscar season. then contact us asap."
Oh, and if any feds are reading this: Even though Cokine is the only "name" of an actual person in the nfo, it does not mean he is affiliated with the group. He is just another starving ascii artist, taking requests over IRC.
Re:Great. (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Great. (Score:2, Interesting)
Sprague will, no doubt, see some jail time, but he's just as likely to plea bargain his time down if he can provide the Feds and the MPAA with any more names or information.
Caridi, however... let's see, career ruined, good name ruined... sure, they could throw him in jail, but if he sticks to his sto
Re:Great. (Score:3, Insightful)
So it's not okay for me to disagree with a law, or the harshness of the punishment for it?
Sorry, I thought I was supposed to never question anything.
Re:Great. (Score:2)
Re:Great. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's in there but... (Score:2)
Re:Great. (Score:2)
Can you please direct me to where it says I'm not allowed to disagree with a law, or the punishments associated with it?
I suppose you think it would be justice to throw somebody in prison, most likely for the remainder of his life, because he allowed people to see a movie screener? You're a barbarian.
Re:Great. (Score:2)
So I take it you support companies taking the Linux kernel, and then using it, and NOT following the GPL? I mean, if you agree with that, then fine. I am sure you are also okay with companies that say they won't sell or distribute your private information, and then do so anyways without fear of punishment.
I am sure you are
Re:Great. (Score:2)
Re:Great. (Score:2)
What the fuck are you talking about? I've never downloaded a movie. This isn't about me, as you seem to think. Continue making your stupid assumptions. One day they'll get you in hot water.
You just can't imagine how a person who doesn't pirate movies on the Internet could possibly have an opinion on this matter, huh?
Re:Great. (Score:2)
It has nothing to do with immunity or the consitution, it has to do with the principles of justice though.
What was the reason we put people in jail, again?
Oh yeah, to protect society and to punish criminals.
Let's see.. is this 70-year-old a danger to society? Hardly. Will he commit the same crime again? I doubt it.
Punishment, then? Well.. putting the guy in jail for any extended period is more or
Re:Great. (Score:2)
Re:Great. (Score:4, Insightful)
You don't spend a word on explaining HOW it is wrong, or what the correct reasons are?
That makes no sense. This is a democracy, the 'common' perception of why the government does things IS the reason why the government does things.
Re:Great. (Score:2)
Re:contradiction (Score:3, Insightful)