[Hendrix]

"I would be. Copyright holders should make the determination of what versions of their material are out there. I also would want to have to filter through a dozen different edits of a movie to make sure I was getting the one I want, it's annoying enough with the special expanded editions muddying the waters."

You would be in the small minority with your view. Most of the public will go for this. You would not have to filter though anything. If you want the original, it will be there. If you want a sanitized version, then you would have a choice of which version you wanted.

[discostu]

And that's why we're a republic and not a democracy, sometimes the majority misses the larger issues, in this case copyright ownership. Once you open the door to anybody making an edit of a movie to remove what they consider to be offensive you've just destroyed the entire concept of copyright, no artist really owns anything they do anymore because it's all open to editing by anybody.

If there's a market for sanitized movies then let the copyright owners edit it and distribute that, along with their other special editions. It shouldn't be open to any seller.

[Gabz]

Most of the public will go for this.

But the public doesn't own the property......the studio/director/producer/whoever does. It is private property, until such time as someone purchases it, then and only then, are they free to do with it as they wish....which does not include renting or reselling it for a profit, as this ruling rightly shows.