Has Hollywood Gone Too Far With DVD Control? - Page 9 - 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, 08:21 PM   #121
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 07:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest
I've been reading the legal documents and it's not just Clean Films and other video-editing companies that are being targeted. The studios also named in the suit a company that doesn't edit videos - they make dvd players that are programmed to skip over objectionable content - without editing or harming the DVD at all.

Surely you will all agree that is neither illegal or unethical to control what parts of the movie you yourself watch on your own TV, especially if no edits are made to the DVD? What the studios are doing here is a perfect example of what I said previously - reaching for an unprecedented level of control.

I think that in all of this, the studios are the unethical party. They want you to have as little control as you can over how you watch their movies. It is their overflowing sense of self-importance and their egotism that drives this.
If it is fully a question of the movie studios complaining, then I'd say that they don't have a case against a DVD player that does that. I'd also be interested in knowing HOW they are able to do that with each DVD. Perhaps they are violating copyright merely through the method? However, the DVD player, itself, might violate patents regarding DVD hardware itself, which has to be licensed as well.

I'm not entirely sure, and I freely admit that that latter is a stretch--and if it was the case, it wouldn't be the movie studios doing the suing. However, these are the same companies that hate DVRs and how they can skip commercials. They are probably seeing how far the courts will let them go.

But again, we have a Congress that's more interested in meaningless hot button issues. It's to distract the fact that they're really just tools for their big money campaign contributors, which corporations certainly fall under.

Melon
__________________

__________________
melon is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 08:24 PM   #122
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 07:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Muggsy


wow this really hits me because I wouldnt like to see my own art abused in that way... I can't help to take this a little bit personal because my way of life depends on those rights, and seeing that someone doesn't respect them because of their conveniences doesnt feel very comfortable.
If someone were to steal your painting instead of buying it, yes that would affect your way of life.

However, I want to ask you a sincere question:

Lets' imagine I buy one of your paintings from you, take it home and decide that the upper right corner doesn't look quite right, so I hire my artist friend to paint over that area, then take the painting and hang it on my wall. How does that affect your way of life?
__________________

__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 08:30 PM   #123
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 07:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon


If it is fully a question of the movie studios complaining, then I'd say that they don't have a case against a DVD player that does that. I'd also be interested in knowing HOW they are able to do that with each DVD. Perhaps they are violating copyright merely through the method?
They custom-create a filter file for each movie. These filter filesare programmed with data on the exact places in the movie that contain the offensive material. The filter files is then loaded on to the DVD player. When the movie is played in the DVD player, the player reads from the filter file, and when an offensive part happens, the filter file sends a message to the DVD player to mute or skip the part.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 08:38 PM   #124
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: 07:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


If someone were to steal your painting instead of buying it, yes that would affect your way of life.

However, I want to ask you a sincere question:

Lets' imagine I buy one of your paintings from you, take it home and decide that the upper right corner doesn't look quite right, so I hire my artist friend to paint over that area, then take the painting and hang it on my wall. How does that affect your way of life?
You still don't get it...

Let's imagine what you say... and you know what? that doesn't make any sense, because why do you want to buy one of my paintings if you find something that you don't like?, I've never heard a thing like that from any of the people I work for, If they like my work they like the whole of it and if they want to make suggestions they talk to me directly, if they don't like my work they just don't hire me, period. that's ridiculous, and it is even more ridiculous (and irrespectful) if you hire someone who isn't me to change it... If that artist you hire has some ethic , they won't to do what you are asking, because they will understand the real value of my work, something that it seems you aren't capable to do . If the upper right corner doesn't look quite right, you have to ask ME to change it, that's the right way to do things.

and now, that you insist that I only talk about money, let's talk about money: if that painting costs you a lot of money and you go and altered it, you lost your inversion, that won't be a "muggsy" original anymore, but a corrupted painting

besides, and back to the topic. that Clean company is not only editing the movies, is selling them!!
__________________
Muggsy is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 08:48 PM   #125
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,689
Local Time: 06:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


I certainly don't, if I bought it legally and don't display it publicly, give it away or sell it. Frankly, I don't understand why anyone would find it unethical.
Um, hello that's what Clean is doing, selling it, so how is that not unethical?

__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 07-27-2006, 08:51 PM   #126
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 07:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest
If someone were to steal your painting instead of buying it, yes that would affect your way of life.

However, I want to ask you a sincere question:

Lets' imagine I buy one of your paintings from you, take it home and decide that the upper right corner doesn't look quite right, so I hire my artist friend to paint over that area, then take the painting and hang it on my wall. How does that affect your way of life?
If you own something, then you have the right to do whatever you want. Original paintings fall under that, and if you really wanted to ruin a $100 million Van Gogh painting after you bought it, you'd be stupid, but well within your rights.

However, this is where software and media companies exploit loopholes in the law. You don't own a DVD. You're merely buying a license to view a movie that the studios own according to their terms. If you don't agree to their licensing terms, then you're not supposed to buy it in the first place.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 08:51 PM   #127
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,689
Local Time: 06:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


Lets' imagine I buy one of your paintings from you, take it home and decide that the upper right corner doesn't look quite right, so I hire my artist friend to paint over that area, then take the painting and hang it on my wall. How does that affect your way of life?
This isn't the same scenario. This would be like if you or a friend personally edited the movie. I see no problem with that, if you want to personally edit your films and not sell them, please do so...
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 07-27-2006, 08:53 PM   #128
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: 07:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Muggsy


You still don't get it...

Let's imagine what you say... and you know what? that doesn't make any sense, because why do you want to buy one of your paintings if find something that you don't like?, I've never heard a thing like that from any of the people I work for, If they like my work they like the whole of it and if they want to make suggestions they talk to me directly, if they don't like my work they just don't hire me, period. that's ridiculous, and it is even more ridiculous (and irrespectful) if you hire someone who isn't me to change it... If that artist you hire has some ethic , they won't to do what you are asking, because they will understand the real value of my work, something that it seems you aren't capable to do . If the upper right corner doesn't look quite right, you have to ask ME to change it, that's the right way to do things.

things would be different if you buy that painting and you write me a letter (or aproach me in other way) asking me to change the corner that you didn't like. I can say "yeah, I will do that for you" or say "no, I won't because that's an important part of the piece". Obviously I won't check your house to see if you change my painting or not, but that's in your conscience.

and now, that you insist that I only talk about money, let's talk about money: if that painting costs you a lot of money and you go and altered it, you lost your inversion, that won't be a "muggsy" original anymore, but a corrupted painting

besides, and back to the topic. that Clean company is not only editing the movies, is selling them!!
sorry!... i quoted myself (I was trying to edit my post) but please read this one now that it is edited

Lore.
__________________
Muggsy is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 08:56 PM   #129
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 12:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Muggsy


You still don't get it...

Let's imagine what you say... and you know what? that doesn't make any sense, because why do you want to buy one of your paintings if find something that you don't like?, I've never heard a thing like that from any of the people I work for, If they like my work they like the whole of it and if they want to make suggestions they talk to me directly, if they don't like my work they just don't hire me, period. that's ridiculous, and it is even more ridiculous (and irrespectful) if you hire someone who isn't me to change it... If that artist you hire has some ethic , they won't to do what you are asking, because they will understand the real value of my work, something that it seems you aren't capable to do . If the upper right corner doesn't look quite right, you have to ask ME to change it, that's the right way to do things.

and now, that you insist that I only talk about money, let's talk about money: if that painting costs you a lot of money and you go and altered it, you lost your inversion, that won't be a "muggsy" original anymore, but a corrupted painting

besides, and back to the topic. that Clean company is not only editing the movies, is selling them!!

You speak for this artist, Muggsy. I wouldn't want to sell a painting that someone ripped out the corner of and had another artist paint over it. It wouldn't be my work anymore.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 09:36 PM   #130
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,882
Local Time: 07:14 PM
Re: Has Hollywood Gone Too Far With DVD Control?

Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


Hollywood has been fighting Clean Films and this kind of company for years. Hollywood producers and directors maintain that by editing the movies, the company is altering the film significantly enough that it no longer stays true to the directors'/producers' visions.

I'd be interested to see more information posted on this topic, because the issue, according to what 80s posted is that the film is no longer "true to the directors/producers vision."

My hunch is that is does, in the end boil down to money and permission, but I can't tell that from 80s post. Does anyone have any more information?

I think there is a political "liberal/conservative" undertone to this whole thing. I think there is a "conservative" undertone to what Clean Films does. The fact that they may be breaking the law is irrelevant to them because they are "heroes stopping Hollywood from foisting their smut upon us." They believe they have the moral high ground here. And I think the objections to the judges ruling have a conservative undertone as well. . .implied is the idea that apparently Hollywood is so desperate to corrupt America that they're going to smash down some godly company even though that company isn't costing Hollywood a cent.
__________________
maycocksean is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 10:05 PM   #131
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 07:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


Um, hello that's what Clean is doing, selling it, so how is that not unethical?

What they sold me is the original DVD. They are editing it and charging for the editing service because I want my movie edited.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 10:09 PM   #132
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,689
Local Time: 06:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


What they sold me is the original DVD. They are editing it and charging for the editing service because I want my movie edited.
Does the original work? You paid for an edited version, don't fool yourself. You paid for what you consider a better, more watchable version.

AND they don't have permission to do that, you tend to forget that part. Thereful still unethical and illegal.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 07-27-2006, 10:14 PM   #133
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 07:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Muggsy


You still don't get it...

Let's imagine what you say... and you know what? that doesn't make any sense, because why do you want to buy one of my paintings if you find something that you don't like?, I've never heard a thing like that from any of the people I work for, If they like my work they like the whole of it
Of course it makes sense. Do you like every song on every album you buy? Do you like every scene of every movie you buy? Of course not.


Quote:
Originally posted by Muggsy

and if they want to make suggestions they talk to me directly, if they don't like my work they just don't hire me, period. that's ridiculous, and it is even more ridiculous (and irrespectful) if you hire someone who isn't me to change it... If that artist you hire has some ethic , they won't to do what you are asking, because they will understand the real value of my work, something that it seems you aren't capable to do . If the upper right corner doesn't look quite right, you have to ask ME to change it, that's the right way to do things.
If I walked up to Universal Studios and said "Hey, I bought your King Kong DVD, but I don't like the swearing, so will you edit it out for me", they'd laugh me out of the room.

And I really don't see why they'd care if I DID take or have someone else take the swearing out of my copy; it doesn't affect them at all. Not at all.


Quote:
Originally posted by Muggsy

and now, that you insist that I only talk about money, let's talk about money:
When did I say you only talk about money? Show me.

i
Quote:
Originally posted by Muggsy
f that painting costs you a lot of money and you go and altered it, you lost your inversion, that won't be a "muggsy" original anymore, but a corrupted painting
Shouldn't I have the right to "lose my inversion"? Since I bought it, I do now own the painting, right? If I wanted to use a painting as a liner for my bird cage, I should be able to.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 10:18 PM   #134
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 07:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2DMfan
The reason they want to shut it down is because they don't want others to profit where they can do just the same. That is, they want to sell their own edited versions.
That's not the reason they shut it down. They have no intention whatsoever of editing their DVDs for content.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 07-27-2006, 10:26 PM   #135
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: 07:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest


Of course it makes sense. Do you like every song on every album you buy? Do you like every scene of every movie you buy? Of course not.




If I walked up to Universal Studios and said "Hey, I bought your King Kong DVD, but I don't like the swearing, so will you edit it out for me", they'd laugh me out of the room.

And I really don't see why they'd care if I DID take or have someone else take the swearing out of my copy; it doesn't affect them at all. Not at all.




When did I say you only talk about money? Show me.

i

Shouldn't I have the right to "lose my inversion"? Since I bought it, I do now own the painting, right? If I wanted to use a painting as a liner for my bird cage, I should be able to.

well... you didnt ask me to imagine that I was the president of Universal studios. I'm answering your questions from my own POV because you asked me to do it so:

* a painting, a single piece of art is apreciated as a whole. You were talking about my paintings, that's the way I appreciate my paintings and other people's single pieces of art. I collect books, books for children and art books, There are books that I like more than others, but I won't paint stuff over the images that I like less, because I respect other's work, and I don't have any authority to do that even if the only person who are going to see the books is me, is just matter of keeping the integrity of the art, I guess.

* As I said before, I'm not the president of a big Studio, probably my relationship with my paintings is different. I'm in every step of their making, I design them, I prepare the materials, I paint them, I show them to the ones who are interested, if it is an illustration I have to check if they are well printed...
Besides, it isn't impossible to show your opinion to those big companies. And I dare to think that the executives of Universal would concern about what would happen with their movies, because, after all, is their image what they are selling and they have the right to protect it, against misuses and ripping.

* about the third... yeah, you have all the right to be stupid and loose your money... but you also had the right to buy a better piece that didn't need any change, and deserves a better place than a birdcage . I dont like the paintings of Botero, for example, but I wouldn't be so silly to buy one of his paintings and ask someone else to make those fat ladies skinny because i don't like the fat ladies, Instead I would buy what I really like: the bacons, The Klees, gigers....
__________________

__________________
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 07:14 PM.


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