Hurt Locker pirates in for a world of legal hurt

Cinematic success story The Hurt Locker was popular long before it won an Oscar for Best Picture and before its director won the first Best Director Oscar for a female director. In fact, it was popular before it was released. A screener copy of the movie was leaked through bitorrent sites three months before its theatrical release, and the downloads only grew once its critical acclaim became well known. Since the Academy Awards ceremony, it has been downloaded three million times. Nevertheless, even with the numerous awards, nominations, and accolades, box office numbers remained low ($16.4 million).

TorrentFreak reports that the makers of the film will attempt to recoup the lost revenue by suing a large number of users who illegally downloaded the movie. They have reportedly hired the U.S. Copyright Group to take legal action against many of the copyright abusers.

The U.S. Copyright Group has used similar tactics in the past against smaller indie film piracy. They request IP addresses from ISPs to identify culprits, and they demand that they pay up for the downloaded content. In the vast majority of cases, the users settled and paid for the content. The makers of the content recoup their losses from piracy, but they only make 30% off each settlement. The U.S. copyright group keeps the other 70%. Thomas Dunlap, a lawyer with the U.S. Copyright Group said that 75% of ISPs have already cooperated with them in giving up identifying information.

The exact numbers of the litigation is as of yet unknown, but Dunlap said this: "You can guess that relative to the films we've pursued already, the order of magnitude is much higher with Hurt Locker." The lawsuit is expected to go into effect this week.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Microsoft and Verizon defend Kin

Next Story

Create iPhone, iPad and Android apps over the web

85 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I read in a few other articles that people who have been sued for other movies
were levied a $2500.00 judgment they paid that amount because they got a letter
with that amount too be paid or other actions would be taken like property paychecks and the
such would be attached . That's two thousand five hundred dollars and there were over 50,000 people in total involving ten movies

Yes, so the excuse for stealing is that it was crap. I guess it is entirely logical. I mean, I only heard it from everyone is crap, but hey I want to see it still.

I love all the US-based pro-pirates for movies. For $20 a month you can rent any movie you want on Netflix. It's about as cheap as it gets. Don't want to buy a movie? Rent it. Join a rental club if you hate Netflix. There really isn't an excuse when it comes to movies.

Solid Knight said,
I love all the US-based pro-pirates for movies. For $20 a month you can rent any movie you want on Netflix. It's about as cheap as it gets. Don't want to buy a movie? Rent it. Join a rental club if you hate Netflix. There really isn't an excuse when it comes to movies.

I don't know how netflix works, but the studios **** off legitimate customers with all the crap they put on a dvd. I mean, a pirate will get a "clean copy". Just hit play and you done, whereas a legitimate customer has to sit through all the legal, and unskippable stuff!

The Gunslinger said,

I don't know how netflix works, but the studios **** off legitimate customers with all the crap they put on a dvd. I mean, a pirate will get a "clean copy". Just hit play and you done, whereas a legitimate customer has to sit through all the legal, and unskippable stuff!

Oh cool, because some DVDs have unskippable previews (which you can skip with some software) you can just pirate whatever you want? Awesome. I hate all those unskippable lines at Universal Studios, so I guess I can sneak into the park without paying.

A movie leaking 3months before release is pretty rare and is a separate issue from online file sharing.

I'd be happy to pay up, say the cost of a new-release rental, for a movie I downloaded and actually enjoyed.
The moment movie studios introduce an efficient NON-GEO RESTRICTED online movie delivery service, they may start actually making some money from some of the people they currently call thieves.

I felt a bit bad about paying the $3 I did to see it at the cheap seats. It's hard to walk out on a film you didn't come alone to.

yup, only matters once the movies famous then it matters. *rollseyes*

If they can just get ip addresses then wack them with a bill why can't average user just randomly select house numbers and give them a bill for stuff.

LOL'd at the comments....

I think a friend brought it over to my house on their external drive...so I guess I'm good to go...pays to have friends that surf underground places...lol ps. it never came to the cinema in my area either.

Do what normal pirates do, get an atheros wifi card and learn how to use airsnort and and aircrack and sit and wait for a WPA/WPA2 router to communicate with a client and capture and crack their password and let your neighbours take the heat while you sit pretty a couple doors down, you could do this multiple times in your neighbourhood and spread the downloading out, makes things less easier to trace

Sigh, i can't even express how retarded they are by doing this. How many of the people do you think went to the cinema to actually enjoy the movie in GOOD quality after seeing a ****ty screener?

I just can't believe this:
" the U.S. Copyright Group said that 75% of ISPs have already cooperated with them in giving up identifying information."
!!!!
how is this possible?! The ISP's are giving a service to their customers! The customers may do what they want with that service! It is like your mobile phone operator is allowed to give the content of your text messages to a third party organisation...!?
I'm not going to say downloading copyrighted files is allowed, but this is not the right way to punish the downloaders! It is just not fair!

TrOjAn. said,
I just can't believe this:
" the U.S. Copyright Group said that 75% of ISPs have already cooperated with them in giving up identifying information."
!!!!
how is this possible?! The ISP's are giving a service to their customers! The customers may do what they want with that service! It is like your mobile phone operator is allowed to give the content of your text messages to a third party organisation...!?
I'm not going to say downloading copyrighted files is allowed, but this is not the right way to punish the downloaders! It is just not fair!

I wonder if i will get in trouble, i downloaded 1% of the movie and then lost interest, did not open it or upload any (as far as i could tell), and i'm curious how far this will actually go.

Ruran said,

I wonder if i will get in trouble, i downloaded 1% of the movie and then lost interest, did not open it or upload any (as far as i could tell), and i'm curious how far this will actually go.


LOL 1 % ?? probably....I wonder if they check to see that the torrent downloaders actually got the whole download 100% before deciding ok let's contact them.

TrOjAn. said,
I just can't believe this:
" the U.S. Copyright Group said that 75% of ISPs have already cooperated with them in giving up identifying information."
!!!!
how is this possible?! The ISP's are giving a service to their customers! The customers may do what they want with that service! It is like your mobile phone operator is allowed to give the content of your text messages to a third party organisation...!?
I'm not going to say downloading copyrighted files is allowed, but this is not the right way to punish the downloaders! It is just not fair!

Have you read your TOS? I've never read one that allowed you to use your service for anything illegal.

DavidM said,

Have you read your TOS? I've never read one that allowed you to use your service for anything illegal.

Filesharing is not illegal.

I don't recall The Hurt Locker to be avalaible in theater here. That might explain the low box office numbers.

Night Prowler said,
What about these guys with dynamic IP's. How do they think they are going to track them?

Woops, time to hit refresh on my router

ISPs keep a log of who was allocated any IP at a given timeframe. They send the IP and Time/Date to the ISP, and they get your details.

Night Prowler said,
What about these guys with dynamic IP's. How do they think they are going to track them?

Woops, time to hit refresh on my router

ISPs keep logs of who is assigned which IP at any particular time, it isn't hard for them to find and give that information to the entities that request it.

ZakO said,
ISPs keep a log of who was allocated any IP at a given timeframe. They send the IP and Time/Date to the ISP, and they get your details.

Good thing they passed a law in Germany, where ISP's are no longer forced to keep those logs.

Odom said,

Good thing they passed a law in Germany, where ISP's are no longer forced to keep those logs.

Interesting, but what about keeping the information for law enforcement purposes?

The ONLY thing that movie had going for it was the 2 Explosions One in the middle and one at the end. Great to listen to when you crank up the surround sound.

This movie was only released in a small number of theaters across the US, I did rent the movie when it was released and I really enjoyed the movie and I am trying to get my hands on a blu-ray copy for a reasonable price. I know the movie was not "Saving Private Ryan" but it was still a great movie about what those troops do in those kind of situations and from what I have read it's almost 100% accurate to real life. You can't beat filming the movie 10 miles from the Iraq boarder.

As far as them suing people for downloading it, waste of time....

in other news, people who actually paid to see the movie are suing the studio for their money and time back.......

neufuse said,
in other news, people who actually paid to see the movie are suing the studio for their money and time back.......
It was an average movie at best. All the hype for the Oscars and even nominating the lead guy for best actor is not justified. I watch it not expecting a lot but it was a total disappointment.

I guess is just that they wanted to give the Best director award to a woman. The low revenue is not because of piracy, it is because people spread the word about it being just a decent movie, not a great one as the critics and media would like you to think.

Here is a bomb, I shall disarm it - few seconds left *tense moment* - *bomb disarmed*
Here is another bomb, I shall disarm it - few seconds left *tense moment* - *bomb disarmed*

Etc...
Greeeeeat movie...*cough*

ajua said,
It was an average movie at best. All the hype for the Oscars and even nominating the lead guy for best actor is not justified. I watch it not expecting a lot but it was a total disappointment.

I guess is just that they wanted to give the Best director award to a woman. The low revenue is not because of piracy, it is because people spread the word about it being just a decent movie, not a great one as the critics and media would like you to think.

i wouldn't even call it decent. that movie was multiple levels of pure fail imo.

neufuse said,
in other news, people who actually paid to see the movie are suing the studio for their money and time back.......

LOL, I havent watched the movie myself, and haven't heard anyhting positive, except that it won a couple of oscars.

Maybe not make a crappy movie, and you would have profited!

I dont see how they hope to recoup their costs by suing. They should rather focus on providing a good dvd/blu-ray experience.

Edited by The Gunslinger, May 13 2010, 8:53am : On topic...

most indie film makers love the exposure from .torrenting. most indie films are available in only small markets or film festivals. at least that's what i've heard from reading the newspaper articles about film festivals.
films that do well at the box office do so despite piracy. imho piracy has very little impact on box office or dvd/blu ray sales.
i also have to wonder what regions those .torrent downloads come from, and the availability of this particular movie in those regions.

I'm also curious how they will go about finding those who did download it. Also - what do they consider a "download", could they sue all the 1% people along with all the 100%-ers? If so i imagine this will be quite a large lawsuit.

Internetist said,
It truly wasn't worth watching. Is there going to be countersuits about the price ?

Countersuit: I wasted 2 hours watching this illegally pirated piece of crap movie, please pay me for the painful experience.

(No, I actually rented it, I'm not a pirate)

c3ntury said,
LOL. I love how all the pirate post here how crap it truly was :')

Because the only way to watch it is by pirating and not buying it?

Seriously, where did you see such comments.

itsthenewDC said,
Can't recoup lost revenue that wasn't lost or going to happen in the first place

But it was because the movie was pirated. The movie was acquired without purchase so it is a [u]lost sale[/u]. Economics 101.

C_Guy said,

But it was because the movie was pirated. The movie was acquired without purchase so it is a [u]lost sale[/u]. Economics 101.

Thats assuming that the pirater would have purchased or went to see the movie in the first place.

C_Guy said,

But it was because the movie was pirated. The movie was acquired without purchase so it is a [u]lost sale[/u]. Economics 101.

No, no it isn't.

xfosx said,
Thats assuming that the pirater would have purchased or went to see the movie in the first place.

Pirates obviously have an interest in watching the movie otherwise they wouldn't have bothered to download it.

Edited by Solid Knight, May 13 2010, 7:26am :

xfosx said,

Thats assuming that the pirater would have purchased or went to see the movie in the first place.

The forever pirate defence. Oh, it wasn't lost revenue. Hell, even so, you watched it, and the company gets only 25% in the end. Fair is fair. You know who benefits in this saga? Oh yes, the lawyers.

So, they're going to go to each person who downloaded it and ask them for the $15 it would have cost them buy it from the shop? Or is it suddenly going to cost each downloader somewhere in the tens of thousands for no apparent reason?

MightyJordan said,
Meh. I thought it was a crap movie. A complete waste of my bandwidth.

If they contact you with a lawsuit, you should counter-sue for the cost of your wasted bandwidth.

lol... Oh boy does that suck, so much money that has to be used just to gain a small profit, and their not even getting a big cut out of it. How do they even know how much times the movie was pirated? Do they have accounts on a lot of torrent sites or something?

warwagon said,

or wait, i'm am USE-ing the NET too.


You already failed by saying you download from rapidshare; which is pretty far from newsgroups

babyHacker said,
How about people actually pay for stuff?
I have zero sympathy for pirates who get caught and prosecuted.

I have zero sympathy for people who hack up babies and get caught and prosecuted.

Sartoris said,

I have zero sympathy for people who hack up babies and get caught and prosecuted.


+1 we need to catch these damn baby hackers!

Grunt said,
So they're going to waste part of that 16.4 million? Why not just give it away? Idiots

They stand to gain a lot more. If 3 million people have downloaded it, that's 3 million potential sales lost. Assuming it would cost about $15 per person for them to see it properly either in the cinema or DVD/Blu-Ray (not sure how accurate this is, I live in the UK), that's a potential $45 million that they have lost. If they can even claim back a portion of that, it's worth doing from their POV.