[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: censoring films
- To: "'liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu'" <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>, "'rickand@unr.edu'" <rickand@unr.edu>
- Subject: RE: censoring films
- From: "Hamaker, Chuck" <cahamake@email.uncc.edu>
- Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2002 13:05:17 EDT
- Reply-To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
After all the rhetoric, I think Rick's reaction means the right and the left and the great middle (whatever that means) have a great deal to lose with laws that make changing, filtering, using content for and in your own way and for your own purposes, legitimate reaons, impossible, illegal and punishable under criminal and civil law. thanks for pointing out something we can agree on Rick. Chuck -----Original Message----- From: Rick Anderson To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu Sent: 8/8/02 5:37 PM Subject: RE: censoring films > The debate in Utah began four years ago when an American Fork company, > Sunset Video, found a profitable business in clipping a nude scene from > hundreds of video copies of "Titanic" brought to them by owners. The > concept of so-called "family-friendly" videos was well-received in Utah > and other religiously conservative parts of the country Gosh, and it seems like just a minute ago that we were energetically defending the "rights of consumers to do what they want with products they've purchased." Well, we all know what Ralph Waldo Emerson said about consistency... :-) ------------- Rick Anderson rickand@unr.edu
- Prev by Date: Arnold Journals 2003 Prices
- Next by Date: RE: DMCA Alternatives
- Prev by thread: RE: censoring films
- Next by thread: RE: censoring films
- Index(es):