Deleting swearing, sex and violence from films on DVD or VHS violates copyright laws, a U.S. judge has ruled. "Their (movie producers) 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."
"Creative, artistic, expression,.......a public interest in providing such protection."
But when this "creative artistic expression " involves God, it's okay to edit. Evidently there isn't "a public interest in providing such protection" in this case. Where's the producers ( Steven Spielberg, Robert Redford and Martin Scorsese, and thirteen others ) standing up against the editing of this content? Where's U.S. District Judge Richard Matsch, the judge who made this ruling?
"These films carry our name and reflect our reputations. So we have great passion about protecting our work ... against unauthorized editing" stated Michael Apted, the president of the Directors Guild of America. So if editing the objectionable content from a piece of work is "...irreparable injury to the creative artistic expression," then how could any producer "authorize" the editing of their work?
Easy. It's called money, something that's paid to the copyright owner for use of their product. Your probably thinking that YOU paid for the DVD you have at home, therefore YOU own it. That's wrong thinking. You paid for the material, labor, and right to have a copy of the movie at home to view. You don't have the right to alter it. In today's world where movie production can be done on the home computer, you could easily edit your personal version of a movie. But don't get caught. It's not really yours.
On September 9th, 2006, the CG show "VeggieTales" appeared for the first time on NBC Saturday morning cartoon programming. But this isn't the same VeggieTales you would find when you purchase the DVD or the VHS, no, this is a version that's been edited to meet the requirements of NBC. What are those requirements? Well, "God," "Jesus," and Bible verses must be removed. They aren't acceptable subjects for children to be exposed to, like, say, violence, sex, and swearing.
NBC could have placed a warning on the cartoon, like "PG-G", for "Parental Guidance required due to "God" content." But no, it's easier to require the removal of the "religious" content, to impose "irreparable injury to the creative artistic expression" of VeggieTales.
The one hope, as expressed by creator Phil Vischer, is that people will enjoy the NBC aired cartoon enough to go out and buy a local copy, the uncut copy, at Walmart, or any Bible store.
VeggieTales on NBC's Saturday cartoon lineup: It's Judge Matsch's "infringement" in reverse. Or is it religious intolerance? Maybe secular bias?
http://www.cbc.ca/story/arts/national/2006/07/09/film-scrubbing-ruling.html
http://www.philvischer.com/index.php/?p=18
http://townhall.com/Columnists/BrentBozellIII/2006/09/08/nbc_slices_and_dices_veggie_tales
Wednesday, September 13, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment