4 ms·
Sounds like a legitimate idea executed the wrong way. If there is a genuine need in the market for such a service, surely the studios would cooperate (ideally w
by dakom 7y ago
Sounds like a legitimate idea executed the wrong way. If there is a genuine need in the market for such a service, surely the studios would cooperate (ideally with the director) in order to produce a clean cut?
Seems to me very similar to overdubbing with other languages. Definitely kills all the hard crafted work of sound design and nuance in actor's performance, something the director should be the authority on - but deals are worked out and films are distributed with language tracks because there's huge global markets and it's ultimately a business decision.
- winkeltripel 7y ago> surely the studios would cooperate There's are a lot of market needs not being met by the studios. A need has to be huge for them to care.
- beatgammit 7y agoCheck out the VidAngel case where they tried to work with the studios to get a licensing agreement but were instead litigated against. They wanted to work with the studios, but they wouldn't, so they found a way that they thought was technically legal. There absolutely is a sizable market for this type of content, but content producers don't want to budge. I think there are a lot of great films that have content I don't want my children watching, and my choices are either to find an edited copy or not consume the content. The problem is that the copyright holder's position is that I'm free to consume other content, whereas my position is that I should be able to modify whatever content I purchase or pay to have access to. Personally, I don't think copyright owners should have any standing to force consumers to consume content in the way the producer intended, they should only be able to offer the content or not. As long as there copyright owner is compensated for each sale, I see no problem with adding value, such as by editing the content or adding to it, provided the modifications are enumerated.