Slashdot Mirror


Auto-Censoring DVD Player

Gogl writes "Those clever folks at RCA have apparently designed a DVD player that automatically scans movies and censors them to make them kosher, as it were. That means none of the naughty bits and none of those bad words either. It will be sold by Walmart for the price of $79, and what with the recent Janet Jackson 'wardrobe malfunction' this product will likely be lauded by the FCC and moralists everywhere, though Hollywood is already complaining."

7 of 1,061 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Control is Good by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 4, Interesting

    But you have little or no control over this either. You're relying on the good and kind folks at ClearPlay to decide what parts you should not see and hear.
    Does their worldview = yours?

  2. Re:Heuristic? by mtrupe · · Score: 3, Interesting

    True, true...
    But you might be surprised how many PG and PG-13 movies have language that many parents don't want their children to hear (again, very young children, I'm not a total prude!)

  3. Good idea by kjdames · · Score: 4, Interesting
    At the risk of sounding old-fashioned (which I am) or prudish (which I am), I think this is a great idea. I now visit kids-in-mind to check out EVERY movie before I rent it - it gives details about every bit of sexuality/violence/profanity. As a concerned father of two pre-teen children, I don't want them watching the smut that Hollywood passes off for entertainment.

    It seems like every film director feels compelled to throw in a sex/nude scene, and the film will be rated R, but only for "violence".

    Case in point: the movie Basic, starring John Travolta and Samuel L. Jackson. I liked the movie, billed as a "military suspense thriller." What I didn't like was a scene near the end, apparently during a Mardi Gras parade, where a completely topless woman was shown from the front. What the hell? In my opinion, that's not appropriate for my boys to be watching.

    There are many good movies out there that barring a few scenes, would be perfectly acceptable for my children to watch. A device like this should allow my family to watch and enjoy these movies.

    --

    Typos... that's just how I role.

  4. New market for studios by bedmison · · Score: 4, Interesting
    The studios should accept this for what it is: A marketing opportunity. All they need to do is start selling the airplane versions of films on DVD. If they start selling more than a few of these players, that ought to be a signal to the studios that there is a market out there for "clean" versions of their films.

    Or better yet, maybe they will make better movies. I don't have any problem with films that have sex, violence, etc, if it makes sense to the story. But there is a whole raft of crap that is stuck in films because the "filmmakers" don't think we as an audience will stay focused on the film without someone on screen using "F***" in all of its grammatical forms every 10 seconds. Its unnecessary and shows a lack of creativity on the writers' part.

    When Hollywood actually starts doing something artistic again, then maybe I'll give "artistic integrity" thought again. Since most of the stuff that comes out now is remakes of films done 30 years ago ( and mostly the earlier ones are better...I give you the Marky Mark Planet of the Apes as a prime example of just because you can doesn't mean you should. ), I hardly think that it requires much artistry to remake something that has already been done. A decent painter could reproduce the Mona Lisa with paint by numbers, but that doesn't require much artistry.

  5. Re:I want by Tassach · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Creators have moral rights on their works.
    That is a specious argument: define "moral" in objective rather than subjective terms.

    What is relevant is that copyright law gives the copyright owner the right to control the production and distribution of derivitive works. Making a "no-naughty-bits" derivitive of a movie for your own use probably falls under fair use. However, as with the MP-3 debate, there's a very ill-defined border between legal fair use and illegal copyright infringement.

    Directors and other artists working on a movie are usually hired by a studio or production company to make the movie. In legal terms, this makes the movie a work for hire -- copyright and creative control belong to the people who paid for it, unless they contractually gave those rights to someone else.

    --
    Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
  6. Re:I want by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting
    And all this player is is a way for me to do that (assuming I was one of those insane Americans who was completely freaked out by the sight of a nipple a few weeks ago).


    Relatively few people were freaked out about it. The loudest voices were those of the opportunistic politicians who were looking for some political hay to make it look like they were doing something useful ...and by crying "foul", they then find ways to spend federal tax dollars to "fix" what isn't broke.

    I like the idea of the censor chips because then broadcasters will be free of the censors (since that function will be rightly in the hands of the viewers) and will be free to include nudity and even sex on prime time TV without fear of government reprisal.

  7. What do the "filter lists" look like? by Animats · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Has anyone figured out the ClearPlay "filter lists" yet? The Internet player for PCs downloads them via the Internet. What does the standalone player do? Can you create your own filter lists? For example, could you express the "Star Wars Phantom Edit" (the one that deletes that Jar Jar characte) as a ClearPlay filter list? This has potential.