Re: VERY interesting copyright article

Kristine R. Brancolini (brancoli@indiana.edu)
Fri, 2 Feb 2001 10:19:01 -0800 (PST)

I'm having troube with the inconsistency of Mr. Wiggers stating that you
have to use the legal definition of a word, "derivative" in this case,
then he goes on to use the word in a more popular sense -- _Scary Movie_
is "derivative." Using the definition that Mr. Wiggers cites from the
copyright office: "A "derivative work" is a work based upon one or more
preexisting works, such as a translation, musical arrangement,
dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording,
art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a
work may be recast, transformed, or adapted." It sounds to me like Mr.
CleanVideo is creating an abridgment.

Not all media librarians lurking on this list think the Mr. CleanVideo's
work is legal. As several people have noted, films are abridged all the
time -- for television, airplanes, schools, etc. (Remember how the
censors removed the best shot from Zeffirelli's _Romeo and Juliet_ when
it was shown in schools?) But I can't imagine arguing that you can do this
*without* permission. The work has been changed. -- Kris

On Fri, 2 Feb 2001, Jessica Rosner wrote:

> Ok I shouldn't but one last comment. I am concerned if not disturbed that
> someone involved in Media would not believe that editing and than renting a
> film is NOT a copyright violation.. To compare this to bad projection (
> which I probably hate more than ANYTHING ) is just silly.
>
> I do believe most studios would in fact be willing to do edit versions of
> their own films if they saw profit in it and indeed companies that rent them
> for public screenings like SWANK have edited versions available BUT this is
> done WITH permission and by agreement. I honestly could care less about most
> of the titles on the Clean Video edit list but I am particularly upset by
> the two Speilberg films, SAVING PRIVATE RYAN and especially SCHINDLER'S
> LIST. Cutting out the violence , nudity, bad words etc. destroys the very
> integrity of these films. Speilberg had TOTAL control of the release of
> Schindler and was adamant that the film HAD to be shown as is. Brigham Young
> University gained some notoriety for canceling a screening due to
> objections. He believed as I do that even middle and high school students
> needed to see the film EXACTLY as he made it and went to some length to
> arrange screenings. Clean Video has NO RIGHT legally OR morally to edit this
> film to his beliefs. Again I hope and believe the MPPA or perhaps Speilberg
> himself will get this guy in court
>
> Jessica Rosner
> Kino
>
>

Kristine R. Brancolini, Director, Digital Library Program
Main Library E170, 1320 E. Tenth Street
Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405
Phone: 812.855.3710 | Fax: 812.856.2062 | Web: www.dlib.indiana.edu