A girlfriend of one of my friends told me she was at a movie once and noticed someone with an 8mm camera taping it. They didn’t do anything about it. I probably wouldn’t have either, as the guy wouldn’t be bothering me and I would think that tape would look/sound like shit. I couldn’t imagine something like that selling on the street for much. Besides, most movies end up in the video store so fast that buying bootlegs seems really dumb.
But my older brother says he would have told the manager of the theater real quick. What would the right thing to do in this case?
I just can’t see a jiggly, crappy sounding 8mm copy of Royal Tannenbaums being worth making a big stink about. But is it?
What kind of violations of law/morals is small enough for the average guy to do something about? Should you call the highway patrol everytime you see someone drive 10 over on the highway? Should you tell the boss when you see a bartender give out a free drink? At what point should a person be squealing to authority?
As a general rule, only take action if there is due cause, you know it’s your responsibility, and you know you can make your case stick.
In this case, taking action is up to the people running the movie theatre, not you. And since the person concerned isn’t adversely affecting your enjoyment of the movie, don’t do anything.
All that is necessary for evil to thrive is that goo men do nothinig, or something like that.
You should have reported him to the theater manager. He was violating copyright laws. The standard of, “don’t get involved unless it’s harming you directly” is what leads people to shut their windows as Kitty genovese dies. Your example, fo course, is trivial in comparison. It is in small things that our ethics are tested.
The right thing to do would be to provide a clearer thread title. How about, “When should I report wrongdoing?”, or “Should I mind my own business or report 'em?”
I sure your hate to live in that world. We (and by that I mean the generally law-abiding average citizen) have much happier lives because sometimes people do good even though it isn’t their responsibility. I don’t know if I would have reported the guy or not, but just because something isn’t my responsibility doesn’t mean I should automatically dismiss it.
Yes! Our very way of life is dependent upon the actions of the Goo Men! Support the Goo Men, and encourage them to Do the Right Thing!
My general rule is to ignore victimless crimes, but report crimes in which there is a victim. In the case in the OP, there was a victim, so I would have reported it.
So let the manager be the one to take action. You can still inform him of what you saw, and then stay out of it.
By your own admission, you do not have the expertise to judge the ethics of copyright violations. But once the question has arisen, you can alert the manager, who (I hope) has read about such things in trade journals and the like. He is the one responsible for violations which occur in his theater, and it will be his judgement call to make. But he can’t make that call unless you let him know that there might be a problem.
Way back when, the studio would sell a print of their silm to the theater. The theater and the studio would split ticket sales. The theater got 90% and the studio got 10%.
Now the situation is reversed (Cite- it’s one of the Imponderables series. Could be When Do Fish Sleep?, or Why Do Clocks Run Clockwise?). The candy and popcorn cost so much because most of the theater’s money comes from the concession stands. Thus, people buying bootlegs instead of tickets will hurt the theater.
There was a clear crime being committed. There was a clear victim. Informing the managment would have required little effort and exposed the informant to no risk. Telling the managment was the right thing to do.
I’d tell the theater manager, and let him decide what to do. This is no different than me seeing a suspicious person snooping around a neighbor’s house and calling the police, IMO.
Who was the victim? One assumes that the videographer had paid to be adimitted, and that there would be no resale value of the video. Perhaps one might make something out of the possibility that he might not rent a video of the film at a later date, but at this point we’re getting rather silly.
Would I go out of my way to report a person for taking an action which might reduce the possibility of that same person later renting a video? No.
Actually, I occasionally record selections from CDs onto a cassette tape to play while I am skiing, so I suppose I should have myself arrested, but no, I don’t bother turning myself in either.
I suppose this means that I am causing the downfall of the record industry, the video industry, and western civilisation as a whole. So be it.
If so, then one assumes incorrectly. Bootleg videos are often produced in this manner and replicated for cheap VCD & CDROM sales that invariable hit the market long before the film is released to video.
The victims are the film studios, theaters, and video outlets who lose sales and customer flow as a result.
I wouldn’t report that, or most minor (IMO) crimes, but I am not sure where I would draw the line.
As a CCW (concealed weapon permit) holder, I am more concerned with when I should intervene with force to stop a crime. Not property crimes, as I could go to prison for that, but am I morally required to try to stop a robbery or mugging?
BTW, a bartender giving out free drinks is not breaking the law and is probably not disobeying his or her employer. Giving people, especially repeat customers, the occasional free drink encourages them to come to the establishment more often.
and the actors, writers and other people associated w/the actual film who would have gotten royalties, the manufacturers of the videos/DVDs etc.
(parenthetically, I hereby nominate this thread as one containing the funniest typo’s - thank you to all the goo men here. )
Assuming the fellow with the cam at the show is necessarily shooting for the purpose of mass distribution is one heck of a leap. Personal use (or even just curiosity) is far more probable.
I agree with the criteria: you shouldn’t take action without cause, obviously, or if it’s not your responsibility. But defining “due cause” and “your responsibility” are important.
So what constitutes “due cause?” Probably a good rule to follow would be whenever someone violates the rights of someone else. (Utilitarian ethicists, etc. might define this differently.) The bootlegged tape might or might not have been sold, but either way, it is in a sense “stolen” from the theater (or the film producers). Copyright violation, as pointed out, does (or at least potentially can) have a victim. That’s probably good enough for “due cause.”
As for “making your case stick,” that’s really up to the managers. Your responsibility–if you have one in this situation–isn’t to make sure the bootlegger is caught and convicted; it’s just to report what you’ve seen to the proper authority. You’re an informant, not law enforcement.
Whether or not it’s your responsibility is the sticky issue, IMO. I really don’t think it would be immoral to just leave and not say anything; after all, he’s not doing anything to you (inflation of ticket prices to compensate for bootlegging notwithstanding), so it’s essentially between him and the theater. However, as Spiritus Mundi pointed out, evil thrives on inaction. The bootleggers are counting on no one reporting them. So while you might not be morally required to report him, going the extra mile and doing so would be a morally praiseworthy thing to do.
Also, in a moral sense, there’s no reason not to inform the management. They might not care, or they might prosecute him to the full extent of the law–either way, all you’ve done is offer your take on what you saw, and whatever happens as a result of that is between the theater management and the bootlegger. Even if you think you might be wrong, or even if it turns out you are wrong, you can’t be blamed for anything because all you’ve done is offered the management your take on what you think might have happened. It’s their responsibility to take it from there. Whatever other reason you might have for not wanting to turn him in, you don’t have to worry about any moral implication for doing it.
Assuming that every mass-distributed bootleg equals lost dollars to the studios, actors, et al is a pretty large leap as well.
How many times has your purchase/download/viewing of a bootleg movie influenced your decision to go to the theater and view said same or possibly different movie?
Show of hands?
Anyone?
Anyone?
Bueller?
Didn’t think so.
Seriously though, I’m sure there are SOME dollars lost, however the ratio is far from 1:1…
I’ve heard that some of those bootlegs get sold in places like China. The quality would be too low for an American audience. The people buying these cheap bootlegs would be unlikely to spend the money on the official copy. The only “victim” if this crime is the movie studio that lost a few hypothetical cents. Screw them - they can afford it. Intellectual property laws suck.
- thank you to all the goo men here. )