Cinematical

according to the salt lake tribune, clearplay is not affected by the ruling.
http://www.sltrib.com/ci_4026743

Reply

I think this is great news. I lived in Utah when the whole CleanFlicks thing was getting started. The videos are so horribly edited that you can't even figure out the plot sometimes. It all began when someone edited out the Titanic scene where Rose has her breasts exposed for a nude etching - a clear double standard for movies and other art.

Reply

Personally I don't have a problem with the CleanPlay player - because you know you are buying one, and you know if you are using one, and you aren't altering the actual film. It's akin to a parent standing in front of the TV during certain scenes.

The renting of actuallu alterted DVDs and tapes however.... clearcut violation of copyright, and it also interferes with the artists vision, because what if the only stores in your town offer these sanitised movies? You'll be forced to watch something the artist didn't intend.

Reply

Quite frankly I find that strangers literally exposing themselves and practically having sex in my living room and the use of disgusting language that rather brands an individual as too mentally inept to express him/her self using plain English, is extremely offensive. If a writer's talent is so minimal that he/she is unable to get a point across using language and art that would be acceptable to show a 5 year old, then get out of the business! You have no talent!
What it boils down too... If your so called intelligence resides behind your zipper or under your thong and your burning desire is to be in the porn business...GET OUT OF MY LIVING ROOM! Most of the TV shows that I thought I would enjoy because of the actors/actresses, have become so disgusting with their inuendos and the raunchy talk they use to the CHILDREN on their shows are so totally unacceptable that I and my family and friends no longer watch them!
Point in case: Raymond was fun when he first started..then he got raunchy. We shut him off. Same with 2 men and a boy. They should be ashamed of themselves.The way they talk to and in front of that child is sick!
The new "Christine" is a disgusting PIG!!
I used to think that Neal Harris was such a cute nice actor. Then he got on that 'How I Met your Mother' show and has joined the rest of the slime...How sad.
Yes, there is filth and 4 letter words and illicet sex and all kinds of offensive thngs in this world, but I don't have to have ANY of it dumped in my home. And I know a lot of people who feel this way. The actors and actresses who accept these roles should remember.THEY will be accountable for any negative influence they have, especially on a youthful audience. THINK! If you think there is no GOD and you can do anything you want whether or not it hurts or offends anyone, and tomorrow you die and discover there IS A GOD, Whoops! Then what!? Have a good life! And may God bless you with just a tad of wisdom!

Reply

Mary, I noticed that you said four letter words and sex are offensive, but what about violence?

Reply

So, Mary, who the crap is "dumping" this stuff into your home. Are you not in control of what plays on your TV? Do you not have the ability to turn off the TV in order to refrain from seeing offensive material? This stuff happens and you need to accept it, not everyone has such high standards as yourself. Do your own responsibility to you and yours, but don't be so quick to pass your judgement on others. Parents need to be responsible for what plays on their TV's, not the studios. Do a little research before watching something, find out if you may be offended and if so, stay away. It's that simple.

Sorry, didn't mean to take away from the initial topic.

Reply

I peruse this sight daily. Most days, multiple times. I have never in my life posted a comment on a board because... well I don't like that process. I like to go on the internet and find out things I didn't know. That's all. I'm not particularly interested in chatting about things. So... out of character for me I have decided that I need to post something on this board. The guy that wrote the article, way to go. You did your job. You reported news. The people that posted comments, way to go. You spoke your mind. Now, Mary Parkhurst, your comment is laughable. I read your comment and I, literally, could not stop myself from laughing. Please, people reading this, Cinematical is a good place. It's a good place for news and there's no reason to pay any attention to people who are bored and find it entertaining to go on the internet and write bullsh*t (dont know if I can curse on here). Everyone have a good evening, and way to go Cinematical. Laugh with me at the childish comments.

Reply

This ruling is interesting. It looks like the rights of Hollywood are somehow more powerful than the rights of individuals, or small companies. It seems that an individual, or company would have the right to buy a product, change it, and resell it, as long as it was purchased. Couldn't I buy a copy of the mona lisa, paint a moustache on it and then resell it? Sure it isn't in the original intended form of the artist, but the artist doesn't own the copy, I do. As long as they're buying the movies, I don't see what the big deal is.

Reply

I say make'em watch The Aristocrats (2005), Clockwork Orange style. Then they'll have a valid complaint. Otherwise it is a choice.

Mary, If you don't want the stuff in your living room, then don't let it in. You own your living room, just as the copyright holders own their decisions.

What is the quote from Bulworth? Something like "I don't find the sex & violence in films offensive, what I find offensive is that most of your products just aren't very good" ( full quote anyone? )

Reply

I go both ways on this. On one hand, its a good thing. Just like music, just because you have a copy of it, doesn't mean you can do what you want with it. (ie music samples). If I remember right, when you buy a movie or a music that is copyrighted, you not actually buying the music/movie, but the right to use it. If that is the case then your not allowed to mess with it.

On the other hand, some of the best stuff I've seen and heard has been indepenentaly edited. The Highlander 2 Renegade version, the Phantom Menace version with out Jar-Jar, and the Grey Album (I don't remember what the guys name was but he took the Beatles White Album and Jay-Z's Black Album and combined it)

I guess I come down on edit movies = bad. DVD players with filters = acceptable.

Reply

Mary, its a good thing film writers don't make sure their films are suitable for 5 year olds to view, or else we would run into some major misconceptions about human life, now wouldn't we? Secondly, there are plenty of movies out there that can teach us a lesson, politically correct or politically incorrect. Read Rich's post and try to be more open minded. And by the way, God bless America for respecting so many forms of anti-censorship.

Reply

John, it's not the same. This was a company reselling it based on the work of someone else. It completely changed the original product. I see why it was ruled this way and agree 100%.

However, it doesn't effect ClearPlay, and I agree with that 100% as well. ClearPlay alters the way someone watches a movie without altering the movie.


It's a subtle distinction, but one that I feel is very important. I mean, you can't go into business buying books, cutting pages out, and reselling it. But you can sell the scissors and guides that tell someone what pages they might not like.



And I'm genuinely hoping Mary is a fake account. If not, well, all the more reason why America is quickly finding it's continued future as a superpower in question...

Reply

John,

Actually, you don't own the copyright to a print of a work of art; that print is still protected by any copyright the original work is protected under, if any. In the case of the Mona Lisa, I don't know if it falls under public domain at this point, or if it's still protected under French law. But if you bought, say, a print of a Mark Mothersbaugh painting, or a print of an Annie Leibowitz photograph, or a copy of the latest novel by Annie Proulx, the fact that you purchased a copy of that painting, photograph or book would not give you the right to make changes to that copyrighted material and resell it.

Also, you say "the rights of Hollywood are somehow more powerful than the rights of individuals". On the contrary -- there was no entity called "Hollywood" that brought this suit; the suit was brought by various groups within Hollywood, representing the rights of the individual people who worked to create the films, and the rights of the studios (who, after all, put their money into making the films) to protect their property.

It makes perfect sense that this ruling wouldn't affect Clearplay, which doesn't actually change the copyrighted material. It's basically like fast-forwarding past the parts you don't like.

Reply

So, am I still allowed to go to someone and pay them to remove scenes which I don't like to see and still watch the movie, or does this ruling a take it or leave it deal where if I do not want that 1 second scene of a 6 hour movie, I can no longer watch it?

It feels likes its less rights for me.

Reply

I’m disappointed with the decision. I have purchased a few films that have been edited for content and have enjoyed watching a movie without hearing the “f” word thrown in here and there. The edit does not take away from a good story line. I’m am however curious as to why the TV networks and airlines are allowed to show edited films, but we the public no longer able to purchase these for our own use. The courts decision will not be life changing for me; I just won’t watch or purchase films with offensive material.

Reply

"I’m am however curious as to why the TV networks and airlines are allowed to show edited films, but we the public no longer able to purchase these for our own use. The courts decision will not be life changing for me; I just won’t watch or purchase films with offensive material."

Because films and TV networks license the movies from the studios.
CleanFlicks didn't. They simply purchased and edited on their own.
Also, studios do the TV and Airline edits themselves. They still have control. CleanFlicks took that control.


If people dislike "offensive material" the best option is to simply not watch those movies. The director wants you to see "offensive material," but plenty of other directors are fine and don't include it.
Or, simply petition studios to include a censored cut on the DVDs. There's room, at least for an audio track, and if there's genuinely a market for it some studios might be ok with it.


Lastly, I'd question why simple words with nothing behind it are deemed "offensive material" to some of you. Is "freaking" really any less offensive than "f**king?" It has the exact same meaning. Why, then, is a slightly different sound relevant? Isn't it the meaning that should count?

Reply

Nice self-edit there MosquitoControl. You just edited something while defending it's right to not be edited. Whoever created that word should sue you for altering their artistic expression. I happen to agree with you on words and meanings, though. Using substitutes does not change your purpose, and that's the critical component. I know the Bible doesn't say, "thou shalt not say the unholy 5 words". Hell, i doubt those words were even around. It's all a societal decision as to what constitutes inappropriateness.
Mary, go get TV Guardian. I have family that uses it with great results. Clearplay also sounds like an alternative for you. But supporting a business that illegally profits from someone else's work is wrong, and makes Jesus cry.
There is obviously a market for people who wish for less amounts of certain content, so maybe if you put forth a little effort to convince studio's that making alternate edits avialable for purchase would be profitable, they'd do it.
whew, that was fun.

Reply

There is no "right" to watch a movie and not be offended. There is no law to save you from those items which are morally offensive to you. There are, however, intellectual property rights which stop people from making money off my creation or idea without consulting me or paying me. It's really that simple.

Don't like it? Don't watch it. Ofended? Turn it off. But don't rip off an artist just so you don't have to be annoyed.

Reply

I don't agree with this decision at all. I rent these edited films, and agree that some of the early editing jobs were horrible and made some movies unwatchable, but the companies have honed their editing skills and most movies I have gotten recently have been great to watch. I would have never seen these films if they were not edited.

No one forces people to rent edited movies, there is obviously a desire for the service, these edited movie stores are bringing these movies to a wider audience, seemed like a win win situation for the editors and film makers.

Reply

"I would have never seen these films if they were not edited."

Sounds like a personal problem.
Obviously I don't know you, so I cannot say for certain, but be it a religious or personal issue it sounds like your skin is too thin.
But I'm of the belief that the American society is too concerned with words and too little concerned with actions. There are worse "evils" out there than some four letter words, some splatches of blood, and the occasional nipple.

"No one forces people to rent edited movies, there is obviously a desire for the service, these edited movie stores are bringing these movies to a wider audience, seemed like a win win situation for the editors and film makers."

But it's not for the film makers. These editors are reselling their product, altered, without their permission. The film makers were not making a proper cut of the movie. They did all of the real work but the editors were making a substantial profit.

That's the issue here.


If the editors went to Hollywood and licensed the movies that would be different. Even then most directors wouldn't allow it, though. Why? Because the movies fall into two categories:
1) cheap thrills. In which case you shouldn't be watching it because the movie as a whole should offend your sensibilities as the themes are just a carrying point of the words and nipples. If you're ok with American Pie sans-nipples... what are you really protesting? Is a movie about underage drinking and premarital sexing really ok if you take out the nipples? Is it the nipples that make the movie "offensive?"
2) Movies with a deeper theme, something more serious, with the words and nipples just there to help convey it. The director felt it was necessary, and likely feels you need thicker skin and to loosen up. It's just words, nipples are natural, and does seeing extra blood is Saving Private Ryan really make it any worse?

Reply