Has Hollywood Gone Too Far With DVD Control? - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-27-2006, 11:13 AM   #31
Blue Crack Addict
 
Liesje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In the dog house
Posts: 19,557
Local Time: 09:32 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest

You may have not paid your friend, but do you really think all it costs is the price of a blank DVD for your friend? He had to buy the software and equipment and he probably spent hours editing it; time is money.
So, you've proved my point, they ARE making money. There's no WAY a for-profit business is only charging the cost of "services". How do they pay the employees?

You can't pay someone to purchase books, pre-print them without parts of the content, make a profit selling them publicly (which we have to assume since they aren't a non-profit), and think that's perfectly legal....
__________________

__________________
Liesje is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 12:01 PM   #32
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,656
Local Time: 08:32 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest
BVS,
Let's imagine you have a favorite photographer. He releases a big book full of his photos, and you buy a copy. Now let's imagine that one of the photos just bugs the crud out of you to the extent that you don't even want to see the photo while flipping through the pages.

Do you think that you should not be allowed to rip that photo out of your book and throw it away?
If you want to edit the movie yourself, that's fine. Just don't edit it then sell it.

I don't believe in third parties editing for distribution.
__________________

__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 07-27-2006, 12:21 PM   #33
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 06:32 AM
Given that movies are edited and distributed regularly for television and airlines, does a contractual permission for such work really act as the deciding factor?

Or is the underlying political statement expressed by the work of Clean Films the true source of contention?
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 12:26 PM   #34
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,656
Local Time: 08:32 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
Given that movies are edited and distributed regularly for television and airlines, does a contractual permission for such work really act as the deciding factor?

Or is the underlying political statement expressed by the work of Clean Films the true source of contention?
Why are you making this political?

Of course if the editing is done with permission it's entirely different.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 07-27-2006, 12:37 PM   #35
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Se7en's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: all around in the dark - everywhere
Posts: 3,531
Local Time: 09:32 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


Or is the underlying political statement expressed by the work of Clean Films the true source of contention?


Quote:
it would be one thing if the studio did it themselves.

it is quite another for Clean Films to do it for them.

write a letter to Universal and tell them that you'd like to have cleaned-up versions of their movies.
yup, what irvine said. this is a clear case of copyright infringement me thinks.
__________________
Se7en is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 12:40 PM   #36
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 06:32 AM
My question was "is this the deciding factor"? Many artists do not retain such a degree of control that they could object to the specific edits that occur for television or airlines. Yet, if you follow the contracts, technically "permission" has been granted. The artistic integrity is degraded as contracts begin to water down the bundle of rights originally held by the artist.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 12:59 PM   #37
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,656
Local Time: 08:32 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
My question was "is this the deciding factor"?
Deciding factor for what?


Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader

The artistic integrity is degraded as contracts begin to water down the bundle of rights originally held by the artist.
Dangers of the business.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 07-27-2006, 01:18 PM   #38
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,474
Local Time: 09:32 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
My question was "is this the deciding factor"? Many artists do not retain such a degree of control that they could object to the specific edits that occur for television or airlines. Yet, if you follow the contracts, technically "permission" has been granted. The artistic integrity is degraded as contracts begin to water down the bundle of rights originally held by the artist.


i think you're confusing the rights of "artists" -- by which we would mean, in this instance, directors -- with the rights of distributors, which would be production companies like Universal, Warner Bros, etc.

depending upon the terms of the contract (i.e., only a handful of directors ever get "final cut" rights, for example, usually the final cut of a film you see is what the studio wants not necessarily what the director wants), permission is not for the director to give but for the studio to give. artistic integrity is beside the point. the finished film is a product to be distributed, and the studio determines in what form that product will be distributed.

you'll note that this isn't a new issue. for example, Blockbuster will not carry films rated NC-17. so, many studios go back and re-edit films themselves in order to get an R rating so that their films can be rented from Blockbuster. one example that leaps to mind is "Showgirls."

it's about $$$, not politics, at least from the perspective of a studio.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 07-27-2006, 01:23 PM   #39
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 06:32 AM
If I understand the service correctly, the studio is still receiving its full share of $$ on each DVD sold by Clean Films. The editing is a service paid for separately from the price of the film.

I also understand the difference between the rights of the artist and the rights of a distributor. The initial objection to Clean Films was based on the artist retaining control over their work.

I would understand completely if Clean Films downloaded a movie and sold it after editing (no money for the studio).
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 01:37 PM   #40
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 09:32 AM
A company like CleanFilms should go to a Universal-type company, and say, "Look, these films have some things that could be edited out and distributed to those who want a cleaner viewing experience. We could team up. We'll do the work, you can still make some royalty on it, and everyone wins." It's not complicated. If they don't want to do it, then, well, you're out of luck.
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 01:52 PM   #41
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,656
Local Time: 08:32 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
If I understand the service correctly, the studio is still receiving its full share of $$ on each DVD sold by Clean Films. The editing is a service paid for separately from the price of the film.
How is this possible unless they have a deal with the studios?

They only need one copy to edit and then they distribute from that copy.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 07-27-2006, 01:59 PM   #42
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 06:32 AM
If they are not paying for each copy of the movie, then they are no better than anyone who illegally downloads media.

For purposes of discussion, let's assume they do pay the studio for each copy. Remove the $$$ component.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 01:59 PM   #43
Refugee
 
Muggsy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: I live in colombia, with a box of watercolors and butterflies in my tummy
Posts: 2,033
Local Time: 09:32 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by verte76
As an artist, I wouldn't want my work changed because it offended someone. I do use self-censorship. I don't take certain paintings out of the studio because I'm afraid they'll offend someone. Last year I abandoned a piece with too much blood and guts. I don't do sex scenes. This has alot to do with me being a lousy figure drawer, but it also had alot to do with my personal values. I don't think I would want someone to rip off a piece of a painting because they didn't like it. I understand movies are different, but as anitram and melon pointed out there are copyright and other legal issues involved.
I'm an artist too and I would be really upset if someone take one of my pieces and change it just because it doesn't fit their values .
__________________
Muggsy is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 02:01 PM   #44
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 09:32 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


How is this possible unless they have a deal with the studios?

They only need one copy to edit and then they distribute from that copy.
In their FAQs, they state that they buy one original copy for each edited movie they sale. They maintain at least a 1 to 1 ratio. In fact, they send you the unedited original copy along with the edited DVD; they disable the original so that you are not receiving 2 copies.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 02:06 PM   #45
Refugee
 
Muggsy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: I live in colombia, with a box of watercolors and butterflies in my tummy
Posts: 2,033
Local Time: 09:32 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


In their FAQs, they state that they buy one original copy for each edited movie they sale. They maintain at least a 1 to 1 ratio. In fact, they send you the unedited original copy along with the edited DVD; they disable the original so that you are not receiving 2 copies.
Do they have a reproduction's right (and distribution right) contract with the studios? Because if they don't that's illegal
__________________

__________________
Muggsy is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:32 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com