Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
Movies Piracy

Employee Who Leaked 'Spider-Man' Blu-ray Sentenced to Nearly 5 Years Prison (torrentfreak.com) 71

Posted by BeauHD from the was-it-worth-it? dept.
A former Memphis disc manufacturing employee has been sentenced to nearly five years in prison after stealing pre-release Blu-rays from his employer and leaking them online. While he received 21 months for copyright infringement, a concurrent firearm charge extended his total prison term to 57 months. TorrentFreak reports: 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.

Employee Who Leaked 'Spider-Man' Blu-ray Sentenced to Nearly 5 Years Prison More | Reply

Employee Who Leaked 'Spider-Man' Blu-ray Sentenced to Nearly 5 Years Prison

Comments Filter:
  • 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 tra

    • 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?

      • I’ll turn this around. What part of “shall not be infringed” did you not understand?

        Oh we can’t use that argument?

        • What I do not understand is why the government can commit violence in protecting the property rights of a movie studio, but I can not protecting my home? The gun charge aside, he was sentenced to jail for copyright infringement. That means if he resisted, violence would be used to coerce him into prison. If he continued to resist, he could end up killed for it. So to protect the property of corporations violence can be used. But to protect my own property, such as if there was a burglar, I cant use violence
        • What part of “a well-regulated militia” don’t you understand?

      • He was a convicted felon illegally possessing a gun.

        Was he a convicted felon when he purchased and registered the gun? Or did he become a felon after the copyright conviction, and just happened to own a gun at the time his premises were raided before that conviction?

        Look, I'm hardly sympathetic to the guy. But depending on the answers to these questions, I think the timing of his purchase matters.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by registrations_suck ( 1075251 )

      He was a felon in illegal possession of a gun. A clear violation of the law.

      Why would the NRA come to his defense?

      • Because without bad guys with guns we wouldn't need good guys with guns to stop them?

      • Shall not be infringed.

      • Re:Painfully obviously used the firearm charge (Score:4, Insightful)

        by ZombieCatInABox ( 5665338 ) on Friday September 12, 2025 @10:49PM (#65656938)

        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:4, Insightful)

      by kenh ( 9056 ) on Friday September 12, 2025 @08:48PM (#65656828) Homepage Journal

      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 for illegal possession of a firearm - that's perfectly appropriate.

      Your rage against the prosecutors and the NRA is non-sensual.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by cstacy ( 534252 )

      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 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.

      To summarize your points:

      1. The NRA IS NOT a civil rights organization,
      because it had no comment on this random obscure incident,
      wherein this convicted felon who is not allowed to posses guns
      was charged with possessing guns (when arrested for another crime).

      2. The NRA IS a civil rights organization because it is objecting
      to Trump's notion that "trans" people should not be allowed
      to have guns. Trump thinks they should loser their 2A rights
      and be disarmed. And the NRA wants to protect the trans
      people.

      3. "On

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by cstacy ( 534252 )

      It's funny because I don't hear a peep from the NRA.

      I doubt the NRA is aware of this obscure incident.
      Perhaps you should call them up and ask them
      to make a statement.

      My guess is that they would say two things:

      1. The NRA supports the vigorous enforcement of gun laws.
      This man was a "prohibited person", specifically a felon,
      caught in course of another felony arrest in possession
      of guns. Which is itself another felony.

      2. If he lost his 2A rights due to conviction of
      a non-violent crime -- and note that he also lost his
      right to ever vote -- that deprivation of rig

  • Pirating isn't why movies are losing customers (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Talon0ne ( 10115958 ) on Friday September 12, 2025 @08:52PM (#65656834)

    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.

    • 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.

    • 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

      • 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...

        • 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:3)

            by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

            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.

            New releases are usually 100% to studio/distributor for at least 2 weeks. Big name releases can often go for a month at 100%. Theatre makes 0% for new releases. Then it drops to 80% or so.

            But you have to realize traffic at 100% is often way higher, so even though the theatre may make a couple of bucks at 80%, far fewer people are seeing the

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

            What theatres should do is offer a discount card that encourages concession sales.

            Like if you buy two tickets, you get one free small popcorn. This is cheap, and because you bought two tickets, you probably brought a friend. Well now the friend will want popcorn so they'll want to buy some. And you'll want drinks because the popcorn will make both of you thirsty. Oh, how about besides that free popcorn, you get 10% off concessions to sweeten the deal?

            The goal being to encourage sales of concessions where yo

            • They kinda do that already and to me 10% off a ripoff price is still a ripoff.

              All I am saying is if the theaters business model is to make say $30 off everyone coming in then just charge for that instead of trying to make it up in overprices concessions, whatever that price is, or at least give customers that option.

              Is it partly psychological? Absolutely but that is what we are talking about here, how the experience related to cost feels.

      • $15-25 for a ticket but popcorn and soda is free

        Cinemas make money of popcorn and soda. Without those sales even the best and most stable cinemas would be in the red.

    • 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.

    • A night out with a mistress is only slightly more expensive.

    • Movies just became obsolete. It kind of sucks but there it is.

      But you're begging the question. Not only are movies not obsolete because you can't afford to take your family (most movie goers are not complete families and never have been), but plenty of cinema chains are making perfectly fine profit (AMC isn't but LOL) and getting perfectly fine patronship.

      There's nothing obsolete about having ginormous image, and sound you literally couldn't replicate at home as the technology (Atmos) isn't available to consumers (no it's not the same as what you get at a Dolby cinema

  • I was held for 1 month in a mental asylum because of clinical depression and suicide risk, and I almost got insane from being locked in. After just 2 weeks I crawed grass, trees, sky, beer - freedom. It was so boring I can not imagine spending months, years!!! , in prison. If you did not experience it first hand your cannot imagine the mental torture you go thru.

    • One of my more bonkers moves as a 20something in the 1990s was busting a girlfriend out of a mental ward she was being held involventarily in. she was actually fine , but some asshole psych had her basically captive because apparently not complying with her turbo christian parents is madness.

      So after an afternoon at the pub, me and a bunch of the boys just barged in and walked her out the front door with the "We are bigger and scarier and you have no power over us" glare.

      The wild thing is ..... it worked. T

  • 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.

  • Should have attempted a coup while at it, would get off free.

  • I dont have a lot of sympathy for folks who take merchandise like this in addition to the firearm violation even though the bit about him registering it makes no sense.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by cstacy ( 534252 )

      I dont have a lot of sympathy for folks who take merchandise like this in addition to the firearm violation even though the bit about him registering it makes no sense.

      Only about three states in the USA have any kind of gun registration, and Tennessee is not one of them, so that part of the report is quite mystifying. It is a federal crime for a convicted felon to posses any firearm. I guess he managed to hide them from the state police, who were supposed to confiscate them when he was convicted.

      This "news" story is confusing -- probably bad reporting and then garbling. Was it processed through an AI at some point? Or just dumb humans?

      Losing your right to posses a firearm

      • You're right about gun possession since it's federal but voting rights are controlled by state of residence. Most states allow felons to vote, and if you move to one from a state where you can't, a previous conviction doesn't mean you still can't vote. Provided you've changed your registration and aren't trying to absentee vote in your old state.

Slashdot Top Deals

Interchangeable parts won't.

Close