It wasn't clear in the article.
Then I disagree with the ruling. There is no difference if a person bought a movie and asked me to edit out the bad words for them, and what they did. So I see no reason why Cleanfilms can't do it for a living. Maybe it will get overturned on appeal, because anyone is entitled to edit their own copies of works they purchased for own use, so why not entrust someone else to do it?
Renting those version out may be a different story, though. But purchased copies for own use, I can't see how this ruling is logical.