Of CleanFlicks and Other Tragedies

I've been thinking a lot about the court ruling that puts companies such as CleanFlicks out of business. Although I have a very definite personal opinion on the topic, I've been trying to openly read arguments from both camps, and I've come to realize that both camps are right to some degree.

Fans of CleanFlicks are correct in saying that there is public policy that can be interpreted to support the CleanFlicks endeavor. I also agree that it's absolutely bogus to imply that the sale of edited DVDs hurts the producers and companies monetarily -- these sales are made primarily to those that would never have bought the movie in the first place, thus broadening the market for that particular film.

However, at the core of it all, this is not a question about copyright law, money, or corporate power as the case is being made out to be. This is a question about a piece of art being altered without permission and distributed for a profit. There are arguments that a movie is a public posession and does not constitute art or creative property, but all cinematic connoisseurs will agree with me that this simply is not the case. A movie is a work of art, and the creative property of those who created it. This claim of creative property is not just in terms of moral reality, but by copyright law as well. Art should be viewed as intended by its creator. Removing part of the art, no matter the purpose, destroys it, leaving it incomplete and changed. Allowing a company to destroy (and profit from the destruction of) works of art, in order to show the art to a broader audience is not doing the artist a favor, but rather undermining what the artist was attempting to portray.

Before I am flamed, I want to clarify that I do not believe art should be forced on those who may find the content uncomfortable. People are completely free to choose what art they do and do not partake of. By all means, avoid seeing or participating in something that you find morally objectionable at all costs. But here's a simple concept: If you don't like what's in the movie, don't watch it. No one is forcing you to watch the movie. The choice to view a particular movie or work of art is yours and yours alone. This is not a concept that this lawsuit is challenging. The lawsuit is merely attempting to protect an artist's right to publish their art without the threat of the art being destroyed and used for another's personal gain.