Is posting Bootleg screenshot images more than once a bannable offense?
 

Just curious what the membership thinks. A few members have posted illegal screencaps, but when warned about it, they then follow IMFDB rules strictly, which is a good thing. That is usually the case. When they're informed of the rules, they apologize and follow the rules.

But.....

I just wonder, since we do have a few DENSE contributors who don't even respond to our posts on their pages, there will someday be a member who just keeps on posting illegal images. We had that issue with moviemaster1993 aka Liam who was some British Git and he was banned, mostly just for being abusive and combative when the legality of his images was questioned (and he was a terrible typist/speller and he hated Americans....;) )

But do you think repeatedly posting images that can get IMFDB in trouble is a bannable offense?

I'm talking about just posting bootleg images, not being abusive or threatening which was the reason MOST of the members who posted bootleg images were banned.

How do you define bootleg images? Technically, every screenshot on this site could be considered a bootleg. None of them are cleared by the copyright holders, and fair use exemption is the only thing keeping this site from being sued into dust.

And how can you tell if an image fits your definition of being "illegal"? There's no way to tell if a screenshot is taken from a bootleg DVD rip versus a legally purchased copy.

MPM is talking about screencaps for film that hasn't been released on DVD yet in the U.S. and aren't from the trailer. hence bootleg.

I think he's referring to films that haven't been yet been released in the US on DVD or BD. The Piranha page just got pulled because of that. You're right, most of the time, there's no telling if a cap is pulled from a DVD or a bootleg, but in this case, if there's no way to get a legal DVD or BD, it's most definitely a bootleg.

(Although...theoretically, since there are people in the industry amongst the members, what about award screeners? I know there are rules regarding these screeners, but would taking screen caps be in violation of those rules?)

As for the violators, repeat violators should be punished.

No screener use ever. I get screeners as well and I know voting members of the MPAA who get them. Those in no way can be EVER used in IMFDB. It's just a bad idea and screams "Pirate". (a) I actually PURCHASE the DVDs that I screencap and (b) when capped to illustrate an article about the film makes it at least tolerable as not being a craven use of the image. I only say this because there are many movie REVIEW sites who screencap shots from DVD releases to talk about the movie and review it (and the DVD as well, i.e. extras, etc.) They have never run into a copyright fight with the studios so far. Since we do the same, a scholarly article ABOUT facets of the film (i.e. weapons) we fall into a relatively similar category. Movie review sites, HOWEVER, only use studio RELEASED promotional materials when writing about any movie that is yet to be released or is in theatres now. They never bootleg images from a bootleg copy for their articles. We do the same. We only use publicly released trailers and promo stills for any movie that has NOT been released yet and then we wait until the DVD release to do screencaps.

If they do it more than once and they refuse to acknowledge admin requests to stop, then hell yes, they should be banned.

Well now that it's been explained, yes, ban them.