A: why should a company be allowed to profit by butchering another persons work to suit the moral tastes of a particular group of people?
B: Why should a person be allowed to enjoy a story that they have voluntarily censored when the creator of the story feels the story has lost its intended meaning by being censored.
A person is free to disregard the violent/sexy bits of a film or book but they are not free to have a company sell them a copy with those parts removed, and the courts agree.
Because the creator of the story determined that those bits you dont want to see are important to the meaning of the story, and if you cant handle those bits you dont have the right to hear the story. What good is schindlers list without dying jews, or sex lies and videotape without the sex or videotape.
You cannot censor an artists work so you can enjoy the part you agree with, if you object to those activities and depictions then you have given up your right to be enlightened by the work in total.
"The better analogy would have been fighting Wyverns in a swamp while carrying Princess Gwaelin back to King Lorik..."
Except as everyone knows wyverns are denziens of the southern continent and would not be found anywhere along the path from the green dragons lair to tantagel castle.
Slashdot Mirror
What good will dow jones stock be when the environment is shot?
No, why would someone who runs linux want to know what the outside looks like?
She actually has an old package of gold from at&t and if she wants new channels she has to get the modern package, pretty simple
A: why should a company be allowed to profit by butchering another persons work to suit the moral tastes of a particular group of people? B: Why should a person be allowed to enjoy a story that they have voluntarily censored when the creator of the story feels the story has lost its intended meaning by being censored. A person is free to disregard the violent/sexy bits of a film or book but they are not free to have a company sell them a copy with those parts removed, and the courts agree.
Because the creator of the story determined that those bits you dont want to see are important to the meaning of the story, and if you cant handle those bits you dont have the right to hear the story. What good is schindlers list without dying jews, or sex lies and videotape without the sex or videotape.
You cannot censor an artists work so you can enjoy the part you agree with, if you object to those activities and depictions then you have given up your right to be enlightened by the work in total.
"The better analogy would have been fighting Wyverns in a swamp while carrying Princess Gwaelin back to King Lorik..."
Except as everyone knows wyverns are denziens of the southern continent and would not be found anywhere along the path from the green dragons lair to tantagel castle.
For Shame.