Device Lets Parents Cut Smut From DVDs

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Thanatoast, Jul 22, 2004.

  1. Thanatoast macrumors 6502a

    Thanatoast

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Location:
    Denver
    #1
    Now when it comes to things like movies, I prefer watching the original, unaltered film. Cutting out the bits you don't like or don't approve of change the tone and the meaning of the movie. If you don't want to subject yourself to naughty images then you should avoid the situations that bring them up and continue to live in the small world you're comfortable with.

    What realy got me was where the guy said "it's just like skipping paragraphs in a book", which of course got me thinking about removing objectionable paragraphs from books, and then the whole Orewellian route.

    There was a great article on salon.com a while back about rehashes of children's books, which showed the terrible things that can happen to a book in a "good" cause. Someone had re-written "The Wind in the Willows" so that it was almost unrecognizable. The language, once ornate, illustrative, and purposeful (and other, bigger words) had been watered down to something almost unrecognizable. The opening paragraph of the book had completely changed it's meaning from "smelling spring in the air and being called outside" to "being sick of cleaning the house". Entire chapters had been cut out of the new edition! It was really quite pathetic.

    Anyway, I was just wondering if anyone else sees any danger in this kind of activity. I'm sure many people here have read Farenheit 451, and were just as sickened by as I was. Or even, dare I say, 1984. The uncomfortable parts removed, rewritten, and made more convenient for modern consumption. It seems incomprehensible to me. Anyone else?
     
  2. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #2
    The problem I see is that people are profiting off alterations of others' copyrighted materials.

    It's like a third party buying "explicit lyrics" CDs, chopping bits out on their own, repackaging and reselling them as "clean" versions for a higher price.

    It's a violation of copyright laws and does not fall under fair use.
     
  3. radhak macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2003
    Location:
    NJ, USA
    #3
    I don't see what the problem is. This software would only help me skip portions on my copy of the DVD, which i have already paid for and bought. So the movie maker is already paid for his product. And if i want to censor / skip parts for my own consumption, how does it affect anybody else?

    Even the comparison with books holds. Once I buy a novel, maybe I tear off a couple of pages and keep the rest as my copy. How's that objectionable?

    Have you never fast-forwarded any movie past portions you are bored with, or not comfortable with? So did you fiddle with any of the movie maker's rights or intellectual property by doing so?

    The only problem would be if somebody uses the software to create a new version of the DVD and starts selling it. That would be piracy, but as such this software is just technology coming to the help of many who have wanted some such for long.
     
  4. mouchoir macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2004
    Location:
    London, UK
    #4
    I agree that this ruling is just going to make one company money.

    There is already a rating system for films, and with good reason.

    What a waste of time and taxpayers money.
     
  5. LethalWolfe macrumors G3

    LethalWolfe

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #5

    This is what the company originally did. They provided a "service" where customers could buy the original DVD and pay for a "clean" version as well. The company tried to skirt copyright issues by saying that customers weren't being charged for the clean DVD they were being charged for the service (i.e. so instead of Bob making a kid friendly version of "Finding Nemo" at home he pays them to do it for him). Needless to say they took a lot of heat from Hollywood, especially directors, and I think they got shut down. Or, at least, they were forced to change direction and came up w/a new way to butcher movies.

    I do think ClearPlay should have to get permission and should have to pay licensing fees. They are selling recuts of movies. It's a non-destructive recut that is done on the fly but it is still a recut. If they offered the filters for free then it might be another matter. But profiting from the works of others w/o their permission is a no-no.


    Lethal
     
  6. radhak macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2003
    Location:
    NJ, USA
    #6
    yes, if they are changing and selling me a copy of a movie made by somebody else, there are issues there, no arguments. and $4.95 every month? whats that for...?

    actually, the technology they offer is much less than what i was hoping for : i want the equivalent of glue-ing together a bunch of pages in a book, so that anybody reading the book after that reads upto page 9, then has to skip to page 14 because the pages in between are permanently stuck. So the device i am hoping for is that 'glue' that allows me to do this in my home to whatever DVD i chose to. maybe some sort of software program that marks specific sections (that i can select) of the DVD unreadable so that the movie automatically skips to the portion after that. that way, i pay for the DVD, and i pay for this software, and use them as i like.

    but if somebody else has to create a filter for me, i may not agree with their version either, so i am back to square one.

    personally for me, the most objectionable in any movie is casual abuse of animals : the dog in 'Something About Mary' or the cat in 'Ed TV' (gets crushed when he falls on it from bed). and i am sure very few 'corporate censors' are going to be bothered by such trifles... :mad:
     

Share This Page