Tuesday, April 19, 2005
Casual Censorship, Vandalism or Protecting the Children ???
It seems that various "family values" politicians and a few clever technology companies managed to get the Family Entertainment and Copyright Act of 2005 passed today. (Many stories but this is very good.) The bill essentially kills a lawsuit brought by directors against a company called ClearPlay. They sell software that skips through profane, violent or sexually explicit content being played on a DVD. Nice. Maybe ClearPlay can design some glasses for folks who walk through the Louvre or the Prada -- wouldn't want folks to get upset by any nekkid statues...Note: what's really at play here isn't so much the freedom to innovate with technology (the EFF's position), an important point, but not nearly as important the issue of a creator's "moral right." (A concept of copyright law, which is very narrowly applied in the U.S., that holds that a creator has some say about how his/her work is used by others.)
Innovation or tool of the anti-art, religious fundamentalists? Is there any difference between the "sanitizing" of "Saving Private Ryan," "Tie Me Up, Tie Me Down" (still one of the sweetest, funniest movies I've seen) and the Taliban blowing up the enormous ancient statues of Buddhas? I mean, dynamite aside... I've heard the folks at ClearPlay give their spiel at various industry conferences. If you don't watch movies with your kids, or you don't trust them, or you don't talk to them, then I suppose ClearPlay will make you rest easier. I suppose, also, if you want somebody else's art to conform to your particular world view, then I suppose a ClearPlay-enabled DVD is for you. I personally find it objectionable that our legislators find it important to get involved in a case that is already with a judge. And why am I not surpsied that Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, is involved?
(What I really want is for somebody to give me ClearPlay-For-Reality. I just want the Bush Administration to be skipped over, as long as the next one isn't Dick Cheney. Or Bill Frist. Or Rick Santorum. Tom DeLay can never be elected president, right? It's just not possible, is it?)
Oh, and piggybacked onto this was a bill that makes it a felony to take a camcorder into a theater and create a "screener" copy of a movie. Fine with me. That's definitely an act of piracy that can't really be defended. However, five years in federal prison and a $250,000 fine? Wow.
It seems that various "family values" politicians and a few clever technology companies managed to get the Family Entertainment and Copyright Act of 2005 passed today. (Many stories but this is very good.) The bill essentially kills a lawsuit brought by directors against a company called ClearPlay. They sell software that skips through profane, violent or sexually explicit content being played on a DVD. Nice. Maybe ClearPlay can design some glasses for folks who walk through the Louvre or the Prada -- wouldn't want folks to get upset by any nekkid statues...Note: what's really at play here isn't so much the freedom to innovate with technology (the EFF's position), an important point, but not nearly as important the issue of a creator's "moral right." (A concept of copyright law, which is very narrowly applied in the U.S., that holds that a creator has some say about how his/her work is used by others.)
Innovation or tool of the anti-art, religious fundamentalists? Is there any difference between the "sanitizing" of "Saving Private Ryan," "Tie Me Up, Tie Me Down" (still one of the sweetest, funniest movies I've seen) and the Taliban blowing up the enormous ancient statues of Buddhas? I mean, dynamite aside... I've heard the folks at ClearPlay give their spiel at various industry conferences. If you don't watch movies with your kids, or you don't trust them, or you don't talk to them, then I suppose ClearPlay will make you rest easier. I suppose, also, if you want somebody else's art to conform to your particular world view, then I suppose a ClearPlay-enabled DVD is for you. I personally find it objectionable that our legislators find it important to get involved in a case that is already with a judge. And why am I not surpsied that Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, is involved?
(What I really want is for somebody to give me ClearPlay-For-Reality. I just want the Bush Administration to be skipped over, as long as the next one isn't Dick Cheney. Or Bill Frist. Or Rick Santorum. Tom DeLay can never be elected president, right? It's just not possible, is it?)
Oh, and piggybacked onto this was a bill that makes it a felony to take a camcorder into a theater and create a "screener" copy of a movie. Fine with me. That's definitely an act of piracy that can't really be defended. However, five years in federal prison and a $250,000 fine? Wow.
Comments:
If your so worried about the creator's "moral right" then I guess we should forbid people from leaving the movie theater to visit the restroom or deny parents the right to cover their child's eyes or ears during a movie. Either one of those actions would prevent the patron from seeing the art the way the creator intended.
I have taken my children to many art museums and they have seen naked people in art and statue. However, I certainly would not take my children to an exhibit that portrays explicit sexual acts or has live nude models. That is my right as a parent and my moral duty. I would also steer them clear if any such art was unexpectedly present at a museum.
I own a Clearplay player. It is in our family room and we always watch the movies together. I do not use it as a babysitter. We enjoy watching movies together but many movies are just past the line of being family friendly. With the help of the Clearplay player, we can be sure that we will not be surprised by any unexpected language, sexual content, or explicit violence. You must realize that in PG-13 movies, such content is added to appeal to adults not to further the story line.
I talk to my children. They are not sheltered. Because of our guidance though, they understand that there is such a thing as appropriate and inappropriate behavior. Instilling these "morals" in them will help them be good leaders, good students, and good friends.
Post a Comment
I have taken my children to many art museums and they have seen naked people in art and statue. However, I certainly would not take my children to an exhibit that portrays explicit sexual acts or has live nude models. That is my right as a parent and my moral duty. I would also steer them clear if any such art was unexpectedly present at a museum.
I own a Clearplay player. It is in our family room and we always watch the movies together. I do not use it as a babysitter. We enjoy watching movies together but many movies are just past the line of being family friendly. With the help of the Clearplay player, we can be sure that we will not be surprised by any unexpected language, sexual content, or explicit violence. You must realize that in PG-13 movies, such content is added to appeal to adults not to further the story line.
I talk to my children. They are not sheltered. Because of our guidance though, they understand that there is such a thing as appropriate and inappropriate behavior. Instilling these "morals" in them will help them be good leaders, good students, and good friends.
# posted by 
: 7:40 AM
: 7:40 AM
