Time to get another player: was that the Director's cut or ClearPlay? (1 Viewer)

[ScottAndrew]

Does Clearplay sell or resell movies?

 

[Damin J Toell]

No, but other organizations named in the DGA suit do.

DJ

 

[ScottAndrew]

If I wrote a book and then someone else sold an alternate, unapproved version with the parts they didn't like cut out, I'd be ticked too.
If someone else sold a publication telling people that before reading my book they should tear out certain pages because they might be offended, I'd call that weird. I might even take it personally. I'd probably ask why they don't just read a different book.
Maybe I'd even put less of the "offensive" stuff in my next book. Would that be so bad? Some people would be unhappy, but it's my choice to yield to market demands or not. It's no different from adding an obligatory romance to a movie to expand the audience or arbitrarily killing a main character at the end to increase the perceived emotional impact. Let's not have the illusion that directors are pure artists who create as they see fit independent of market forces.

 

[Julian Lalor]

No decent writer 'yields to market demands'. It's not like the movie business. Airport trash, sure, but that's why it's trash.

 

[DaveGTP]

If Clearplay and the like weren't making a profit on the backs of the copyright holders, I would have less argument here (In fact I seem to remember saying something similiar in the last thread about this last year).

I will say: I would be one pissed off director/writer etc if someone was censoring my works.

I remember watching the special features from the Berserk anime series (this would never get Clearplayed anyway, but that's not the point). The producer/director whatever talked about why he didn't use the typical bloodless sword slashes common to much fantasy anime. Instead you saw people's arms chopped off and them screaming in pain, etc. He wanted it clear that war hurt, that people get hurt and suffer, etc. I imagine a lot of movie directors feel the same way.

Excising stuff changes the message of the movie in subtle ways. I can imagine sometimes it would be drastic. Maybe there isn't that much to some movies like Back to the Future that would be lost, but in other cases...

Anyway, Isn't this sort of a blatant copyright violation? Just wait until the studios figure out some sort of anti-clearplay copy protection. Then suddenly Clearplay will be violating the DMCA.

 

[Chris Farmer]

If ClearPlay was selling these movies I would have a serious problem with it, and I think other companies that are selling censored versions should be shut down. But what ClearPlay is doing is essentially automating features that DVD players already have. They're selling a DVD player that can be pre-programmed to mute/fast-forward certain sections of the movie automatically. It's like if you could watch a movie, edit it, and save those edits so that every time you popped the movie in certain scenes would be skipped. As long as they're just charging for the player and not the filters, I have no problem with this, and don't see how it infringes on any copyrights. And, most importantly, it keeps the original as the only version on store shelves, avoiding consumer confusion and keeping the original in their hands should they ever grow into it.

 

[Brandon Conway]

Nintendo v. Galoob

It's that simple. I've been saying it for years.

Clearplay a-ok, Cleanflicks no.

 

[JackKay]

Chris Farmer

Your correct in saying that it is software (pre-programed)not unlike what you could do for yourself in your own home for your own personal use. But now someone is doing it for you, and in essence they are selling their versions to you. ( Dosen't the player come with 300 movies preprogrammed, but updates? $$$) You are paying for the editited movies through added cost to the player.

Some one like Spielberg might say "Hey, I spent 2 years planning this movie, 6 months shooting it and another 6 months in post, editing etc. The movie came under our 60 million dollar budget, and we spent another 25 million to market it. I finally got it where I originally envisioned it, and I hope it's accepted by the public because it was something I wanted to say. Now, some guys out of nowhere, are changing my movie into several versions from different companies, and they arn't even required to even tell me their doing it. Nobody can stop them. I don't like these versions, but I am helpless to do anything. And my Name is still on this movie, like I approve of it. With all the work and time I put into this, here come a bunch of people who just jump up and piggy back ride on our hard work and marketing costs and take a free ride for a Profit! And I can't take my name off of it!"

 

[ScottAndrew]

Not to beat a dead horse, but Clearplay doesn't "change" a movie. There are no "versions" or "edited movies." The consumer bought the movie off the shelf. The consumer is making a personal choice to avoid watching certain parts. They are certainly aware that they aren't watching the whole movie as the director intended; they are going out of their way not to do so.
IMO, here's where it gets icky. If Clearplay were taking the movie, hacking it up, reselling it, and turning a profit on a derivative of someone else's work, the net effect would be almost the same. That's why it feels wrong.
But it isn't the same. It's my DVD player and my remote control, so can't I fast forward and mute? What if I pay someone to sit in my living room and fast forward and mute for me?
A) It's icky.
B) If I don't like violence, why am I watching Rambo II?*
Both are valid issues, but they are entirely in the domain of the individual consumer. Those decisions get made in my living room, no where else. (Unless they figure out a way to defeat the filter and risk losing 0.02% of their DVD sales.)

*That one is pretty obvious. What about the Royal Tennenbaums or The Insider?

 

[Chris Farmer]

I have no experience with a ClearPlay machine (no desire whatsoever to won one), so I'm not etirely sure how it works. Is the process automatic, you put the movie in, turn ClearPlay on for whatever you want removed, and the player figures it out automatically what movie you're watching and picks the correct filter? If so you might be dealing with copyright infringement if you have to pay for the filters. If, however, the filters can be applied to any movies and you tell it which movie you're watching, then what you're buying is nothing more then pre-timed fast forwards and mutes that happen to line up with the movie. It's no more copyright infringement then buying a copy of Dark Side of the Moon that syncs up with The Wizard of Oz, because the copyrighted work is never modified. What's changed is your playback of said work, but the work itself is left untouched.

 

[derek]

That is exactly how ClearPlay works (Nintendo v. Galoob as someone mentioned.) How anyone could argue against one's personal preferences of media playback is truly incredulous. Watch out Big Brother is gonna make you get rid of those chapter skip, ff, and pause buttons on your DVD remote!!!

 

[Tim_Stack]

Good court ruling this week:

http://www.sltrib.com/ci_4026743

 

[AndrewWickliffe]

Wow... how is that CleanFlicks (which cuts and burns copies of DVDs) not piracy ring?