Employee Who Leaked 'Spider-Man' Blu-ray Sentenced to Nearly 5 Years Prison (torrentfreak.com)
- Reference: 0179194380
- News link: https://entertainment.slashdot.org/story/25/09/12/2251230/employee-who-leaked-spider-man-blu-ray-sentenced-to-nearly-5-years-prison
- Source link: https://torrentfreak.com/employee-who-leaked-spider-man-blu-ray-sentenced-to-nearly-5-years-in-prison-on-gun-charge/
> In February, the U.S. Department of Justice indicted 37-year-old Steven Hale from Tennessee, a former employee of a disc manufacturing and distribution company in Memphis. While working at the unnamed company between 2021 and 2022, Hale allegedly stole numerous "pre-release" DVD and Blu-ray discs from his employer. These stolen discs contained many high-profile movie titles including "Spider-Man: No Way Home." In addition to the copyright infringement charge, Hale was also indicted for a firearm offense. When raiding his premises, law enforcement found a gun in a car that was registered in his name, which, for a felon, is a separate criminal offense.
>
> Hale was sentenced at a federal court in Memphis yesterday, where Chief Judge Sheryl H. Lipman handed down a 57-month prison term, exactly in line with the U.S. government's recommendation. Two separate sentences will be served concurrently. Hale received 21 months for the theft and distribution of hundreds of pre-release movie discs. A longer sentence of 57 months was handed down for the firearm charge, which ultimately defines the total prison term. Judge Lipman also granted several requests by the defense. The court recommended that Hale be housed in a facility as close to Memphis as possible so he can be near his family. In addition, the defendant will be allowed to remain on bond and self-surrender to prison at a later date.
>
> The 21-month sentence for the copyright infringement charge is substantially lower than the maximum of 60 months. This is in part the result of a guilty plea the defendant signed in May. After accepting responsibility, the prosecution agreed to drop other charges and recommend a sentence at the low end of the guideline range. Hale entered his guilty plea to Count Two of the indictment. The charge relates to his distribution of ten or more copies of copyrighted works, including pre-release movies, for commercial advantage and private financial gain. This includes the pre-release 'Spider-Man: No Way Home' disc, which is likely the source of the public leak.
[1] https://slashdot.org/arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/09/ex-dvd-company-employee-gets-4-years-for-leaking-spider-man-blu-ray/
[2] https://torrentfreak.com/employee-who-leaked-spider-man-blu-ray-sentenced-to-nearly-5-years-in-prison-on-gun-charge/
Pirating isn't why movies are losing customers (Score:4, Interesting)
It's needing to drop 200 bucks to take your family to a movie and get popcorn, slurpy, etc. It's just not worth it. It's fun, and I took my kids to see the Starwars re-release last May, but since then, nothing. It'll be out on streaming in a few months for at most 20 dollars. Movies just became obsolete. It kind of sucks but there it is.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I stopped doing that non-sense back around 2015. Me, the wife, and 3 kids, over $200. Insane. Unbelievable amount of ads before movie, no intermission for bathroom break, and uncomfortable seats. I'm content sitting in front of my 55" living room monitor where my family controls the narrative.
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe some places do this already but my idea is just charge $15-25 for a ticket but popcorn and soda is free, those things are cheap as shit instead of the decades old snack subsidy model. At least the price is predictable and fixed and I think families would feel less ripped off about it.
Most of us understand prices go up but it's the constant ripped off feeling. Someone mentioned the amount of ads. One or two is like, fine especially if the ads are funny and well done but it's feeling hustled when you
Re: Pirating isn't why movies are losing customers (Score:1)
> Maybe some places do this already but my idea is just charge $15-25 for a ticket but popcorn and soda is free, those things are cheap as shit instead of the decades old snack subsidy model. At least the price is predictable and fixed and I think families would feel less ripped off about it.
You realize movie tickets are already $15-25/person, right?
You realize the bulk of the ticket revenue (80%+) goes to the movie distributor, right?
You realize the only money the theaters make is from popcorn & soda, right?
When movie tickets were $10-15 your idea makes sense, now...
Re: (Score:2)
> You realize movie tickets are already $15-25/person, right?
Depends when you go.
> You realize the bulk of the ticket revenue (80%+) goes to the movie distributor, right?
Depends how long it's been out, that 80% is usually for the first week or two then it flip flops to the theaters advantage also depends on the studio and the arrangement.
> You realize the only money the theaters make is from popcorn & soda, right?
I know you can read so that's what i meant by " decades old snack subsidy model"
> When movie tickets were $10-15 your idea makes sense, now...
Then make it $35 for premieres first week and lower it for matinees. The point is if the experience was a fixed price maybe folks wouldn't feel so ripped off.
Re: (Score:2)
Some theaters are cheap. I can see movies at the local Cinemark for under $10 a person. My wife was worried about bringing a drink in her purse and a guy sits down next to us and opens a shopping bag of Chinese takeout. Theaters don’t care and the kids working don’t get paid enough to care.
clickbait: 5 years, reality: zero (Score:2)
Thanks to the legal joke of "concurrent sentences", there was not a single extra day sentenced for the piracy.
Actually not "piracy", it was a criminal theft and breach of trust. Unlike unauthorised copying, it really was criminal.
Did crime incorrectly (Score:2)
Should have attempted a coup while at it, would get off free.
Painfully obviously used the firearm charge (Score:3, Insightful)
To extend it. It's funny because I don't hear a peep from the NRA. Almost as if they are there not to protect rights but the sell guns...
I'll spell it out to anyone who doesn't get it. The NRA is not a civil rights organization it's a industry lobby. It just so happens that the industry in question is firearms. But they don't care about your rights they care about how much product they can move this year.
I will give them some credit for noticing that Trump was talking about taking guns away from trans folks. On the other hand that is exactly who the Nazis started with.
Re: Painfully obviously used the firearm charge (Score:1, Insightful)
Wow.
He was a convicted felon illegally possessing a gun. Why would the NRA come to the defense of a convicted felon that possessed an illegal firearm?
Re: Painfully obviously used the firearm charge (Score:4, Funny)
never ask a man his salary
a woman her age
a Republican what they posted when paul pelosi was attacked by a maga
Re: (Score:2)
I’ll turn this around. What part of “shall not be infringed” did you not understand?
Oh we can’t use that argument?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
He was a felon in illegal possession of a gun. A clear violation of the law.
Why would the NRA come to his defense?
Re: (Score:2)
Because without bad guys with guns we wouldn't need good guys with guns to stop them?
Re: Painfully obviously used the firearm charge (Score:2)
Hunting?
Marksmanship?
Re: (Score:2)
We still need good guys with guns to cull deer populations.
Re: (Score:2)
Shall not be infringed.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you really think people care about felony convictions anymore ?
Convicted felons get elected president of the United States, for crying out loud.
Re: Painfully obviously used the firearm charge (Score:2, Insightful)
It makes no sense to conflate unrelated gun charges with the piracy charges - the illegal firearm was not used in the commission of his theft of copyright-protected goods (DVDs).
He got 21 months for piracy, the low-end of the sentencing range because he pled guilty.
If prosecutors wanted to really 'stick it to him' they could have simply not requested a lighter sentence from the judge.
He pled guilty, got a reduced sentence - that's appropriate.
As a previously convicted felon he got a nearly 5 year sentence f
Re: Painfully obviously used the firearm charge (Score:3)
Non-sensical - damn auto-correct!
Re: (Score:2)
That too.