The whole rigamarole started last year, when The Hurt Locker‘s producers first decided to go ahead with the landmark suit. Together with the US Copyright Group, Voltage sued 14,583 people, drawing comparisons to those fun RIAA anti-piracy lawsuits. The figure jumped to more than 24,000 earlier this year, and broke the record for most frivolous lawsuits filed in the process.
Now the suit is down to a little more than 2300 defendants, though some have been named in the case. It’s just unclear how many of the 24,000-plus torrenters settled out of court. Voltage is still carrying on with the case. Presumably because they’re sure they can suck more money out of it.
Andy
Sunday, October 2, 2011 at 10:17 AMI downloaded that. And I couldn’t sit through more than 1/3rd. The most boring movie I’ve ever seen. So I’d only pay 1/3rd then divide that by half given the extremely poor quality. Then divide that by 0.
GG
Sunday, October 2, 2011 at 10:21 AMyou are going to pay a hell of a lot of money if you are going to divide anything by 0,…. you’ll be paying of the US deficit that way lol.
jake
Sunday, October 2, 2011 at 11:48 AMsay its $1000 fine … pay 1/3… thats $333.33, then divide that by a half… 333.333/0.5 = 666.666, now divide by 0 = infinity. wow… math fail lol.
Tezz
Sunday, October 2, 2011 at 1:47 PMguess he really did love the movie.
Steve
Monday, October 3, 2011 at 1:22 PMHe never said he disliked it. Just that he enjoyed it so much he was getting a sensor overload and could not watch anymore.
DarthDVD
Sunday, October 2, 2011 at 8:44 PMwait.. if you devided anything by 0… wont the universe explode???
Drew
Monday, October 3, 2011 at 8:29 AMMaybe if it didn’t take them 9 months to release the movie outside the USA….. You know, people wouldn’t have to pirate it.
Crowknee
Monday, October 3, 2011 at 3:29 PMA company defends it’s intellectual property against proven illicit downloads and it’s labelled “frivolous”…
Downloaders should be ordered to pay the price of the article in their territory.
Suppliers should be ordered to pay the total of the cost of the article x the number of allowed downloads.
People need to wake up to these issues or we can start lamenting the reduction of releases due to declining investment.
Michael
Monday, October 3, 2011 at 6:15 PMIf said article had a better release time frame, and wasn’t leaked onto the internet to drum up opinion of the article, then where would the problem be? Maybe in the fact that the article was terrible and because of “word of mouth” on how terrible the craftmanship of the article was, people chose not to pay for it. Fact being, before the interwebs, people probably wouldn’t have gone and seen this movie anyway. I am the kind of person that judges books by their covers, and a name like Hurt Locker just doesn’t seem to pull me in. However I do like seeing lockers being punched. I just don’t think they can feel.
bazuden
Monday, October 3, 2011 at 10:02 PMThe Dark Knight was released in 2008, the same year as Hurt Locker. The Dark Knight was the most downloaded movie of 2008, and was also the highest grossing movie of 2008.
Piracy does not hurt quality movies.
Michael
Tuesday, October 4, 2011 at 3:30 AMI agree. I downloaded The Dark Knight, I ended up buying it on dvd. Good movies make money. I would have seen it at the cinemas had I been in a position to. You can’t beat a good movie on the big screen. Just don’t bitch when the seats are empty. If two people like it and they happen to be critics, it doesn’t mean everyone likes it.
Gage
Tuesday, October 4, 2011 at 12:28 PMI think a law suit against Voltage by all the people who paid to watch that boring piece of $h1t is more appropriate… they owe a lot of people their time and money back.