(no subject)
Jul. 10th, 2006 01:16 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Court Rules Against Sanitizing Films (thanks,
byzantinespy)
I had no idea this was going on.
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
SALT LAKE CITY -- 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."
I had no idea this was going on.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-10 10:16 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-10 11:07 am (UTC)I'm wondering how this compares with/if it'll affect over-dubbing when movies are shown on TV?
(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-10 11:34 am (UTC)What a relief.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-10 12:11 pm (UTC)I haven't heard it mentioned in the news since the initial splash when a reporter found out it was going on-- this is probably fifteen or so years ago now. For some reason, I thought they'd been ordered to stop doing it years ago.
(I don't get it-- doesn't this get done by the studios themselves for TV consumption? If so, why did anyone see a need to create a whole separate company to do it again?)
(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-10 02:43 pm (UTC)I think the difference is when independent companies edit the movies and then sell or rent them for profit, versus a studio's cutting its own movie or allowing a network to edit a movie to comply with FCC regulations.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-10 03:48 pm (UTC)Or Deep Throat...
I think the difference is when independent companies edit the movies and then sell or rent them for profit, versus a studio's cutting its own movie or allowing a network to edit a movie to comply with FCC regulations.
Well, yeah, I get why the studios are pissed (and rightly so); what I'm missing is why some moron decided this was a good idea in the first place-- and why more decided it was after they saw the first one doing it.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-10 04:26 pm (UTC)I barfed a little in my mouth.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-10 06:54 pm (UTC)Revise the past to withstand the future, as an associate of mine once said.
I wish they'd just go back to being Luddites, and leave the rest of us alone...
(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-10 03:02 pm (UTC)If Mormons want to live in a bubble-wrapped world, they'll just have to watch their movies on network tv where nipples are still considered teh eval.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-10 10:28 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-07-10 10:34 pm (UTC)