Slashdot Mirror
Cutting out the Naughty Bits Ruled Illegal
An anonymous reader writes "Some of you may recall the lawsuit brought by several Hollywood directors against companies which edit movies for sex, language, and violence. The companies would trade consumers an off-the-shelf DVD for an edited one. Well, the CBC is reporting that Judge Richard P. Matsch has found that this practice violates U.S. copyright law, and 'decreed on Thursday in Denver, Colo., that sanitizing movies to delete content that may offend some people is an "illegitimate business." [...] The judge also praised the motives of the Hollywood studios and directors behind the suit, ordering the companies that provide the service to hand over their inventories.'''
What I'm interested to know is how this affects parents who use their DVR's to achieve the same purpose to sanitize movies for their children. Hollywood has expressed anger over THAT practice, too, which seems to me wholly unfair.
We are the fire that lights our world.. and we are the fire that consumes it.
I understand where the movie companies are coming from in terms of copyright... they don't want people taking a DVD, adding additional clips/features/menus/etc, and selling that for a profit. Then again, I don't really understand why they have an issue with that. They're getting just as much money from each DVD sale, so it's not like they're losing any business. In fact, they're probably gaining business from those people who wouldn't normally buy a certain movie due to violent/sexual/etc content, but will if they get an edited version of the movie.
;)
As for the directors and producers that claim their artistic vision was impeded upon, they sure don't have an issue with those movies being modified in the exact same way for broadcast on network tv. All they care about is the large amount of money the networks give them.
So, what this really comes down to is the movie studios wanting complete control over their works, which I'm surprised to see much of the Slashdot crowd backing up. Seems it's better to hate "the red states" than to hate the MPAA.
Now that that those are taken care of, where do Microsoft, the Kansas Board of Education, America, Republicans, sports, and current music stars fit in?
You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life. --Winston Churchill
People tend to get *very* irate if they do not think they should be carded for something. And silly as it sounds, having someone screaming at you after you've been dealing with customers for 8 hours really can affect a decision to card someone. In addition, fewer people try to illegally purchase alcohol and ammunition than movies or games. Think about it: it's illegal to buy beer if you're under 21, but it's only illegal to sell restricted movies to minors. See the difference?
One of the "clean movie" companies does exactly this (forgot the name, saw it on a news story of DVD editing). They sell special web-connected DVD players that download edit lists for the movies. Though more expensive to set up, they feel they are more legally in the clear. I think this model is actually quite nice, as you could tag each missing part, and then set up a menu for what things are ok to show (language, nudity, violence, etc) as checklists or even allowable levels. That would give the consumer complete control.
Personally I like to watch un-edited movies, but I defend the rights of others to watch whatever edit they want of something they bought. "Bounty" does not tell me what I am allowed and not allowed to do with their paper towels, magazines do not prevent me from skipping through stories, so why is a plastic disc treated differently?