Axing sex, swearing from films violates copyright

[Rosco T.]

http://www.cbc.ca/story/arts/national/2006/07/09/film-scrubbing-ruling.html

Axing sex, swearing from films violates copyright: court
Last Updated Sun, 09 Jul 2006 10:47:31 EDT
CBC Arts

Deleting swearing, sex and violence from films on DVD or VHS violates copyright laws, a U.S. judge has ruled in a decision that could end controversial sanitizing done for some video-rental chains, cable services and the internet.

U.S. District Judge Richard Matsch says sanitizing movies to delete content that may offend some people is an 'illegitimate business.' The ruling stemmed from a lawsuit brought by 16 U.S. directors — including Steven Spielberg, Robert Redford and Martin Scorsese — against three Utah-based companies that "scrub" films.

(snip)

Film sanitizing causes 'irreparable injury to the creative artistic expression in the copyrighted movies.'
-Judge Richard P. MatschSeveral other companies, mostly in Utah, quickly sprang up to follow its lead and there are currently an estimated 90 film scrubbing companies in the United States.

(snip)

Matsch ordered the companies named in the suit — CleanFlicks, Play It clean Video and CleanFilms — to immediately stop producing, creating and renting out the scrubbed films.

(more)

[TahitiNut]

1. It's about time.

The butchery done on films in the name of "public standards" is abominable.

[Swamp Rat]

2. GOOD!

The 'moral minority' can make their own goddamn clean movies.

[DRoseDARs]

3. I have to wonder what would happen to The Passion of the Christ...

Would its runtime be reduced to a five second shot of Jesus and then the rolling credits? :shrug:

[unschooler]

4. Two hours of unspeakable violence is perfectly "clean." Don't

you know anything? ;-)

I know a half-dozen fundy families who took their seven or eight-year-olds to see Jesus get beaten up for their sins.

[ConsAreLiars]

5. Finally, a copyright ruling that makes some sense in terms of the

original intent, namely to keep others from selling bogus copies as if they were the originals.

[NMMNG]

6. It's about time

The Morality Police are utterly destroying movies for everyone. If they don't want to see it they don't have to watch it, but they don't have the right to screw it up for everyone else or mess with the artist's copyrights.

Would they like it if somebody edited their movies to add sex scenes and swearing?

[Sherman A1]

8. Agreed

Will this however just push the argument by the morality police to the original production? Will it affect the shelf space that such films can get in the mass merchants and thereby their ability to produce income for the makers of such films? Will that affect the topics or scripts chosen to be produced as some will not make it onto the shelf at Blockbuster or Wal Mart? I am all for the ruling and think the morality police should go fly a kite, there is however a great possibility of some ripple effects up the food chain which could affect the selection of movies for us all. If a movie isn't produced because the maker knows he cannot get it into Wal Mart (even with a "clean" version) his basic business decision or creative decision will be altered. Movies are after all a hopefully money making exercise.

[lapfog_1]

7. Of course, there is a high tech way to get around this

Don't hack the movie (make a copy with the offending material removed).
Hack the player... create a smart DVD player that knows what film it is playing and what to skip or bleep from the movie being played. I'm sure it's quite possible, though harder to do (everyone has to buy the player, and the database of "cuts", as well as the off the shelf DVD). Probably perfectly legal from a copyright standpoint.

I don't know how I feel about it. I suppose it's OK to make such a thing. Personal choice and all that.

[readmoreoften]

9. HALLELUJAH!!!

If anyone ever sold edited versions of my films I'd lose my cake. Yeah for the rights of artists!

[liberal N proud]

10. Stopping the beast - People who try to force their beliefs on others