How Do You Ban Someone From Posessing A 'Recording Device'?

from the seems-to-rule-out-a-lot... dept

Michael Geist points out that a guy in Canada has been convicted under an anti-camcording law for recording a showing of the movie Dan in Real Life (I'm sure it was big on all the torrent sites). However, what struck me as interesting was the punishment handed out. The guy is on 24 months of probation, has to perform 120 hours of community service, is barred from entering a movie theater or associating with anyone involved in movie piracy. And... he is barred from owning any recording device.

That seems a bit broad. After all, most mobile phones these days are recording devices. Any computer is a recording device. An iPod can be a recording device. I can understand the thought process that went into such a ban, but it seems to overreach in its intended impact.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    identicon
    Mark, Feb 24th, 2009 @ 10:19am

    Come to think of it, even the human brain is a 'recording device'..

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 24th, 2009 @ 10:42am

    Is he barred from that forever? Wow.

    Just think of all the lost movie revenue now that they've stopped piracy.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    identicon
    :Lobo Santo, Feb 24th, 2009 @ 10:43am

    Re:

    Right, so... no brain for this guy(?)

    That'll make his life tough for awhile.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    icon
    ChurchHatesTucker (profile), Feb 24th, 2009 @ 10:45am

    Let the punishment fit the crime

    His time should be commuted to the time he spent watching "Dan in Real Life"

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    BTR1701, Feb 24th, 2009 @ 10:46am

    Re: Forever

    > Is he barred from that forever?

    No, just during the length of his parole/probation. At least that's how it would work in the USA. Placing those conditions on a person who has served his sentence free and clear would be unconstitutional.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    icon
    Jasen (profile), Feb 24th, 2009 @ 10:52am

    Move

    If I were him, I would move to the US after completing probation.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 24th, 2009 @ 11:00am

    I rather doubt all the decision says is a "recording device"" without explaining what the phrase means.

    A copy of the decision, which I am not able to locate, would help in any discussions of the phrase.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 24th, 2009 @ 11:10am

    Re: Re:

    nah, he'll just become a politician, they get along fine without them.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    identicon
    TasMot, Feb 24th, 2009 @ 11:19am

    All recording devices

    Does that mean that he can't use an answering machine (or just not own one so he can still use a vendor provided answering service). BUT, the silliness goes on.....

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    identicon
    Ariel, Feb 24th, 2009 @ 11:26am

    So...

    He's banned from "owning," but can he "borrow" anything he wants from friends? :)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    identicon
    Dan, Feb 24th, 2009 @ 11:32am

    Dumb..

    ..and as with most decrees like this, totally pointless. There's no way to enforce something like that. Absolutely impossible, unless they lock him up in solitary.

    What a waste of everyone involved's time.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 24th, 2009 @ 11:36am

    Hmm you can "record" what is said & happens with pen & paper, so I guess that he's banned from owning pen & paper now also

    (not to mention that you can copy a book with that technology)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    icon
    ChurchHatesTucker (profile), Feb 24th, 2009 @ 11:37am

    Re: Dumb..

    "There's no way to enforce something like that. Absolutely impossible, unless they lock him up in solitary."

    Too true. You can 'borrow' something you don't 'own.' (There seems to be a copyfight meme in there, but I must be too tired...)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 24th, 2009 @ 11:50am

    Re: Re: Forever

    Except for convicted sex offenders, regardless of the severity of their crime. So, no, not just for the length of his parole/probation, at least not in the US.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  15.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 24th, 2009 @ 11:54am

    Re: Move

    I doubt the US would accept an ex-con.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  16.  
    identicon
    Some IT Guy, Feb 24th, 2009 @ 11:58am

    WTF Canada!?

    Ok so the guy messed up...but I think that is a little too far...

    Hey buddy, move to Mexico...you will probably have a better standard of living and it's warmer.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  17.  
    identicon
    Valkor, Feb 24th, 2009 @ 12:04pm

    Re: So...

    He could, but then he'd be violating another one of the terms of his probation: associating with anyone involved in movie piracy. (/sarcasm)

    He'd better start vetting all his friends pretty carefully...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  18.  
    identicon
    adanac ho, Feb 24th, 2009 @ 12:11pm

    Re: WTF Canada!?

    OUCH!
    Yuh seem to hate the northern neighbors, eh?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  19.  
    identicon
    Some IT Guy, Feb 24th, 2009 @ 12:20pm

    Re: Re: WTF Canada!?

    Oh not really.... But after this and from what I heard about CanCon...just doesn't sound very friendly! Oh, and don't forget the cold factor :)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  20.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 24th, 2009 @ 12:36pm

    Is it owning a recording device, or possessing a recording device. Because there's a difference there.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  21.  
    identicon
    Chronno S. Trigger, Feb 24th, 2009 @ 1:09pm

    Re: Re: Move

    The MPAA would have the FBI watching his ass 24/7.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  22.  
    identicon
    Rabble Rouser, Feb 24th, 2009 @ 1:41pm

    Banned?

    Hmm, if he's banned from owning a recording device, how can he sign in to his parole officer, unless he can use a pencil.
    So let me get this straight, he can't own a pencil and paper, VCR, PC, camera, tape recorder, or brain. Now that should be appealed under the 8th amendment!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  23.  
    identicon
    cvpunk, Feb 24th, 2009 @ 1:52pm

    Re: Move

    yeah, because a lengthy prison sentence and a $250,000 fine is much better.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  24.  
    identicon
    bigpicture, Feb 24th, 2009 @ 2:26pm

    Re: Re: Move

    And the RIAA can administer the big fine directly, to save the time of going in front of a Judge.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  25.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 24th, 2009 @ 9:25pm

    Re: Banned?

    Except this is in CANADA.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  26.  
    identicon
    cKarlGo, Feb 25th, 2009 @ 7:05am

    The judge is a cretian

    A pen and a piece of paper is a recording device. That's amazingly stupid, even for a judge in Canada.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  27.  
    identicon
    BTR1701, Feb 25th, 2009 @ 7:56am

    Re: Re: Re: Forever

    > Except for convicted sex offenders, regardless
    > of the severity of their crime. So, no, not
    > just for the length of his parole/probation,
    > at least not in the US.

    Actually, there are several cases coming up from varous states that challange the constitutionality of many aspects of those lifetime sex offender punishments-- especially with defendants where there isn't any real "sickness", like a high school kid having sex with his girlfriend, who is only a year or so younger than he is. It will be interesting to see how these cases come out. Based on past precedent, a lot of these restrictions would seem to be in danger of being invalidated.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  28.  
    identicon
    Xiera, Feb 25th, 2009 @ 11:15am

    Not to flame or anything, but you start by spelling 'possessing' correctly in the headline. ;)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  29.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 26th, 2009 @ 6:49am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Forever

    do you have any links to articles about that?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This