Subject: more on How the MPAA killed the movie theater experience: a first-hand report [ip]
Begin forwarded message:
From: Bob Frankston <Bob2firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: November 5, 2005 5:58:01 PM EST
To: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
Subject: RE: How the MPAA killed the movie theater experience: a first-hand report [ip]
What is the legal status of banning personal computing devices which might
be vital for safety or for dealing with disabilities?
The personal connected devices can also be vital for monitoring others. In
the days of two-paging I remember getting the message "The babysitter fell
asleep -- what should I do". Of course I don't turn off my devices -- I
just change the notification to vibrate and can use messaging (assuming the
screen isn't too bright).
As with the Sony's home (PC) invasion -- we have people traipsing all over
acting as if they own the place and only their needs matter or are even
Well, it could be worse -- they could ban you from leaving the theater with
any memory of your experience.
Begin forwarded message:
From: Patrick Pittman <email@example.com> Date: November 5, 2005 9:50:34 AM EST To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: Re: How the MPAA killed the movie theater experience: a first-hand report [ip]
This is nothing new -- I've been reviewing films down here in Australia for ten years or so, and I first sighted the metal detectors somewhere round about 2000. The "put your phone in a bag and get it at the end" trick has been running for about two years, annoying the hell out of all of us would-be pirates that want to rebroadcast new releases via our half megapixel phonecam. When challenged as to what _purpose_ this serves, no security guy or film company rep has ever given me a useful answer. I've taken to leaving my phone at home to save the trouble and arguments.
The night-vision goggles first appeared, if memory serves, at a preview of X-Men 2. Every so often, a PR hack from the film company will explain to us the importance of these searches, as piracy is affecting all of us. Of course, at the bottom of all screening passes now, there's boilerplate about how the companies take piracy seriously, and so should I, and my agreeing to watch the film is subject to search, etc, etc.
In the last year or so, I've noticed the searches at most films becoming a bit more lax - a half-hearted wave of the detector in your general direction, a bit of a squeeze of your bag like they're checking for freshness, and then a stern look when they realise you have a phone. And I have to say, I've noticed pretty much zero correlation between the heaviness of preview screening security and the amount of time it takes for a film to show up on bittorrent. But _you_ try telling a security guard about 10 times more bulky than yourself that the film he's guarding is already up on the net anyway, so all of this is pointless..
------------------------------------------- \\ Patrick Pittman \\ Freelance Writer / Broadcaster e \ email@example.com w \ journals.concrete.org.au/patrick
On 05/11/2005, at 9:15 PM, David Farber wrote:
------------------------------------- You are subscribed as BobIP@Bobf.Frankston.com To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting- people/
------------------------------------- You are subscribed as firstname.lastname@example.org To manage your subscription, go to http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
Powered by eList eXpress LLC