CleanFlix Redux
I'd like to revise and extend my earlier remarks on CleanFlix by linking to this Tim Lee post clarifying that I'm most definitely not an intellectual property lawyer and it's possible that the judge was making the legally correct decision. Rather, I'm offering a policy argument about what the law should be.
Let me also recommend Scott Lemieux's remarks on this case.
Advertisement
Legally, this is very clear cut. What CleanFlix is doing involves copying of DVDs, which they have no right to do - case closed. Are the copyright laws bad? Yeah, but that's a different discussion.
Morally, artists should have the right not to be associated with bastardized versions of their own works. If I was a director and someone edited my movie without permission, I would very much like to at least have the option of having my name deleted from it (possibly also require a name change). This is not unheard of - for instance David Lynch objected to an edited version of the movie Dune, hence that version is 'directed by Alan Smithee'.
Technically, the way forward is to supply whiteout lists as separate products. It should not be terribly difficult to create a 'program' that skips certain scenes on a DVD (an unmodified DVD and the associated whiteout list could be probably sold together as a kit). I still would find that misguided and barbaric, but legally it would be on much firmer ground.
July 10, 2006 9:55 PM | Reply | Permalink