Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Court Rules Against Sanitizing Films
AP ^ | Saturday July 8, 9:52 pm

Posted on 07/08/2006 9:24:52 PM PDT by BenLurkin

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) -- Sanitizing movies on DVD or VHS tape violates federal copyright laws, and several companies that scrub films must turn over their inventory to Hollywood studios, an appeals judge ruled.

Editing movies to delete objectionable language, sex and violence is an "illegitimate business" that hurts Hollywood studios and directors who own the movie rights, said U.S. District Judge Richard P. Matsch in a decision released Thursday in Denver.

"Their (studios and directors) objective ... is to stop the infringement because of its irreparable injury to the creative artistic expression in the copyrighted movies," the judge wrote. "There is a public interest in providing such protection."

Matsch ordered the companies named in the suit, including CleanFlicks, Play It Clean Video and CleanFilms, to stop "producing, manufacturing, creating" and renting edited movies. The businesses also must turn over their inventory to the movie studios within five days of the ruling.

"We're disappointed," CleanFlicks chief executive Ray Lines said. "This is a typical case of David vs. Goliath, but in this case, Hollywood rewrote the ending. We're going to continue to fight."

CleanFlicks produces and distributes sanitized copies of Hollywood films on DVD by burning edited versions of movies onto blank discs. The scrubbed films are sold over the Internet and to video stores.

As many as 90 video stores nationwide -- about half of them in Utah -- purchase movies from CleanFlicks, Lines said. It's unclear how the ruling may effect those stores.

The controversy began in 1998 when the owners of Sunrise Family Video began deleting scenes from "Titanic" that showed a naked Kate Winselt.

The scrubbing caused an uproar in Hollywood, resulting in several lawsuits and countersuits.

Directors can feel vindicated by the ruling, said Michael Apted, president of the Director's Guild of America.

"Audiences can now be assured that the films they buy or rent are the vision of the filmmakers who made them and not the arbitrary choices of a third-party editor," he said.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; US: Utah
KEYWORDS: busybodies; christianmedia; churchlady; cleanflicks; copyright; directorsguild; fairuse; film; hollywood; restrictchoices; richardmatsch; sanitize; secularselfrighteous; unelectedjudges; video
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300301-320321-340 ... 701-712 next last
To: FreedomCalls
The question is about legality, not about channelling a dead author's wishes. It my not be what he wanted, but is it legal?

NO! It is not legal for you to produce and distribute altered versions of copyrighted works.

Circle, circle, circle...

301 posted on 07/09/2006 1:35:43 AM PDT by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 296 | View Replies]

To: Binghamton_native

I agree that studios could put out an edited version, much the same way musicians do, and still collect a profit. But you must keep in mind that this would be difficult with some of the "R" rated mvies today. Even some PG-13 movies should be an R. I definately agree though for many PG movies that could use some dubbing for a few of those swear words in the movie.


302 posted on 07/09/2006 1:36:03 AM PDT by albyjimc2 (If dying's asked of me, I'll bear that cross with honor, cause freedom don't come free...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 291 | View Replies]

To: Republican Wildcat
One point of clarification...can't sell or distribute (otherwise, the original Napster was legal because they weren't being sold, just "shared.")

Right. I'm talking about making personal backups, because the DVD will reach a point it will be scratched and chewed by a 2 year old, it won't play, and that VHS tape? The VCR might decide to eat it sometime.

303 posted on 07/09/2006 1:36:49 AM PDT by BigSkyFreeper (There is no alternative to the GOP except varying degrees of insanity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 295 | View Replies]

To: killjoy
So in your eyes, it is legal to buy a movie, it is legal to sell an old DVD to a used DVD store, it is legal to sell my old movies on ebay, it is legal to splice a new version of my VHS at home, but if I sell my legally re-edited VHS movie, then it becomes illegal?

You got it.

304 posted on 07/09/2006 1:37:09 AM PDT by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 298 | View Replies]

To: Republican Wildcat

What part are you from? I hail from Lexington.


305 posted on 07/09/2006 1:37:39 AM PDT by albyjimc2 (If dying's asked of me, I'll bear that cross with honor, cause freedom don't come free...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 297 | View Replies]

To: BigSkyFreeper
Cable and TV networks pay for and buy rights to the movies (NBC for instance has access to the Universal Studios produceds films and already have permission from that studio), which for networks are edited at the movie studio for content and time constraints. This agreement in effect gives the TV stations permission to air the edited product.

And I have purchased a right to watch the movie at home when I bought the DVD. How is sending that DVD to an edit company to make certain edits that I request in violation of that home viewing right?

306 posted on 07/09/2006 1:38:12 AM PDT by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 260 | View Replies]

To: Republican Wildcat
You got it.

Why? Which law have I broken?

307 posted on 07/09/2006 1:38:38 AM PDT by killjoy (Dirka dirka mohammed jihad! Sherpa sherpa bakalah!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 304 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
Now some people with a modicum of taste cut unnecessary and prurient scenes and the pormasters of Hollywierd file suit.

WRONG! you can do it all you want, but when you sell them for profit then thats where you will get in trouble with copyright issues. Its not hard to understand.

308 posted on 07/09/2006 1:38:51 AM PDT by stuck_in_new_orleans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: killjoy

Copyright law.


309 posted on 07/09/2006 1:39:10 AM PDT by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 307 | View Replies]

To: durasell
One of the major modern screw-ups in regards to copyright law was the movie It's a Wonderful Life. The copyright wasn't re-newed and anyone who owned a copy -- basically television stations --could play it as often as they wanted without paying royalties. Hence, it became a Christmas classic.

It was already a Christmas classic. It became a bad joke and late-night filler material. Anyone with a crappy VHS copy could broadcast it, anyone with a crappy print could offer an awful video transfer for sale. That's a filmmaker's nightmare; control over one's creation is what this whole argument is about.

310 posted on 07/09/2006 1:39:48 AM PDT by ReignOfError
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: BigSkyFreeper
You're not free to tell me what is considered clean or not.

No one is telling you what is considered "clean" or not. All people are doing is asking that the companies make specific edits in certain movies for them, not for you. You don't even know what the edits are.

311 posted on 07/09/2006 1:40:28 AM PDT by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 262 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls
And I have purchased a right to watch the movie at home when I bought the DVD. How is sending that DVD to an edit company to make certain edits that I request in violation of that home viewing right?

You purchased a right to view the movie, you didn't purchase the right to alter someone else's work without their permission.

312 posted on 07/09/2006 1:40:28 AM PDT by BigSkyFreeper (There is no alternative to the GOP except varying degrees of insanity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 306 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
If these companies are making bootleg copies and selling them -- then they should be stopped. But that isn't what the article says.

article:

CleanFlicks produces and distributes sanitized copies of Hollywood films on DVD by burning edited versions of movies onto blank discs. The scrubbed films are sold over the Internet and to video stores.

313 posted on 07/09/2006 1:41:17 AM PDT by stuck_in_new_orleans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Central Scrutiniser
Good! Films are pieces of art, and the director and producer should have the say as to whether they can be tampered with.

I am convinced that most nude scenes in movies are filmed in order to satisfy the voyeristic predilictions of the directors. And 99% of the curse words in movies are wholly unnecessary. It is as if the only adjectives the writers know start with "F" and end with "K" or "ING".

Most of the truly great movies contain no curse words and no nudity. They contain a lot of intelligent dialogue using the Queen's English.

Most of the newer movies must be "sanitized" before they are released on television, and the television versions are often much better than the origianals. In order to make up for the lost time from all the cuts from the curse words and nudity, they add scenes which were left on the cutting room floor.

Don't tell me that the new movies are pieces of art. Most of them are trash. They reflect the morality and the artistic vision of the hollywood crowd. IOW they have no sense of morality and no sense of art.

314 posted on 07/09/2006 1:41:26 AM PDT by P-Marlowe (((172 * 3.141592653589793238462) / 180) * 10 = 30.0196631)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls
You don't even know what the edits are.

You clearly don't understand copyright laws.

315 posted on 07/09/2006 1:41:27 AM PDT by BigSkyFreeper (There is no alternative to the GOP except varying degrees of insanity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 311 | View Replies]

To: albyjimc2
It is against the law no matter which way you look at it, and that is the bottom line.

Yes, it's agains the law to copy a movie to resell it for profit. I agree. But that is not what is going on here. They are simply editing an already-purchased movie at someone's request. I bought the Titanic VHS tape. I sent it in. They removed the nude scene, the same scene edited out with the studio's permission for TV, and sent it back. What laws were violated?

316 posted on 07/09/2006 1:44:08 AM PDT by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 263 | View Replies]

To: Republican Wildcat
Copyright law.

What part of copyright law? Can you be more specific?

317 posted on 07/09/2006 1:44:53 AM PDT by killjoy (Dirka dirka mohammed jihad! Sherpa sherpa bakalah!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 309 | View Replies]

To: TheDon
The only question left unanswered is why are studios pursuing this action?

Two reasons.

First, directors are usually pampered primadonnas who actually believe they create great art. The more cravenly commercial a director is, the more he thinks he is a great artist. Every precious moment in their films are sparkling gems. In a sense, clean flicks walked into a longstanding dispute between the studios and the directors. This issue comes up all the time over who has the final edit--the studio or the director. Normally the studio gets it because they put up the money but the big directors get final cut and the negotiations over the issue can be brutal.

Second, Hollywood does produce filthy crap that is intended to poison the minds of young folks into seeing immoral behavior as normal. A lot of folks in Hollywood see breaking down square families and square values as one of their missions.

318 posted on 07/09/2006 1:45:45 AM PDT by ModelBreaker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls

http://www.clearplay.com/

Just buy that DVD player and get what you want accomplished the legal way and we can all be happy. Protecting kids and not watching something you don't want to see is a worthwhile goal. However, that is no excuse to violate the law.


319 posted on 07/09/2006 1:46:10 AM PDT by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 311 | View Replies]

To: BigSkyFreeper
You purchased a right to view the movie, you didn't purchase the right to alter someone else's work without their permission.

When you buy a DVD in a store, are you purchasing the DVD or are you buying a license? Your statement implies that you feel you are buying a license. If so, why doesn't it come with a license agreement?

320 posted on 07/09/2006 1:46:37 AM PDT by killjoy (Dirka dirka mohammed jihad! Sherpa sherpa bakalah!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 312 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300301-320321-340 ... 701-712 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson