[icwhatudo]

"How dare you take out the 3 F bombs and 1 boobie shot that otherwise had nothing to do with a great movie you wanted to watch with your family!!!"

[SteveMcKing]

It's like clothing Michelangelo's cherubs, or putting boxer briefs on the David statue.

[LowOiL]

Previously posted...

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1662608/posts

[impatient]

Would it be illegal to edit movies to not suck?

[Smokin' Joe]

Now if we could get them to un-Bowdlerize Shakespeare and put Jim's first name back in Mark Twain's writings...

Hollywood is its own victim in this, imo.

[zarf]

I recently saw te sanitized version of Deadwood.

It was the trailer.

[VOA]

(here's a blast from the past...)

as the old lead-in to "The Outer Limits" did years ago...
once again we've heard from a band of aliens living in Hollywood:

We control the horizontal
We control the vertical
We control the fart jokes, the gratuitous nudity and cursing, environmentalistic
propaganda and liberal-agenda brainwashing in our films.
We will make sure you watch all of it.
Even if we make the same money if you got an edited version without the
childish trash we crafted into the product.

[Central Scrutiniser]

There is another thread about this, very long and very repetitive.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1662608/posts?q=1&&page=1

[ElkGroveDan]

I'm not so sure this is so cut and dry. Does this mean my home builder can sue me for changing the floorplan of my home and selling it for more?

[Question_Assumptions]

There is probably a simple techological solution here. Basically, create and sell a DVD player that can read instructions about how to play a commercial DVD censored in various ways via the internet or some sort of CD-ROM system so that you buy a standard copy of, say, The Matrix, and the player adjusts how it's played by either automatically skipping over scenes, dropping out the sound, blocking out parts of the screen, or changing how the picture is framed. The only question there would be whether you need to agree not to do that when you license the technology to play DVDs.

[Jedi Master Pikachu]

As long as it isn't stealing intellectual property, shouldn't people be allowed to get edited movies--though technically the editors would need to get approval from the original makers of the (copyrighted) movie.

[Caramelgal]

I say let the buyer be ware…..

You don’t want you or your family to hear the F-bomb or see some titty? Do some research first, preview and make an informed choice. Don’t like what you see? – don’t watch it. But don’t expect your retailer do your censorship for you and know better than the writers and director on what makes sense for their artistic creation – whether you agree it is good or not and it could very well be crap in my opinion too.

I saw my first R-rated movie when I was in the third grade when my Dad took me to see Patton. He explained to me ahead of time that I’d hear very bad language and see some violence and disturbing scenes but that what I would see was true to history and what he experienced as a WW2 vet. I was not scarred by seeing that movie and I think it made me a better person. I also saw the Green Barets at about the same time.

I concede that Patton did not have “gratuitous” sex, violence or bad language and was a good and patriotic film but then some people would have been happier if the General said things like, gee golly gosh instead of what he actually said. BTW – while we are at it, let’s take the cigarette out of Bogart’s mouth in Casablanca – after all cigarettes are now known to be bad and children could be influenced and after all any censorship is good if “it’s for the children”….

[Jeff Gordon]

Judge Richard Matsch

Appointed by Nixon.
Hung Timothy McVeigh.

[Brimack34]

Good for them. Now the thousands that were for this just will not buy them at all.

[my_pointy_head_is_sharp]

It's not like anyone was getting SURPRISED with a sanitized version. As if they were expecting the usual F-bombs and instead got a clean version. These sanitized versions were being rented where people knew what they were getting and WANTED to get those versions.

Don't TV networks routinely do this? They call it, "edited for television". Even more often, they simply "bleep" words.

Absolutely right. How come the networks have the right to sanitize the movies, but private companies don't? Perhaps what they objected to was the SELLING of these versions, rather than just the rental.

[Republican Wildcat]

Here's the legal way to handle this, rather than making illegal copies of movies:

http://www.clearplay.com

Props to Politicalmom who gave the heads up on this device on another thread.

[Brytani]

If Hollywood had a clue they would compromise on this. All I've heard is how movies are bombing right and left. If it wasn't for the latest Johnny Depp Pirate movie, the movie industry would have another bad season.

Why don't motion picture distributors get together with companies that want to remove cussing/nudity/sex scenes etc out of movies. If the companies pay royalties to the movie industry for cleaned up movies, then sell them to people who would otherwise not see the film, it's a win win situation.

I do not believe a company has the right to take a movie and change the content without the expressed permission of the owner of the film. However, when there is money to be made, I'm surprised Hollywood isn't jumping at the chance.

[napscoordinator]

I believe that Hollywood has a chance to make more money here. If they would start selling a "family version" they could make money on the theater version, the family version and the unrated version that they sell now. I hope that they decide to take this big money venture on some time. It would help there bottom line and help get rid of the unauthorized companies that are doing it.

[wai-ming]

Question:

Do copyright owners get royalties every time a piece of work is sold or resold? What about "used" books, movies, etc.?

For example,
if I bought a book, then tore out a page, could I then resell the book as a "used book with a missing page"?

Could the author sue me for "altering" his work? That appears to be what is happening here.