Statutory Research Problem–Bootleg movies

Dave Watson purchased a dvd of an obscure horror movie, “Easter Bunny Death Squad”. He used a computer program to decrypt the content, which was encrypted using the Content Scrambling System. Then, he uploaded a copy to his blog, and invited readers to download the movie for free.

Janet Barker downloaded the movie from Watson’s blog, and made a DVD for her friend Alan Storm. Janet told Alan how she obtained the movie. Alan watched the movie in his living room with his mom and his sister.

Under Federal law, what civil or criminal penalties does Dave Watson face? What civil or criminal penalties does Alan Storm face?

Answer:

Dave Watson faces a civil suit for copyright infringement. 17 USC 501. He violated the copyright owner’s exclusive rights to reproduce and distribute the work. 17 USC 106. The copyright owner is possibly entitled to an injunction, monetary damages and costs and attorney fees. 17 USC 502-504.

Watson does not face criminal charges under 17 USC 506, because he did not commit the infringement for commercial advantage or private financial gain. (17 USC 101 definition of financial gain).

Watson committed a violation by circumventing technological measures. 17 USC 1201(a)(1). He faces a civil action under 17 USC 1203 for damages, injunction, cost and attorney fees. He does not face a criminal action under 17 USC 1204, because his actions were not for private financial gain. If it were a file sharing arrangement, he would have financial gain as defined by the statute.

Trademark or Counterfeiting laws? 15 USC 1114 – trademark, 18 USC 2320 – counterfeit – I don’t think these apply because it is not being passed off as an original

Ohio RC 2913.32 – Criminal Simulation – I don’t this applies because it is not being passed off as something it isn’t.

I could not find any federal statutes where Alan Storm would be liable for merely owning or watching an illegally copied dvd. There isn’t any evidence that he somehow encouraged or facilitated illegal downloading, so I don’t think vicarious copyright liability applies.

Not a violation of copyright law – see 17 USC 501, 506, 106

Realistically, prosecutors and copyright owners probably do not bother with people who merely receive and own an illegal copy.

I don’t think he could be guilty of receiving stolen property under ORC 2913.51 because what is the theft offense by which the property was obtained? Theft offense is as defined by 2913.01(K), includes criminal simulation, 2913.32, I criminal simulation does not apply. It is not straight theft 2913.02 because you are not depriving the owner of property or services.

------

Secondary sources --

  • Coming Attractions: Opportunities and Challenges in Thwarting Global Movie Piracy,Lucille M. Ponte, 45 Am. Bus. L.J. 331, Summer, 2008 ;
  • DIGITAL VIDEO COPYRIGHT PROTECTION WITH FILE-BASED CONTENT,Patrick Turner,16 Media L. & Pol'y 165Summer 2007
  • Nimmer on Copyright – CH 8, Ch 12A
  • Proof of Copyright Infringement by File Sharing 63 Am. Jur. Proof of Facts 3d 1