Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: New ETS Can locks

This is topic New ETS Can locks in forum Film Handlers' Forum at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=005071

Posted by Paul Konen (Member # 41) on 07-08-2003, 09:43 AM:

You know those tabs they put on electric meters. Well, they used them on our cans of T3. They require pliers or tin snips in order to cut through the metal ring.

Here's a picture:

Paul

Posted by Michael Gonzalez (Member # 593) on 07-08-2003, 10:28 AM:

My Booth person seemed to have problems opening these things with the wire cutters. I just went up grabbed the blue part and twisted it until the wire broke. Pretty easy.

Posted by Aaron Sisemore (Member # 145) on 07-08-2003, 10:40 AM:

I had handled a print of 'Star Trek II: The Wrath Of Khan' in 1982 that had the cans sealed with one of the old lead-and-wire seals...

And a print of 'A Bug's Life' for a special advance screening that had PADLOCKS on the cans. Disney tech Kent Peterson had the only set of keys.

Aaron

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 07-08-2003, 10:46 AM:

How well publicized was the use of these "secured" tabs? Unless a theatre knew the cases were SUPPOSED to arrive with the tabs intact, a would-be pirate could have "borrowed" the print for copying, and just sent it on to the theatre without the tabs.

Paul: How are they protecting the digital cinema version of T3? How was it delivered to your theatre? (Satellite or DVDs?) Is an decryption key system being used yet?:

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/digital/cineOpSys.shtml

http://www.kodak.com/country/US/en/motion/digital/bouchardInterviewP.shtml

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/corp/researchDevelopment/productFeatures/cinema.shtml

Posted by Peter Kerchinsky (Member # 1098) on 07-08-2003, 01:29 PM:

This was a real brilliant move!
Our print of T3 had the "secured tabs" on each of the cans EXCEPT one of them was on the inside of the key. Why that can didn't open and spew out the reels is beyond me.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-08-2003, 01:41 PM:

You're right, wire cutters DON'T work! I had to fight to get mine off. After the first can, I was seriously eyeing the bolt cutters. I figure if the front of the can won't open because of a stupid security clasp, I'll cut the back latches open. I don't have time to play jack-around with these stupid security measures.

John, I think it's cute how you insinuate that pirates don't have access to prints before the depot ships them out. [Razz]

Then again why does Sony feel the need to put a fake movie title on every print on one side of the can, then put the REAL title on the other? Yeah, that's gonna fool someone. And wasn't there an Arnold movie released by Warner Brothers called "Collateral Damage"? What a great idea to name a new Arnold/Warner movie "Collateral Damage". I'm going to laugh if down the road someone opens up a set of cans for a repertory show and the wrong film is in there.

Posted by Paul Konen (Member # 41) on 07-08-2003, 01:45 PM:

John, all content is delivered on hard drives that plug into the AMS system. The content is generally encrypted in which the TDC (Technicolor Digital Cinema) tech installs the decryption keys.

The content, feature and all 6 channels, have a unique DES3 key that is tied to the decoder so you can't take the content from one machine to another without a new set of keys.

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 07-08-2003, 01:50 PM:

All of my prints had "Collateral Damage (2003)" on them. Not to be mistaken with "Collateral Damage (2002)". [Smile]

BTW, we're still running Finding Nemo on our TI/CDS DLP... and since our two prints of T3 are selling out in auditoriums similar in size to the DLP auditorium (~350 seats), it wouldn't have made a difference if we had chosen to run T3 in digital.

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 07-08-2003, 02:12 PM:

Use your Bus Bar shunt, Stick it in, and give it a couple of twists and it should pop.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 07-08-2003, 03:49 PM:

quote:
John, I think it's cute how you insinuate that pirates don't have access to prints before the depot ships them out.

I AM saying that the print could be "borrowed" BEFORE it gets to the theatre.

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 07-08-2003, 03:52 PM:

I believe Brad was just pointing out that the print could be "borrowed" before the "security tag" even gets attatched to the can.

Posted by Bill Carter (Member # 156) on 07-08-2003, 04:01 PM:

Funny, the guys at my local ETS depot were complaining and laughing about having to put those tags on all the T3 prints. I actually had to wait while they found one to put on my print before I could take it out the door.

Posted by Carl Martin (Member # 1146) on 07-08-2003, 04:05 PM:

am i missing something? that whole tag looks narrow enough to fit through the slot in the latch. is it too thick?

carl

Posted by Daryl C. W. O'Shea (Member # 1303) on 07-08-2003, 04:09 PM:

Since the regular tab just fits through the slot, the 'security' tab won't fit through since it sits against the regular tab (the wire isn't long enough to go through after the regular tab).

Posted by Bill Enos (Member # 440) on 07-08-2003, 05:30 PM:

The hand full of pirated videos I've seen were well before theatres would have gotten prints, indicating the copying was done at the distribution level or before.

Posted by Darryl Spicer (Member # 711) on 07-08-2003, 06:40 PM:

I didn't have to cut mine I just pulled them thru the slot and opened the can. So when I break the film down and send it out it will look as if I put new tabs on it. There is no security in the way they put them on there.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 07-08-2003, 07:29 PM:

How would a theatre know that the cans were supposed to arrive with these seals intact and that something would be amiss if they were not? And what is to prevent a would-be film pirate from re-attaching his own seals? It's not as if the theatre is going to compare a list of serial numbers from ETS with actual serial numbers on the seals.

In any case, I hate these things. In addition to being largely ineffective (except maybe for the padlock), they're often difficult to remove. I have on several occasions found myself in a booth (usually one where films are shown only occasionally) without a knife or pair of scissors and have wasted a good 10-15 minutes trying to get the TES-style seals off so that I could open the cans.

Posted by William T. Parr (Member # 677) on 07-08-2003, 07:40 PM:

Both of my prints of T 3 showed up with those damned security clasp's on them. It took me a bit to get them off so I could build my prints up. ended up destroying mine so I hope they do not expect them to be put back on when shipped out.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-08-2003, 07:45 PM:

John, you misread my humorous post above. Daryl clarified.

Let's get some ideas going here. Since transportation is such a security issue, what is the best way to seal the cans back up for return shipment to the depot? Super glue? Welding? [Big Grin]

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 07-08-2003, 08:02 PM:

Welding is not good enough since pirates WILL be able to blowtorch their way through and steal trillions of dollars from our industry while we all die penniless and unentertained. I think that they should just stop making movies, that way there is nothing to pirate.

Although I think the pirating of actual film prints is an issue, I don't think it is what the MPAA should be regarding with utmost urgency. Instead they should focus on screener tapes and DVDs that go out well before the prints do and are of a much higher quality than any dupe from a print can be. This is where most pirated copies come from. Don't blame the theaters!

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 07-08-2003, 08:24 PM:

My ideas:

CAP Code is already available for film prints, and often used on multiple reels. The man-readable number does not have to be printed, making it hard to find, except by the FBI when they track any pirated video.

A Watermarking CAP Code system needs to be developed to UNIQUELY identify each screener tape or DVD sent. Kodak Digital Watermarking technology could be applied, as it cannot be removed or altered, no matter how the illegal copies are made (The watermarking would work even if shooting a video display with a camera, as it is an integral part of the image itself):

Kodak Digital Watermarking

Anyone who lets their screener fall into the wrong hands would be held accountable.

The cases could be secured with strong combination locks, with the combinations sent to the theatre via fax or e-mail.

--------------------------------------------------------------

New addition 10:10 pm:

Just did a web search on film piracy.

They are PROSECUTING pirates. Here's what happened to someone who pirated a screener of "The Hulk":

http://www.zap2it.com/movies/news/story/0,1259,---17528,00.html

http://money.cnn.com/2003/06/25/news/companies/hulk/

http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/index.ssf?/base/news-9/105746008543050.xml

[ 07-08-2003, 10:13 PM: Message edited by: John Pytlak ]

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 07-08-2003, 10:12 PM:

I would like to know how this watermarking works exactly (I looked at the site and got bored because it didn't tell me what I wanted to know in the first 5 seconds I was there). I don't expect you to divulge how it works, but it is interesting.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 07-08-2003, 10:16 PM:

Joe...you get bored too easily. Here's the basics:

How Kodak Digital Watermarking Works

For those with a short attention span, here's an animated overview:

Kodak Digital Watermarking Animation

Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 07-08-2003, 10:41 PM:

Brad and the rest of you guys...stick a big screwdriver in between the wires, wedge the tip against the film can with the shank on the plastic part, wind yourself up and give it a big "wang"....it'll come loose. [Smile]

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 07-08-2003, 10:53 PM:

Just like CAP code, there just has to be a point where the dupe quality is so crappy that the watermark or CAP code is rendered useless.

Of course no one would want to watch such a tape, but in all fairness, there HAS to be a point. So how bad can the picture be degraded and still pull the watermark? That would be interesting to see examples of intentionally degraded images that held the code intact.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 07-08-2003, 10:58 PM:

AFAIK, the image would be virtually unwatchable before the Kodak Digital Watermark cannot be decoded.

Posted by Greg Routenburg (Member # 1742) on 07-09-2003, 01:33 AM:

I recall a story that was flying around Toronto theatres about two ushers that were stupid enough to steal a print of SWEP II and sell it on e-bay to an FBI sting. They were actually stupid enough to drive into the US to deliver it and were they were picked up and arrested. I never confirmed this story but it sounded plausable. At any rate, there really isn't a whole lot that can be done if people decide to steal a print while in transport even if they do have silly little tags on them. I'm kinda glad it happened to a Lucas Film though as there is no other film producer I loath more then him. I almost wish they got away with it. [Razz]

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 07-09-2003, 01:46 AM:

The site does not tell me how this is done. It just says that it is invisible and uses special software to extract it.

Let's put this to the test. Send me an image file via e-mail that has something watermarked in it. Let's say my name. I will tamper with the image file and send it back. You extract the watermark. Of course you must prove that you got the watermark from the copy I sent back.

Posted by Jack Ondracek (Member # 1466) on 07-09-2003, 02:33 AM:

Why not just destroy the print when we're done. Have the studios provide a vial of some chemical that reduces the print to a glob the size of one of those shrink-it sponges. Send that back to them in a post office CD pack so that Kodak can extract all the essential recyclable elements of another 12,000 feet or so of print stock & be done with it. Then, we can burn (or safely dispose of in an environmentally sensitive fashion) those blasted new cardboard print boxes they seem to be so fond of [evil]

...Have a nice day! [beer]

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 07-09-2003, 06:40 AM:

Joe:

As noted on the Kodak website, the Kodak Digital Watermarking technology has already been tested independently by the standardized "Stirmark" test, and scored the highest of any available technology (98%) [Smile]

:

http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/stirmark.html

Technical details ("Data Embedding Using Phase Dispersion") are in the published paper and Kodak patents:

Kodak: Data Embedding Using Phase Dispersion

Sorry you were too "bored" to read them. [Frown]

Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 07-09-2003, 01:43 PM:

That was nowhere on the previous page you linked to, which only provided simple information about what it is. Anyway thanks for finally linking to that.