Lionsgate Waging a Legal War Over Expendables 3 Internet Leak

Alex Co

New member
Dec 11, 2013
1,183
0
0
Lionsgate Waging a Legal War Over Expendables 3 Internet Leak


The studio is none too happy that its upcoming Expendables 3 has been downloaded over a million times online.

Those who frequent file sharing sites might have seen a file called "Expendables 3" being offered for download as early as a few weeks ago. Now, film company Lionsgate is taking legal action against the individuals who it claims shared an advance copy of the film online. Last week, Thursday, Lionsgate filed a lawsuit in California against "John Does 1-10," and targets the people behind torrent sites: limetorrents, billionuploads, hulfile, played, swantshare and dotsemper, and "uses language that's similar to past mass 'Doe' complaints against torrent users." According to Lionsgate, it has learned on July 24 that a digital file containing a high-quality reproduction of the action film has been stolen and uploaded on the internet. Lionsgate claims all of the copies circulating online are said to be traceable to the original digital file that got nicked. To date Expendables 3 is said to have already been downloaded over a million times across multiple sites.

The lawsuit mentions: "By downloading one of these 'torrent' files associated with the Stolen Film from <limetorrents (dot) com>, users join a 'swarm' where they download parts of the Stolen Film from many different users and also upload to other users parts of the Stolen Film they have already received, until eventually they have reproduced the entire Stolen Film on their own hard drives and in most cases have also uploaded all or a substantial part of the Stolen Film to others."

Additionally, Lionsgate mentions in the lawsuit that it sent demand letters to the torrent operators mentioned but did not receive a response. The studio is demanding a temporary restraining order (TRO) and injunctions that prohibit anonymous operators of the sites from hosting, linking to, distributing reproducing, performing, selling or making available copies of Expendables 3. However, Lionsgate isn't stopping there, as the requested injunction also aims to "take all steps necessary to recall and recover all copies of the Stolen Film or any portion thereof that they have distributed," and is even eyeing the ISPs that are providing cloud storage and hosting services, the banks and financial institutions that are servicing said torrent sites.

Say what you will about movies not being worth the price of admission, but downloading a film and watching it for free is theft however you look at it -- regardless if you think it's worth paying full admission price or not.

Expendables 3 stars Sylvester Stallone, Jet Li, Jason Statham, Terry Crews, Dolph Lundgren, Randy Couture, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Antonio Banderas, Harrison Ford, Mel Gibson, Wesley Snipes, Kellan Lutz, Victor Ortiz and MMA fighter Ronda Rousey for an August 15, 2014 theatrical release.

Source: The Hollywood Reporter [http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/lionsgate-sues-expendables-3-leak-722806]

Permalink
 

gigastar

Insert one-liner here.
Sep 13, 2010
4,419
0
0
Was it really nessessary to post links to the torrent sites?
 

Falterfire

New member
Jul 9, 2012
810
0
0
Alex Co said:
downloading a film and watching it for free is theft however you look at it
Not exactly. It's copyright infringement, but theft requires not just having something you didn't pay for but also depriving the original owner of it. Since digital copies are copies and leave the original owner in possession of the original, it's not theft.

Whether or not infringement is morally wrong or not is not an argument I'm particularly interested in having since it ultimately ends up devolving into unverifiable claims about whether somebody would have bought a movie/game/whatever had they not pirated it, but I'll stand by copyright infringement and theft not being the same thing.
 

Alex Co

New member
Dec 11, 2013
1,183
0
0
gigastar said:
Was it really nessessary to post links to the torrent sites?
That happened automatically! Damnit! Taking it out now! Sorry and thanks!
 

omega 616

New member
May 1, 2009
5,883
1
0
Interesting, they got Ronda instead of Gina. I know Ronda is THE female fighter of the moment (the shine has come off her a bit though) but Gina was the original female fighter of the moment and has done a movie or two before.

That is one hell of a cast list, I don't even recognize most the names on the list. I am in the minority that kind of likes the expendables films but there was a lot of "fighting for screen time", this list is huge ... so I have to think that fight will be a royal rumble for screen time.
 

RJ 17

The Sound of Silence
Nov 27, 2011
8,687
0
0
.............the hell is Kelsey Grammer doing in this movie? Don't get me wrong, I love the guy and think he's a great actor. It's just when I think "80's/Early 90's Action Movie" (which all these movies are purely an homage to and almost even a parody of), I don't really think of Kelsey Grammer kicking ass and taking names.
 

CriticalMiss

New member
Jan 18, 2013
2,024
0
0
RJ 17 said:
.............the hell is Kelsey Grammer doing in this movie? Don't get me wrong, I love the guy and think he's a great actor. It's just when I think "80's/Early 90's Action Movie" (which all these movies are purely an homage to and almost even a parody of), I don't really think of Kelsey Grammer kicking ass and taking names.
Don't you remember Cheers Part 2: Boston Bloodbath? Frasier really put John Rambo to shame in that one.
 

beatmaster

New member
Apr 28, 2011
2
0
0
Alex Co said:
Say what you will about movies not being worth the price of admission, but downloading a film and watching it for free is theft however you look at it -- regardless if you think it's worth paying full admission price or not.
the movie was put out before its theatrical release. blame the source and not the folks that take advantage of a hiring mistake Lionsgate made.
 

The Feast

New member
Apr 5, 2013
61
0
0
The plot of the second movie feels like making a check list for the pacing. One "not famous" guy got killed by the big bad, and they feel a need for revenge (Just forget about the super weapon thingy that Van Damme wanted to sell, because he never even got the chance to).

The heroes chase the bad guy at the airport. Bam, bam, bam...nothing that really stands out, but probably the Chuck Norris, Arnold Schwarzenegger and the Bruce Willis bits are enjoyable. The final fight are poorly choreographed, Scott Adkins which is famous for the Undisputed movies got no time to shine.

A movie that supposed to represent the badass action star leave a bad taste in my mouth. At least, the first movie had a story. But for some reason, I really wish the third movie will give me some of the badass feel when I get from watching those action stars.
 

lord's voken

New member
Oct 9, 2011
44
0
0
i wonder how many more people knew about this thanks to this news story.
i for one didnt know that expendables 3 was already up for pirating, not that
i care at all, but still. Seems like something you would want to be hush hush
about.
 

FogHornG36

New member
Jan 29, 2011
649
0
0
Well if they got their hands on the person that posted the video, then good for you, string them up. But if you are going after the torrent sites, you have already lost.
 

Aggieknight

New member
Dec 6, 2009
229
0
0
Falterfire said:
Alex Co said:
downloading a film and watching it for free is theft however you look at it
Not exactly. It's copyright infringement, but theft requires not just having something you didn't pay for but also depriving the original owner of it. Since digital copies are copies and leave the original owner in possession of the original, it's not theft.

Whether or not infringement is morally wrong or not is not an argument I'm particularly interested in having since it ultimately ends up devolving into unverifiable claims about whether somebody would have bought a movie/game/whatever had they not pirated it, but I'll stand by copyright infringement and theft not being the same thing.
Almost exactly what I was going to post. Thank you.

'Copyright infringement' is in no way, shape of form theft, even if it is morally/legally questionable. Calling it theft prevents honest debate. Kinda disappointed that The Escapist referred to it as such.
 

kasperbbs

New member
Dec 27, 2009
1,855
0
0
Yeah i saw it somewhere, but i don't really want to waste my time on it even for free.
 

AstaresPanda

New member
Nov 5, 2009
441
0
0
Aggieknight said:
Falterfire said:
Alex Co said:
downloading a film and watching it for free is theft however you look at it
Not exactly. It's copyright infringement, but theft requires not just having something you didn't pay for but also depriving the original owner of it. Since digital copies are copies and leave the original owner in possession of the original, it's not theft.

Whether or not infringement is morally wrong or not is not an argument I'm particularly interested in having since it ultimately ends up devolving into unverifiable claims about whether somebody would have bought a movie/game/whatever had they not pirated it, but I'll stand by copyright infringement and theft not being the same thing.
Almost exactly what I was going to post. Thank you.

'Copyright infringement' is in no way, shape of form theft, even if it is morally/legally questionable. Calling it theft prevents honest debate. Kinda disappointed that The Escapist referred to it as such.
yeap yeap and yeap. I heard the rating got downgraded from adult to a PG-13 film which is just.....dumb.
 

EndlessSporadic

New member
May 20, 2009
276
0
0
I don't have much to say about downloading it after it is released, but torrenting it before it is even released is downright dirty.
 

The Bucket

New member
May 4, 2010
531
0
0
EndlessSporadic said:
I don't have much to say about downloading it after it is released, but torrenting it before it is even released is downright dirty.
Why? You have the exact same result it in the end
 

walrusaurus

New member
Mar 1, 2011
595
0
0
THis seems like the dumbest possible response to a leek like that. What realistic benefit does suing people really serve. Even if they are able to successfully get a conviction how much money would they ever actually get from such a lawsuit? And by publicly filing a lawsuit this way they call attention to the leak so a much wider audience will now be aware of the bootlegged copies existence. I certainly would never known about it had it not been for this article lol.
 

Ajarat

New member
Apr 29, 2014
45
0
0
For it to be copyright infringement, doesn't the IP holder have to take steps to ensure their work is protected?
If so, how is suing after copyright has been infringed considered "protecting" said copyright? The fact that it's being copied wholesale suggests to me that there was very little protecting the work, if anything at all, or that there was obviously inadequate protections placed upon the work. Sure, there are always going to be people that will find a way, but since they get mad over EVERY IP they make being copied I would suggest they care not for attempting to protect their work.
Well, I never could make it through the first expendables movie, wasn't even aware of the second, but I'll download this one just to be a pain in their lazy deluded behinds. Let's see how well they protected this copyright of theirs...
Oh, downloading already and I didn't even need trackers either! Didn't notice any protection at all. Thanks TPB, And Thanks Lionsgate, I still won't bother watching the movie though, not for free either. Downloaded and deleted, all within 5 minutes.