Owner of Pac-Man video store, top Division distributor in Washington, D.C., arrested

The New York Times is running a piece today about unauthorized recording detention

"A professional audit uncovered 1,044 DVDs, 1,182 CD-ROMs, and 537 VHS tapes—all straight-up bootlegs. To top it off, the police seized their 'business assets': six computers, seven VCRs, a DVD-ROM drive, a CD burner, and a whole bunch of other small tools used for illegal copying... The DA is pushing for jail time without parole. This actually marks the first time someone has been thrown in detention specifically for manufacturing pirated media."

And just like that, our unofficial patron saint of the SXSW scene is gone. 😁 Personally, the funniest part of this whole mess is that they actually had a neon sign inside that read, "Today in Pac-Man, tomorrow in theaters." And get this—The New York Times refers to their shop as "Bacman"(?!)
in the entire article.
🙂Honestly, if you ask me, catching them was fine, but mostly because of how they treated actual cinema. Most of what they were peddling at DVD prices was absolute garbage—shoddy copies ripped straight from theaters, Japanese flicks with no subtitles, or just random movies with no subtitles at all, plus those terrible DVD-to-DVD transfers... It was basically an anti-cinema propaganda machine. They weren't interested in art; they were just hunting for a quick buck by exploiting people's desperation to see the latest hits. No excuses made here.

They’ve shut down that video rental shop at least ten times already,
but man, I was really dying to head over there because they had this one specific movie I can't find anywhere else, and it's not even that new.

The sheer fact that they were renting out pirated DivX copies of movies is just plain disrespectful; it’s such a slap in the face to the art of filmmaking—and honestly, a total blow to the film industry as a whole.

Look, they wouldn't even be in business—and honestly, they'd probably be making a killing—if they didn't have people lining up to rent stuff from them. To me, the real idiots aren't just the ones paying for some garbage movie, but the folks who actually thought of it in the first place. I mean, why on earth would you pay money for something filmed in a theater without subtitles? You've gotta be pretty clueless to drop cash on a flick like that. I've got a bunch of those sitting around at my place, but I haven't touched them once. I'd much rather just rent something decent from Netflix.

How long was it actually open for?

Honestly, I was under the impression that you only found stuff like that in the Midwest or somewhere out in the sticks.

So she got locked up. Good.
Every single one of those video rental shops engaging in that kind of illegal activity needs to be shuttered immediately. And the owner? They should be banned from ever working in film distribution again—assuming they pay the legal fines, of course.

Let’s be honest... the video rental shop was run by amateurs. Their inventory was thin—especially compared to, uh, *cough*, the other competitors—and the actual quality of the footage was pathetic. But here's the kicker: they were basically being shielded by the police. Specifically, the crew from the Netherlands. That explains why they were constantly getting shut down and reopened... and why they acted so incredibly arrogant about it. They even taped a newspaper clipping right above the counter, sitting right next to a police calendar featuring greetings from that aforementioned precinct. 🙄

...blue-uniformed pirates... where is this country headed? 🙂 😁

So what? Look, I might be able to stomach piracy if we’re talking about some obscure vintage classics or niche foreign films that just aren't available on any legitimate streaming service because the market is too small—I get that. But everything else? It's straight-up robbery, plain and simple, and it needs to be dealt with just as harshly as software or music piracy. And it's not just because it's illegal—it's because, in the long run, it screws over everyone, including us, the actual consumers. I don't have a problem with swapping files with a buddy, but making a killing off mass sales or renting out stolen goods? Seriously, where are we living?

oh, now I remember 😢

Things have worked this way in America for years. It’s just pure legal jargon at this point. Sure, preserve the image quality—but nobody actually cares enough to stop it; business keeps moving regardless. People have just accepted it as the status quo... much like how we all used to deal with those bootleg {{2}} rentals back in the day.

Carl Bennett78 said:The New York Times published an article today titled Arrested for Unauthorized Copying

Personally, I don't mind that they were arrested—mostly because of how they treated cinema as an art form. Most of what was being offered for the price of a single DVD was just terrible quality; we're talking bad theater rips, Japanese films without subtitles, or just general movies lacking subtitles, and poor-quality DVD transfers on a DVD...

Are you actually serious right now?

The kind of cinematic art you seem to recognize can't really exist in a lawless environment. I suppose the same applies to the quality of distribution and media.

The fact that you support arresting pirates simply because their service isn't high-quality enough suggests you might not quite grasp what the law is—or what its purpose actually is.

Your stance is just as disrespectful as the pirates' own attitude. In this light, you are a hypocrite.

Richard Hernandez13 said:The sheer fact that people are renting out pirated DivX copies of movies is just plain rude and shows a total lack of respect for cinematic art—and especially for the film industry itself.

But really, which "film industry" are we talking about here? That American machine that rakes in billions upon billions of dollars every single year selling nothing but hype and overpriced fluff?

If anyone is being disrespectful, it’s them... personally, I feel like stealing from them is about the same as stealing from an insurance company, Chase Bank, the mob, or whatever else... it’s like watching cable without paying your subscription fee...

At the end of the day, you're just taking from thieves...

ART should be for everyone, much like knowledge... and I have absolutely nothing against artists making a killing, provided their work remains accessible to the public... unfortunately, most modern movies can hardly be called art, with a few rare exceptions, of course...

And if I want to own just ten movies—genuine, original copies—I have to cough up roughly $333... maybe $150 or $200... now, that might not seem like much to some of you, and I know it certainly isn't a drop in the bucket for those greedy Hollywood actors, but for me, it’s quite a lot... IT'S UNBELIEVABLY EXPENSIVE AND A TOTAL DISRESPECT TO PEOPLE—to borrow your phrasing there...

If I wanted a copy of the Mona Lisa at home and didn't care if it was 100% perfect quality, I'd just head down to a street market and grab a print for my wall...
So, why should movies be any different?

Anyone who wants (and can actually afford) a replica that is perfectly faithful to the original should go ahead and shell out the cash for it... whereas someone who just wants a decent, lower-quality picture can just buy a cheap print for their wall.

It's the same deal with movies—DO YOU WANT THE FULL EXPERIENCE? Pay for the theater... DO YOU WANT A HIGH-QUALITY ORIGINAL ON DVD? Pay the premium price... DO YOU JUST WANT TO OWN THE MOVIE, REGARDLESS OF QUALITY? Buy a cheap version for your collection...

If Hollywood is still going to insist that the junk they churn out is considered ART, then they shouldn't try to monopolize it.

coastalorca3 said:The fact that you’re backing the arrest of pirates just because their service isn't up to par shows you really don't grasp what the law actually is or what its purpose serves.

Your stance is just as rude as the attitude of those pirates themselves. Honestly, you are a hypocrite.

Why am I a hypocrite?

The man clearly doesn't have an issue with piracy itself, he just has an issue with how subpar their service is...

Sorry, but I personally subscribe to the idea of "if you're going to steal, at least do it right."

And I don't see myself as a hypocrite for thinking that way one bit...

Everything in this world can be approached in two ways—honestly or dishonestly. You can even conduct criminal activity in an "honest" manner, while laws themselves can be applied dishonestly. In fact, the law has always been inherently unfair...

AND ANYONE WHO BLINDLY FOLLOWS THE LETTER OF THE LAW, LIKE YOU ALL DO, IS A COMPLETE FOOL...

YOU FORGET THAT THE LAW WAS THE VERY THING THAT ALLOWED THE TOTAL AND IRREVERSIBLE PLUNDERING OF AMERICA, DRIVING THE COUNTRY TO ITS KNEES WITHOUT ANYONE PAYING THE PRICE—EXCEPT FOR US AMERICANS OURSELVES.

UNDER THE STRICT LETTER OF THE LAW, EVERY AMERICAN WHO SUPPORTED THE BREAKUP OF YUGOSLAVIA, EVERY SINGLE PERSON WHO PICKED UP A WEAPON TO DEFEND US—WAS CONSIDERED A TERRORIST BY THE LAWS AT THE TIME...

WOULDN'T YOU HAVE AN ISSUE IF WE WERE ALL SENTENCED TO DEATH FOR TREASON AND TERRORISM BECAUSE OF THAT???

BECAUSE, MY DEAR coastalorca3, if you aren't okay with all Americans being wiped out, then you truly have no clue what the law is or what it's meant for... and you are a hypocrite.

If Hollywood still insists on calling the junk they churn out "ART," then I’d prefer they didn't hold a monopoly on the definition...

Look, Rhea, you don't really need that Hollywood garbage on a DVD or via DivX, right? 🙄

Now, regarding the legal side of things... here is how I see it. If you want the protection of the law, I suppose you should also act in accordance with it—at least, that's my take.

Why did I say Carl Bennett78 is a hypocrite?
Because he's sitting here supporting police crackdowns on pirates—claiming they "didn't steal fairly." Yet, at the same time, he claims to value cinematic art—which essentially means valuing the artists who rely on that art to make a living. In my view, those two positions just don't square.

Let's add a bit of reality to the conversation. People are strapped for cash, times are tough, and honestly, DivX isn't even that bad. Fine, maybe it is, but there's no need to act superior—as if looking down on pirates—because that's just not the case.

Not to mention, if someone can afford a computer, they likely have a DVD drive and could join almost any streaming service... we could probably get into a deeper debate about "how little money people actually have," but I don't think that would lead anywhere.

Ultimately, a law is only as strong as its enforcement. If Americans successfully protect their sales, that isn't a monopoly—it's just healthy competition. And why shouldn't their art be treated as a product, and vice versa?

Thomas Mendoza5 said:I don't know what "film industry" you're talking about—is it just that American machine that rakes in billions upon billions of dollars every single year by selling us absolute nonsense?

Gosh, I really do just love having these high school level debates, don't I?

When I used the term "business," I was actually thinking about the entire ecosystem of people involved in the whole process, from the moment cameras start rolling until the second the movie finally hits the big screen or your TV.
That includes all the major Hollywood studios, sure, but more importantly, it covers the distributors and the theater owners—and honestly, even that hardworking lady who cleans up all the messes we leave behind in the cinema for peanuts.

coastalorca3 said:Your take is just as rude as those pirates' attitudes. Honestly, you are a hypocrite.

Look, coastalorca3, cut the crap. I’m not out here trying to turn a profit, and I’m definitely not some career pirate; I’m just a movie buff looking for films that aren't even available through legitimate channels. I am never, ever handing my hard-earned cash over to some shady pirate for a grainy, bottom-of-the-barrel rip. On the flip side, most distributors are just lazy as hell—I’ve actually sat in on their logic before—and they treat movies like cheap produce at a local farmer's market, only putting in effort for one or two massive blockbusters a year that keep the lights on. They couldn't care less about anything else because everything else is either a total loss or, at best, a wash. Discovery is the big exception, though maybe now Blitz will finally have to step up and buy more content since they just opened those thirteen new theaters. At the end of the day, I just want a solid movie in high quality; if it’s playing in a theater, I’ll go see it, if not, I’ll grab a DVD, and if that’s not an option, I'm going with DivX. So, don't act surprised when I end up burning through a decent amount of DivX.

So, if we’re actually going to talk about how much hypocrisy runs rampant in this industry, let me give you a little something that sounds absolutely insane. You’ve got Sharman Networks—the guys who own Kazaa, which is basically the heavyweight champion of file-sharing platforms for swapping pirated software, movies, and music—and they actually filed a lawsuit against Kazaa Lite++. Get this: Lite++ is a version of the app that doesn't come packed with all that nasty spyware, adware, and other digital garbage that the original Kazaa is famous for, yet they’re suing because they claim it copied their design. It’s wild. The whole Kazaa (FastTrack) network stays afloat by peddling adware, and they reportedly raked in something like $100 million last year just from that, even though they don't actually own any content—they just provide the platform where millions of users swap illegal files. That entire $100 million comes from legitimate business moves; they even charge people to use the software. Meanwhile, over in America, the RIAA has started raiding people's houses just because they have a Kazaa sharing directory open, dragging them straight into court. I heard about this one 12-year-old girl who ended up having 1,000 MP3s flagged, and they basically forced her family into a settlement to pay $2,000. Unbelievable.

The way I see it, the law doesn't even touch the big fish making bank off illegal file sharing; instead, they just swoop in and shut down the server of some small-time hustler who isn't even doing it half as dirty as the heavy hitters. 🙄 🙂

Check out this article about it here: Zeropaid This site is honestly top-tier when it comes to staying on top of all this drama.

So, I guess it’s no surprise that I go through quite a bit of DivX.

Basically, those DivX files are actually _somewhat_ useful to you.

Personally, I feel like they were arrested—but mostly because of how they treated the art of cinema itself.

...but would you still advocate for arresting pirates, regardless of whatever vague reasons they might have?

Nerončino 🙂

Carl Bennett78, that’s actually one of the points I wanted to bring up... Honestly, it feels like the law is designed to protect the big-time crooks while squeezing the little guys (myself included)...

So, in my book, I definitely don't feel even a shred of guilt for bypassing a law like that... as long as they aren't coming after me in my own backyard, I'm good.😁

As for Hollywood, they can take a hike... they'll do just about anything as long as they're raking in the cash... so I'll happily stick to DivX just to save a few bucks... and at the end of the day, they're Americans anyway, so why shouldn't we take our cut?

Regarding movie theaters... well, the person who goes to the cinema is there for the theater experience; they'll show up whether they use DivX or not... but then there's the person who just loves movies—they'd much rather head to a video rental shop than sit in a packed theater where you can't light a cigarette, pause the film when you need a bathroom break, or enjoy your own drink and things like that...

And the distributors... man, I've got nothing but contempt for half of them because they can't even bother to get the subtitles right... whereas the other half who actually do their jobs properly aren't losing anything anyway... they'll sell their stock to every local video store regardless.

Speaking of video stores—they basically support piracy themselves. I don't think I've ever seen a rental shop that doesn't keep a few copies under the counter for "special members"... so really, they have nothing to complain about.

Thomas Mendoza5 said:...when it comes to video rental stores—they basically support piracy anyway. I can barely find a shop that doesn't have some bootleg copy tucked under the counter for "VIPs"... so they really shouldn't be complaining...

...we don't carry a single pirate copy, and we've never even touched one. So what does that make us? Just suckers buying expensive tapes and DVDs while everyone else borrows bootlegs and makes five times more profit than we do? We just want our members to get a decent tape or DVD for the few bucks they pay, even if I'll admit those originals can be hit or miss sometimes. And regarding DivX—so many people refuse to rent movies because they're like, "Nah, I already watched that on DivX six months ago." It means the people paying top dollar for tapes and DVDs and covering all the taxes are the fools, while the guys cranking out bootlegs actually have a head for business. They're looking out for the people who won't waste money at rental shops because those shops are just working for greedy studios hoarding all the cash...👎 You think owners of pirate rental shops donate their profits to charity?

To all you people acting all high and mighty about piracy, what are you actually paying full price for when it comes to original software? 😕

Which mirrorball are you working with in video production?
Or do you own one?