p2p bad, cleanflix good ????? shocking story !!!!

Closed Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
  1. #1

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    in my home
    Posts
    3,451

    p2p bad, cleanflix good ????? shocking story !!!!

    OK...so i am really pissed off right now...I just watched a special on AMC about this and found out some horrifying news.


    As you all know, p2p is always under heavy fire and getting shut down left and right. Why? because the government feels that if you purchase 1 copy of said DVD or CD, you are not allowed by law to give it to anyone else or copy this item.

    Now...did you know that the government finds companies like cleanFilms to be OK? do you know what they do? They buy 1 original version of a DVD or CD and then go on to edit out sex, violence, gore, etc. They then turn around and burn these films and sell them to stores and online for profit.

    The difference? p2p is free, while cleanFlicks charges money.
    Where does the money go? not to the movie companies. not to the directors, actors or producers. the money goes to the cleanflicks people only.

    They feel they have purchased one original film, therefore they are giving to the movie companies.

    Many directors brought them to court, and lost. They dont get any money, and they dont get any authorization rights.

    These pathetic church groups need to understand that a film has ratings. If you dont like the films ratings, then maybe you shouldnt watch this. It does not mean edit this film and sell it to make over 3 million dollars a year and only give the movie company 19.95.

    Now, if the directors approved the cuts, or provided edited versions, thats a different story. That is something approved by original creator. The problem with that is that if the movie company did this, then they would sell it themselves. But they dont unless a director approves this.

    I find this outrageous.
    So basically i can buy 1 DVD from the store for 19.95, edit out any black people by painting them white (digitally), and then copy it and throw a sticker on there saying "edited for white trash church going hicks." Then drive to the bible belt and sell it for 10 bucks a pop.

    Lets say this took me a month to edit one film. I can probably sell 10K copies. So for 1 DVD, i can make about 99,980.05....and the movie company makes 19.95. This seems fare to you right?

    Or for that matter, I can maybe edit out people wearing red shoes. Why? cause i find them offensive to my "new religion" ***note to self* make new religion that finds red shoes offensive *end note***
    then do the whole resale.


    I can not understand how the government sides with this, yet according to the law, you can not share a copied CD with your family and friends. For that matter, you cant copy your original DVD or CD either.

    am i nuts? or is the world just pissing and shitting on itself for fun?


  2. #2

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    12,383
    http://www.cleanfilms.com/about_edited.phtml

    As long as they maintain a 1 to 1 ratio ... seems ok.

    Also, do keep in mind that P2P is not under fire, as much as the use of P2P to distribute and download illegal materials is. A perfectly legal (some might call it a grey area) is distribution of many UK based TV shows through bittorrent using UKNOVA.

    Interesting reading ..

    http://www.cleanfilms.com/pdf/motion...ryJudgment.pdf

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    in my home
    Posts
    3,451

    you are insane for thinking this is ok kia.... no offense...but you must have zero creativity in your bones.

    as an artist, you become connected with your work. whether it be a painting, a photograph, a movie, a song, etc.

    to allow someone to alter this work without your consent and turn around and sell it is completely ridiculous. a 1 to 1 is not good enough. why? because its not 1 to 1. its n ot just the money issue, its the time, the devotion, the heart, the sweat, the love that went into the creation of this work.

    they who put that effort into this creation should have the ultimate say as to what happens with their work. their name is on something that they did not make, they did not intend audiences to percieve in this manner.

    its like if you were alive when davinchi was......and when he made the mona lisa...you bought one copy from him. you then added a moustache, and sold it again to someone as an edited davinchi.

    his name is on this still, and he would probably have killed for less.
    he does not want to be asscoicated with this crap atrocity to his work.

    now if these companies want to edit and redistribute, then they should strike an edit/redistribution deal with the movie creators. then a fair settlement can maybe be achieved.

    so then maybe as a director i can say ok...if you want to edit my film you can for a fee of 100 per movie. this will allow you to edit and redistibute, but you must alter package to be easily identifiable as a different product...no tiny lil sticker.


  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    in my home
    Posts
    3,451

    also...according to many of the lawsuits and industries words:

    you technically can not copy a dvd to give to your mom, burn a mix cd for your gf, or record a radio station, or download a tv show.

    this whole thing is a grey area...but at least its keeping true to creators eyes or ears. what these clear compaines are doing is altering and shitting on art, then reselling it without the artists consent, yet keeping the artists name on it.


  5. #5

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    12,383

    >> as an artist, you become connected with your work. whether it be a painting, a photograph, a movie, a song, etc.

    Then for christs sake ... don't get a studio involved. Turn into a starving indie artist.


  6. #6

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    12,383

    Also, how is this different from airlines that edit movies before they show them?


  7. #7

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,733

    I think Cleanfilms should be paying loyalties...they're not doing all that much work and they're raping everyone involved in the production of the original picture while they're at it. Airlines buy edited versions from the film distribution companies, so loyalties are paid. Cleanfilm are basically editing intellectual property, then going on to sell it at a profit without paying the people actually involved in the creative process. If Cleanfilms did that to a movie I acted in (I wish) I'd be pissed


  8. #8

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    At home
    Posts
    262
    Quote Originally Posted by jayinhongkong:
    I think Cleanfilms should be paying loyalties...
    LOL: either you mean royalties or you've picked up an accent. (I'm not having a go at you; this just amused me.)

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,733

    LOL typo, i actually noticed that after i finished typing it, but then had a message on AIM and didn't bother to change it. thanks I think it might have to do with the discussion about loyalty versus dedication I had with a student earlier. I'm embarassed now. ROYALTIES. There, happy?

    Last edited by jayinhongkong; 30-12-2005 at 01:13 AM.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    12,383

    I remember we used to make sure certain senior students were targetted in college because they had the best highlighted text books. (We'd offer to buy their text books at the end of their term..)


Closed Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast