Feds pull Google Glass user from theater for suspected piracy

[Redfairen]

Source: NBC News

A Google Glass user in Ohio has run into an unexpected consequence of wearing a camera on your face at all times: Movie theaters might suspect you of piracy. Homeland Security agents pulled the man from the movie and interviewed him aggressively, though no charges ended up being filed. But is it really a surprise?

He and his wife had bought tickets to see "Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit" at a mall theater on Jan. 18, and he wore his Google Glass set — with prescription lenses. About an hour into the film, they were approached by someone claiming to be a federal agent. As the user phrased it:

"A guy comes near my seat, shoves a badge that had some sort of a shield on it, yanks the Google Glass off my face and says "follow me outside immediately". It was quite embarrassing and outside of the theater there were about 5-10 cops and mall cops."

He goes on to say that the agent told him he had "been caught illegally taping the movie," then ushered him and his wife into separate rooms in the mall's administrative area. Although the ensuing interview was described as "voluntary," it was suggested that not cooperating could result in "bad things" happening.



Read more: http://m.nbcnews.com/technology/feds-pull-google-glass-user-theater-suspected-piracy-2D11967844

[jtuck004]

1. Is Google setting this stuff up to check public attitude? Feds in an AMC? WTF? n/t

[davidpdx]

2. I don't know if Google Glasses can record or not

Sounds unlikely to me. I do know a lot of recording of movies does go on and end up online.

[dipsydoodle]

8. Never occured to me they might be able to record but apparently they do /can.

10 Places Where Google Glass is Banned. http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/advisor/10-places-where-google-glass-banned-144517888.html

And

Google Glass Sex App Lets You Watch, Record Yourself In The Act : http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/21/google-glass-sex_n_4637741.html

[davidpdx]

11. Then in my opinion the theaters should have a sign stating that they not allowed

As for recording sex, I guess people better be careful who they are banging. Their next act might be on the internet.

[customerserviceguy]

15. Movies have signs

forbidding texting, yet very few ever enforce it.

[Fumesucker]

25. Some of them have signs forbidding weapons too

As we now know, not everyone obeys those signs either.

[customerserviceguy]

50. Most people with weapons

don't brandish them during the show. A lot of texters think their little flashlight in my face isn't bothering anybody.

[davidpdx]

48. But I'm talking specifically about Google Glasses

since they are a new technology that can record (according to what another DUers said).

[customerserviceguy]

51. Google glasses

weapons, video recording cameras, cell phones, whatever. If the sign is not enforced in any way, then it's just a suggestion.

Back in the good old days, we paid people to be ushers who would remind people to keep to the rules. Now, the whole movie complex has popcorn poppers and maybe a few ticket takers. Other than the snack counter selling overpriced popcorn and candy, the only time I see a movie employee is when they come in to clean the place while I'm still watching the credits.

[davidpdx]

52. Same with outside food and drink

I've gotten away with it every single time except for once.

[bloomington-lib]

3. HLS watches movie theaters?

[Shamash]

4. My thoughts exactly

Not that they were watching directly, but that the theater had a hotline to Homeland Security and that they were all set up and ready to siphon off all the contents of his electronics. And of course that movie piracy is a matter of "homeland security".

Ohio is apparently on the front lines in the War on Terror.

[kelliekat44]

5. Since a major shooting killing people happened in a movie theater, it seems reasonable to me that

a movie theater management might have a "hot line" to some kind of law enforcement folks. The Feds are damned if they and damned if they don't with some people. It could have even been fellow movie-goer who reported since those glasses might resemble night goggles being used to see targets in a darkened movie theater.

[Dustlawyer]

7. Movie piracy is huge! Did they over-react, maybe, it depends on what was said by whoever

called it in. They could have been more polite though.

[thesquanderer]

9. Should NOT have been Homeland Security

I don't know what DHS is doing getting involved with someone allegedly copying a movie. This is where our post 9/11 defense tax dollars are going?

http://www.dhs.gov/mission

[kelliekat44]

13. As I said, the fear may not have been only about movie piracy! nt

[Auggie]

14. +1 … and creepy

[okaawhatever]

45. Copyright violations are a federal crime. In some areas the FBI and Homeland security

are one and the same. If you commit a federal crime, whatever federal agent is nearby will handle it. It isn't some massive conspiracy. Since the issue was time specific it could also be that a HLS officer was all they had. It's just like the secret service. They handle counterfeiting. If you pass a counterfeit bill, even if it's inadvertent you might get a visit from secret service. It's their area of jurisdiction.

[L0oniX]

23. An armed security guard would be enough. HLS is way out of bounds here.

[kelliekat44]

47. I don't believe they marched in om their own. nt

[DeSwiss]

6. K&R

- Let 'em try that in a Florida movie theater.

[L0oniX]

24. Does the HLS text much in theaters?

[DeSwiss]

39. That information is available.....

...on a ''need-to-know'' basis only.

- For your protection, of course.....

[L0oniX]

41. Just wondering since a cop shot and killed someone in a theater for texting.

[TBF]

42. Seriously ...

[onehandle]

10. Heavy handed, but Glassholes eventually will be banned from movie theaters anyway.

Offices, bars and restaurants are already banning Google Glass for privacy issues.

Some states have banned them while driving.

[awoke_in_2003]

33. Glassholes...

Thanks, I will remember that one. It is easier than "douchebag google glass wearers"

[snooper2]

35. You should be in awe of the power of google glass

The World is changing-

Are you going to change with it?

[LeftyMom]

37. If this was about an iThing you'd be ready to riot.

[fbc]

38. Hidden eyeglass cameras, lapel cameras, hat cameras, etc have existed for years

Check out any spy shop...

The idea that someone can only be filming you when they are actively pointing a smart phone at you just isn't true.

Google Glass video capabilities aren't anything new and in the future cameras will only become smaller and smaller. In my opinion, this fear of Google Glass because of video is irrational.

full disclaimer: I plan on buying Google Glass as soon as it becomes available to the general public, as long as they have an option for wearers of prescription eyeglasses.

[Codeine]

49. In five years they'll be so common as to be entirely unremarkable.

They'll look like any other glasses and everyone will have learned how to cope with the horror of this oh-so-scary new technology.

[marble falls]

12. Why do google glass wearers think that their surveillance is any less intrusive? .....

And even more importantly: why is copyright infringement a parvenu of "homeland defense"???? Who's on gitmo over pirating Jack Ryan?

[frylock]

28. what are the surveilling?

why don't people complain about the use of GoPro?

[sulphurdunn]

16. I think the genie

is really out of the bottle this time. Won't be long before you can buy Google contact lenses.

[sulphurdunn]

17. We are creating a massive

surveillance state primarily to further and protect commercial interests, which have become indistinguishable from our national interests. I haven't a clue how to even begin to stop it.

[DeSwiss]

40. AKA: Fascism.

You stop it by taking away it's power.

- Us.

[blackspade]

18. Homeland Security was involved why?

This is such bullshit.
Yet more police state antics

[Kelvin Mace]

19. Two possible reasons

1) Malls and theatres are terrorist targets.

2) Hollywood has a LOT of power.

Your choice as to which one sounds more plausible.

[blackspade]

22. Going with option 2

Because DHS doesn't truly care as long as they get their funding for new toys.
Hollywood corps have money, shoppers and movie viewers...not so much.

[davidthegnome]

20. Hmm.

A couple of interesting lines from the article....

1. Homeland Security agents pulled the man from the movie and interviewed him aggressively, though no charges ended up being filed.


2. He goes on to say that the agent told him he had "been caught illegally taping the movie," then ushered him and his wife into separate rooms in the mall's administrative area.


He had been caught illegally taping the movie... but no charges were filed. Does this strike anyone else as kind of suspicious? For one thing, how do they know if he was illegally taping the movie? For another, once they had the glasses, could they not have used them to determine this for a fact - and if so, would not charges have been filed? Basically, it appears to me that they acted on suspicion of piracy. No piracy could be proven (and likely was not taking place) so a federal agent basically lied.

Homeland security... protecting movie rights and profits. Great. Fantastic. I'm glad that things are so well, and so safe here, that they have the time and resources to devote to this sort of nonsense.

Maybe someone should let them know that there are prostitutes in New York City. These agents clearly need more to do.

[bemildred]

27. It's kind of weird isn't it? Why are all these cops losing their marbles like this all the time?

Triple colonoscopies looking for drugs, yanking people out of theaters for "illegally taping" something, shooting and punching cripples and old women?

What they are trying to do in the theater is assert the existence of a new crime, "illegally taping", despite the fact that it has already been found that taping for personal use and backup is OK.

One can infer that someone is really freaked out about that sort of thing.

[AtheistCrusader]

29. The police are allowed to lie to you.

He was lying to the guy, to pressure him into supplying probable cause. Even if he wasn't taping anything.


If I ever get detained for shit like this here's how it's going to go down:

"You write your threats on a piece of paper, and you hand them to my lawyer. He'll read it, and then pass it to me. I will write my response on the back, and pass it back to my lawyer, who will read, and then provide it to you. And we will communicate via this fashion only, like 3rd graders. Beyond that, I am invoking my right to remain silent. Please notify my legal counsel that I have invoked this right."

[davidthegnome]

34. I'm curious about whether that would work.

My understanding is the Patriot Act grants the authorities (particularly homeland security) the power to act often without consideration for legal niceties such as the right to representation. Or even the right to remain silent. If they claim suspicion of terror activity - or a link to terror activity, or a possible link to possible people who are possibly involved in terror activity... can they not simply arrest you and hold you at a location of their choosing?

I'm not saying that this is what would happen, I'm just wondering if they can do this with the extra powers granted by the Patriot Act.

[AtheistCrusader]

36. Being a test case can be uncomfortable, but if DHS tried to pressure someone

as if they were a terrorist threat, when it's a matter of copyright enforcement on the line, I imagine that might not play well in the courtroom later on.

But yeah, probably be spending some time in jail, probably be waiting for a while for that lawyer to show up... They'd make it uncomfortable, I'm sure.

[L0oniX]

21. "Homeland Security agents" WTF! We are soooo fucked.

Homeland Security agents ...working hard to keep you safe from terrorists. Thanks Agent Mike!

[bemildred]

26. Morons. Now everybody will do it. nt

[happyslug]

30. Homeland Security has no arrest powers

That power is still reserved to your local police (some Federal agents have arrest powers, for example the Coast Guard but all in very restricted environments).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coast_Guard_Investigative_Service

List of Federal Agencies with Arrest Powers:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_agent

Federal Arrest power is limited:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_enforcement_in_the_United_States#Types_of_police

Thus "Homeland Security" has no power in itself, but has to rely on some agency within its group OR within the Department of Justice.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) is responsible for most law enforcement duties at the federal level. It includes the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), the United States Marshals Service, the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) and others.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is another branch with numerous federal law enforcement agencies reporting to it. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), United States Secret Service (USSS), United States Coast Guard (USCG),Homeland security investigations (HSI), and the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) are some of the agencies that report to DHS. It should be noted that the United States Coast Guard is assigned to the United States Department of Defense in the event of war, and operates under the Department of Homeland Security during peacetime.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_enforcement_in_the_United_States#Types_of_police

Something is wrong here, either someone else is saying they are "Homeland Security" i.e. a movie private investigatory (which means the talk HAD to be voluntary, but that is why they passed themselves off as "Homeland Security" for "Homeland Security" is NOT a law enforcement agency and thus it is NOT illegal to call yourself one, unlike calling yourself an "FBI Agent" or a "US Customs Agent", for those ARE federal law enforcement agencies.

The other option is someone is making to much to a simple talk. We may never know for both sides have reasons to end this right now. If the agent was NOT a Law Enforcement Officers, they have reason just to be quite, if the Agent was such a Law Enforcement Officer he or she will have to explain what they were doing. As to the person "Arrested", he has reasons to avoid talking for he or she will have to explain why he call it an arrest and why he called the talk something done by "Homeland Security". No actual arrest were made, just a talk over glasses, thus not a violation of any law IF THE AGENT DID NOT CALL HIMSELF A SPECIFIC AGENT OF A SPECIFIC AGENCY. If the person "arrested" assumed they had arrest powers and went with them, it is still viewed as a voluntary act on his part. Thus this should die unless something else is involved, like lying.

[herding cats]

31. How is movie theft a Homeland Security issue in the first place?

They have way to broad of a jurisdiction, and obviously nothing of an real importance to be doing with their time, if they come running to a movie theater just because the MPAA says boo.

Movie theft is something we take very seriously, and our theater managers contact the Motion Picture Association of America anytime it’s suspected that someone may be illegally recording content on screen. While we’re huge fans of technology and innovation, wearing a device that has the capability to record video is not appropriate at the movie theatre. At AMC Easton 30 last weekend, a guest was questioned for possible movie theft after he was identified wearing a recording device during a film. The presence of this recording device prompted an investigation by the MPAA, which was on site. The MPAA then contacted Homeland Security, which oversees movie theft. The investigation determined the guest was not recording content.

Then the MPAA:

Google Glass is an incredible innovation in the mobile sphere, and we have seen no proof that it is currently a significant threat that could result in content theft. The MPAA works closely with theaters all over the country to curb camcording and theater-originated piracy, and in this particular case, no such activity was discovered.

Finally, Homeland Security's ICE division:

On Jan. 18, special agents with ICE’s Homeland Security Investigations and local authorities briefly interviewed a man suspected of using an electronic recording device to record a film at an AMC theater in Columbus. The man, who voluntarily answered questions, confirmed to authorities that the suspected recording device was also a pair of prescription eye glasses in which the recording function had been inactive. No further action was taken.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140121/15234325942/mpaa-ice-confirm-they-interrogated-guy-wearing-google-glass-during-movie.shtml

The Republicans are looking for ways to cut the budget, they should start here. It would appear ICE and the Homeland Security dept are both severely over staffed, since they have time to harass an innocent movie goer just because the MPAA thinks there may possibly, perhaps, maybe be a potential threat to their (federally subsidized?) copyright war.

[awoke_in_2003]

32. I don't know which is worse...

oeverbearing police or douchebag google glass wearers.

[truebrit71]

43. Something smells about this story...

...the MPAA just happened to be there? And since when does Homeland Fucking Security have ANYTHING to do with the goddamned movies...

Good thing this isn't a police state or we'd have people being detained for wearing glasses at a movie thea.....oh wait...

[GoneFishin]

55. Yep. Exactly. The militarization of domestic law enforcement is about protecting the 1% and

corporate profits. More proof of what I already knew.

[blkmusclmachine]

44. Stupid, stupid, stupid

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

46. Google Glass looks like Google Glass

but with a little tweaking, a little more miniaturization, a little more attention to styling, and the Next Generation Google/I/MS/Linux Glass will be too subtle to spot by the average mall theater usher.

It will look like glasses. Or earrings. Or a campaign button.

[Fumesucker]

53. Or a pen

[Fumesucker]

54. I don't have a Google Glass but I've done a fair amount of head mounted video on my bikes

Google Glass would be a terrible way to record a movie, it's about impossible to keep your head completely still for any length of time and the image would be wavering all over the place as your head involuntarily moved around.