Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Auto-Censoring DVD Player

michael posted more than 10 years ago | from the naughty-bits dept.

Censorship 1061

Gogl writes "Those clever folks at RCA have apparently designed a DVD player that automatically scans movies and censors them to make them kosher, as it were. That means none of the naughty bits and none of those bad words either. It will be sold by Walmart for the price of $79, and what with the recent Janet Jackson 'wardrobe malfunction' this product will likely be lauded by the FCC and moralists everywhere, though Hollywood is already complaining."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

bitches (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8814097)

bitches

I"M WAYNE BRADY BITCH

GNAA + Censoring DVD Player (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8814099)

Your smelly dong is blacked out!

I want (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8814101)

I want b00bies!

Damn those dumb people, why are they taking the b00bies away from me???

What, are these corporations my MOTHER or something now??

GNAA Announces acquisition of SCO (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8814103)

GNAA Announces acquisition of SCO
By Tim Copperfield
New York, NY - GNAA (Gay Nigger Association of America) today announced acquisition of The SCO Group [yahoo.com] for $26.9 million in stock and $40 million in gay niggers.

GNAA today announced it has signed a definitive agreement to acquire the intellectual property and technology assets of The SCO Group, a leading provider of Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt, based in Lindon, Utah. GNAA's acquisition of SCO technology will help GNAA sign up more members worldwide. In addition to developing new solutions, GNAA will use SCO engineering expertise and technology to enhance the GNAA member services.

"I'd love to see these GNAA types slowly consumed by millions of swarming microbes and converted into harmless and useful biochemicals." said an anonymous slashdot poster, blinded by the GNAA success in achieving first post on a popular geek news website, slashdot.org [slashdot.org] .

"This GNAA shit is getting out of hand. Slashdot needs troll filters. Or better yet a crap flood mod that I can exclude from my browsing. Seriously, a good troll is art, what you dumb fucks are doing is just plain stupid." said spacecowboy420.

macewan, on linuxquestions [linuxquestions.org] said "Thanks for that link to the SCO quotes page. My guess is that they want to be bought out. Hrm, think they want GNAA to buy them??"

After careful consideration and debate, GNAA board of directors agreed to purchase 6,426,600 preferred shares and 113,102 common shares (the equivalent of 150,803 ADSs) of SCO, for an aggregate consideration of approximately US$26.9 million and approximately $40 million for gay niggers that were working in Lindon, Utah offices of The SCO Group.

If all goes well, the final decision is to be expected shortly, followed by transfer of most SCO niggers from their Lindon, UT offices to the GNAA Headquarters in New York.

About GNAA
GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the first organization which
gathers GAY NIGGERS from all over America and abroad for one common goal - being GAY NIGGERS.

Are you GAY [klerck.org] ?
Are you a NIGGER [mugshots.org] ?
Are you a GAY NIGGER [gay-sex-access.com] ?

If you answered "Yes" to any of the above questions, then GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) might be exactly what you've been looking for!
Join GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) today, and enjoy all the benefits of being a full-time GNAA member.
GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the fastest-growing GAY NIGGER community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of America. You, too, can be a part of GNAA if you join today!

Why not? It's quick and easy - only 3 simple steps!

First, you have to obtain a copy of GAY NIGGERS FROM OUTER SPACE THE MOVIE [imdb.com] and watch it.

Second, you need to succeed in posting a GNAA "first post" on slashdot.org [slashdot.org] , a popular "news for trolls" website

Third, you need to join the official GNAA irc channel #GNAA on EFNet, and apply for membership.
Talk to one of the ops or any of the other members in the channel to sign up today!

If you are having trouble locating #GNAA, the official GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA irc channel, you might be on a wrong irc network. The correct network is EFNet, and you can connect to irc.secsup.org or irc.isprime.com as one of the EFNet servers.
If you do not have an IRC client handy, you are free to use the GNAA Java IRC client by clicking here [nero-online.org] .

About SCO
The SCO Group [SCOX [yahoo.com] ] helps millions of gay niggers in more than 82 countries around the world grow their penises everyday. Headquartered in Lindon, Utah, SCO has a network of more than 11,000 nigger resellers and 8,000 developers. SCO Global Services provides reliable nigger support and services to prospective members and customers.
SCO and the associated SCO logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of The SCO Group, Inc. in the U.S. and other countries. UNIX and UnixWare are registered trademarks of The Open Group in the United States and other countries. All other brand or product names are or may be trademarks of their respective owners.

This news release contains forward-looking statements that involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions. All statements other than statements of historical fact are statements that could be deemed forward-looking statements. These statements are based on management's current expectations and are subject to uncertainty and changes in circumstances. Actual results may vary materially from the expectations contained herein. The forward-looking statements contained herein include statements about the consummation of the transaction with SCO and benefits of the pending transaction with SCO. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those described herein include the inability to obtain regulatory approvals and the inability to successfully integrate the SCO business. GNAA is under no obligation to (and expressly disclaims any such obligation to) update or alter its forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.


If you have mod points and would like to support GNAA, please moderate this post up.

________________________________________________
| ______________________________________._a,____ |
| _______a_._______a_______aj#0s_____aWY!400.___ |
| __ad#7!!*P____a.d#0a____#!-_#0i___.#!__W#0#___ |
| _j#'_.00#,___4#dP_"#,__j#,__0#Wi___*00P!_"#L,_ |
| _"#ga#9!01___"#01__40,_"4Lj#!_4#g_________"01_ |
| ________"#,___*@`__-N#____`___-!^_____________ |
| _________#1__________?________________________ |
| _________j1___________________________________ |
| ____a,___jk_GAY_NIGGER_ASSOCIATION_OF_AMERICA_ |
| ____!4yaa#l___________________________________ |
| ______-"!^____________________________________ |
` _______________________________________________'

Re:GNAA Announces acquisition of SCO (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8814136)

Who's posting this script kiddie shit ? It seems that you're even more stupid than these guys at SCO.

Re:GNAA Announces acquisition of SCO (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8814189)

What does the GNAA have to do with script kiddies?

Re:GNAA Announces acquisition of SCO (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8814213)

They don't - you have :)

yay!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8814104)

just what i want for my birthday!! GET THE FILTH OUT!

Fundamentalist Christianity (-1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8814105)

is just as bad as fundamentalist Islam.

REGIME CHANGE IN THE USA

Re:Fundamentalist Christianity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8814165)

the fundamentalist pacifist is the worst of all.

Re:Fundamentalist Christianity (2, Insightful)

sloptaco (709054) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814259)

what the hell is a fundamentalist pacifist?

hmmm... but I must say, the world would be a safer, brighter place if it were not for all us people devoted to peace.

-sloptaco

Isn't this the best answer? (5, Insightful)

Libertarian_Geek (691416) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814269)

Just give the enduser the ability to censor, and leave the original signal/movie untouched. Example: When the little tikes are in the room, switch to G rated, when they leave, switch to whatever rating you want. Heck, maybe with this tech, you could have a setting to make it all "Naughty-Bits". I don't see it as censorship if it's selectable by the end-user then it's selective viewing. The problem comes in when/if you are mandated to keep the settings at a certain level, or required to have it self-censor. Beyond that, this could help eliminate censorship at the original broadcast.

Derivative works (4, Insightful)

stinkenstein (187644) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814106)

I think this is an unauthorized making of a derivative work, and as such should be actionable under the DMCA. As a matter of fact, distribution of this player should be as well.

MOD Parent Up (0)

michaelmalak (91262) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814218)

Sadly, I believe the parent is correct, even though it is expressed in the form of a troll.

Flamebait? Stupid mods (3, Informative)

Shakrai (717556) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814226)

I think this is an unauthorized making of a derivative work, and as such should be actionable under the DMCA. As a matter of fact, distribution of this player should be as well.

Why is this flamebait?

The parent was referring to modifying somebodies intellectual property without their permission. That is covered by the DMCA. Why do you think Hollywood hates the idea of these things? They consider themselves artists and artists don't like it when other people start changing their work. If you don't like it then don't look at it or watch it -- but don't change it.

The parent raises a valid point about how stupid the DMCA is too. It would cover this in theory. Overreaching law or good thing? His comment was not flamebait.

Re:Flamebait? Stupid mods (2, Insightful)

Eccles (932) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814262)

Why is this flamebait?

Because nothing is being "made" or "modified." The DVD is untouched. And regardless, if I own a magazine or a book, I can tear out pages that offend me, and yes I can still sell it afterwards.

Re:Derivative works (2, Informative)

Kris Thalamus (555841) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814236)

You have a point. The Directors guild of America has a problem with third parties cashing in on edited versions of their films. They're still engaged in legal action [dga.org] against ClearPlay over this matter.

Editing a film is a way of creating a derivative work. It's an essential part of the art of movie making. Often, directors would rather not be pressured to make multiple versions of their film that cater to peoples varying conception of objectionable material.

To those of you who support this (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8814107)

Not a flame, but don't post AC; I'd like to learn more about folks like you, what makes you tick, what your thought processes are.

Your reasoning seems to be so alien that I feel the need to understand what your background is that leads you to your conclusions.

Yet... (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8814146)

Yet you post AC.

Anyway, I think the biggest benefit of this product is for children. Kids end up watching stuff that, personally, I find offensive. I think parents should have an easy of keeping kids from being bombarded constantly with offensive material. It seems like our culture is producing way more crap these days.

If our kids watch crap all the time, what do you think will happen to them?

Re:To those of you who support this (1, Insightful)

SamiousHaze (212418) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814199)

I live in North East Ohio and there is, on public access station, some tool named Rudy Rooster who basically plays porn on TV for 9 hours a week. He cuts out pictures from (presumably) playboy and plays music with filthy lyrics (with all the appropriate words that are censored when used as verbs) in the background. I do not want my two nephews (4 and 5) watching this garbage on TV if they get up on saturday and start flipping through the channels. That said, that is a *TV* problem, the janet jackson thing was a *TV* problem. My feeling is that if they are going to make something that sensors things that are inapprorpiate, they should make it for the TV. The V-Chip is a joke. After all is said and done, it is easy to sensor DVDs.

Don't buy'em.

-Sam

Re:To those of you who support this (1)

YrWrstNtmr (564987) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814252)

And you have the ability to block that. Simply program your TV to skip that channel. Or let it require a password for access to that channel.

Re:To those of you who support this (1)

AndroidCat (229562) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814267)

I bet that most of the people in favour of this never switch on this feature at home. After all, they have to keep track of all the shameful content that would have got through without this protection. It's a dirty job, but someone has to be on guard against corruption of public morals.

It reminds me of the story of the old woman who calls the sheriff to complain about the boys skinny-dipping in the river near her house. When she calls a second time, the sheriff says that the boys moved their swimming a mile downstream, she couldn't possibly see them. She indignantly replies that she certainly can--with her binoculars.

get the hell outa my way bitch! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8814108)

i gotta get this first POST!
goatse
fent
tacosnot

Damn it! (5, Funny)

Doomrat (615771) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814111)

Stupid thing... it's censoring all of my cookery instruction DVDs. It's blocked out an apple and banana, both of the melons, and a saveloy.

Re:Damn it! (2, Funny)

Cyno01 (573917) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814266)

Heh, on that note you could probably kill the thing with the last scene of the first Austin Powers movie.

but would it catch.. (2, Insightful)

ThePretender (180143) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814112)

to start the trend early.. if you were watching a DVD of that awful performance (and wardrobe malfunction) of Janet Jackson would it have captured and censored it? Probably not.

As an American... (4, Funny)

bcolflesh (710514) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814114)

I pray to almighty Jesus that all the gun-fighting and blood spray will be unaffected.

Re:As an American... (2, Interesting)

Vancorps (746090) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814148)

I continue to find this humerous how violence is more acceptable on TV than sex. Of course, someday in the near future I'm fairly certain both will be equally accepted as the old religious farts die off (The ones that control the content)

Perhaps a new breed of people forcing their moral values on the entire country will emerge but hopefully they won't be the ones in control for long if at all.

I never understood why parents couldn't shut the tv off, or better yet, use a vchip like device to stop kids from watching both violence and sex. Of course, these days the news contains a lot of both

Re:As an American... (1, Funny)

velo_mike (666386) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814232)

Of course, someday in the near future I'm fairly certain both will be equally accepted as the old religious farts die off (The ones that control the content)

Unfortunately, the old religious farts are prolific breeders (the only acceptable sex to them) and thus raise a whole new generation of self rightous morals police.

Re:As an American... (2, Interesting)

pinkUZI (515787) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814244)

I, for one, am excited about this technology and what it will do for my family because I don't always have the time to sit and watch a dvd myself before watching it with my kids, so that I can shut off the "bad parts." I would happily pay for a service that I could trust to prescreen these for me. Which is what this is.

As far as the "old religious farts" dieing off, I hate to dissapoint you, but I'm 22 years old.

OT (Kinda') (0, Offtopic)

NineNine (235196) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814217)

Happy Jesus Killing Day!

Is this really OT?...

Re:As an American... (3, Insightful)

DrXym (126579) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814220)

As a visitor to the US, I am flabbergasted by how crass the TV output is. Apparantly it's okay to show guns, violence and gore but swearwords and nudity are out. Even the crazy channels like TBN put out violence packed junk like the Omega Code.

What kind of fucked up system is that?

Re:As an American... (1)

chmod000 (123913) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814225)

Don't worry. If it were to block that, there would be nothing left to see. The $79 DVD player could be replaced with a $0.79 cardboard mockup, and you know THAT ain't gonna happen.

Re:As an American... (1)

Mick Ohrberg (744441) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814242)

Next, they'll need to come up with a method of filtering the news, where the real violence is.

Now... (5, Funny)

Knight Thrasher (766792) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814117)

I just KNOW there's going to be a hack out for it soon, that will enable to user to reverse the process and skip to just the naughty bits and swear words. =)

Re:Now... (1)

Jin Wicked (317953) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814246)

I have at least seen one video collection of nothing but topless scenes from assorted movies, pasted all together on one tape, for sale on late night network television.

Haven't seen anything for explosions yet, but that could be good if they get the right classic symphony orchestrated to go along with it.

How does it work exactly? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8814119)

Does it have a database of boobies to match against or something?

Will this be like the web-censoring software that. (2, Interesting)

shoppa (464619) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814120)

Will this be like the web-censoring software that prohibits users from visiting the Scunthrope United [scunthorpe-united.co.uk] soccer team website, or the Essex County College [essex.edu] website?

Ah (1)

Moth7 (699815) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814135)

The same type that blocks Knoppix.org because it contains the word "pix"? Most likely. There's only so much accuracy one can achieve with a "flesh coloured pixel" count. Chances are it'll end up blocking things like scenes in rooms with wallpaper who's colour resembles human skin - after all, it's a screenfull of human flesh coloured pixels - it must be offensive o.0

Ok (1)

kpogoda (580939) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814121)

Sounds like the V-Chip in the televisions but only a step further. As long as the technology does not go any further, I do not see any real problems with this. This would be good for parents with young children. I can see the potential for industry abuse for this in the future.

Re:Ok (1)

Grant29 (701796) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814155)

I agree, like most products, if you don't want it, don't buy it. There are uses for this type of technology, luckily there are some alternatives.

--
Retail Retreat [retailretreat.com]

Control is Good (2, Insightful)

xetdog (413680) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814124)

Do you want to watch what you want? Or do you want Hollywood to have total control? This is especially good for children and watching otherwise great movie with a few objectionable scenes.

Re:Control is Good (4, Interesting)

YrWrstNtmr (564987) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814177)

But you have little or no control over this either. You're relying on the good and kind folks at ClearPlay [clearplay.com] to decide what parts you should not see and hear.
Does their worldview = yours?

Can i get one that does the opposite? (4, Funny)

Unknown Poltroon (31628) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814125)

Filters out the boring crap and goes straight for the neekidness and cussing?

Already done. (1)

Azureflare (645778) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814168)

Pr0n.

Nuff said.

Heuristic? (2, Insightful)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814128)

So now we have to depend on the processor in a $79 piece of asiaware to correctly detect and 'bleep' or otherwise censor dirty words? Please. This reminds me of the so-called "web censoring software" that looked for images with sufficient pixels in the color range of human flesh, and 'decided' that it was pr0n. It had a false positive rate = false negative rate.

Here's a suggestion to all you Concerned Parents: Stop foisting the responsibility of raising your children onto other people. Watch TV with your kids. Know what they watch. Heck, buy them books instead.

Re:Heuristic? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8814147)

i tried to submit a link to fark regarding that kids get ADD more easily the more they watch tv (doesn't look like they accepted it):

"Study finds that kids watching TV makes them more likely to have attention defi - Hey look! A pony!"

Re:Heuristic? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8814149)

Here's a neat idea, try relying on yourself to read the article.

The censoring only works on movies that it already knows about. A human has setup what is to be censored. It uses the Clearplay [clearplay.com] software.

the article? (1)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814159)

You must be new here.

Re:Heuristic? (2, Informative)

SkunkPussy (85271) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814183)

"So now we have to depend on the processor in a $79 piece of asiaware to correctly detect and 'bleep' or otherwise censor dirty words? Please. This reminds me of the so-called "web censoring software" that looked for images with sufficient pixels in the color range of human flesh, and 'decided' that it was pr0n. It had a false positive rate = false negative rate."

RTFA!!!! clearplay scan the films for you and I think it is downloaded to the dvd

Re:Heuristic? (1)

rjelks (635588) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814247)

What is this CENSORED world coming to. I can't CENSORED stand all the CENSORED CENSORED CENSORED people who feel the need to CENSORED censor what we CENSORED watch. I won't buy one of those CENSORED DVD players, you can bet your CENSORED.

player contains no artificial intelligence (2, Informative)

John_Sauter (595980) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814190)

So now we have to depend on the processor in a $79 piece of asiaware to correctly detect and 'bleep' or otherwise censor dirty words?
No, the player does not have an AI that can detect offensive material. It gets censorship instructions on a per-movie basis from the manufacturer. The article doesn't say, but I assume you have to connect the player to a telephone line to keep it updated so it can censor new movies. There is probably also a subscription charge for this service.
John Sauter (J_Sauter@Empire.Net)

Schernau's 2nd Law (1)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814257)

Sorry, you've violated Schernau's 2nd Law - anyone who signs a slashdot post with a real name to provide credibility automatically loses it.

Re:Heuristic? (5, Insightful)

mtrupe (156137) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814210)

What if parents still want to watch movies, but include the family? This could be a wonderful tool for parents.

I don't understand what is wrong with this. If you don't like it, don't buy it- its as simple as that.

Re:Heuristic? (1)

Jin Wicked (317953) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814223)

Heck, buy them books instead.

Yeah... good, wholesome classics they'd never be exposed to stuff like language or sexuality, like 1001 Arabian Nights, or The Adventures of Huck Finn.

Maybe if parents would actually just talk to their kids about things so they understood them, instead of trying to shelter them from anything not kid-proofed, none of this would be necessary. Hell, I read practically every book Steven King had ever written by that point in the second and third grade, and I haven't grown up to go on any mass murdering sprees and don't have any serious mental disorders.

Re:Heuristic? (0)

seanfuller (265807) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814229)

I believe the player just reads a database that has been prepared by the company and doesn't do any pixel checking. Here's a bit from the article. "Clearplay scans movies for dodgy content, and then programs that data into its system.

Subscribers can then watch standard copies of the 500-or-so films on its list, with the assurance that they will automatically skip over mute anything that children or the squeamish may not like.

"

Uh.....RTFA (2, Informative)

Azureflare (645778) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814241)

FTFA:

Clearplay scans movies for dodgy content, and then programs that data into its system.

Subscribers can then watch standard copies of the 500-or-so films on its list, with the assurance that they will automatically skip over mute anything that children or the squeamish may not like.

Until now, Clearplay has only run through a PC.

It does not use a heuristic. Clearplay has already screened the movie previously for offensive content and preprogrammed actions (i.e. skipping or bleeping).

Personally I don't like the idea of people trusting other people's judgment on what their kids should or shouldn't see in a movie. Seems a little Big Brother'ish.

I'm sure many parents will love this though. Now they can just sit their kids in front of the tube and not worry their little heads over whether their kids are seeing inappropriate material.

It's partly the fault of societal pressures (i.e. monetary), but really, what's the point of having kids if you just ignore them after they reach age 4 (sometimes even earlier?).

great.. (3, Funny)

patrick.whitlock (708318) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814129)

now all my porn's gonna be more broke up than eminem on cable..

Re:great.. (1)

Moth7 (699815) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814162)

No it isn't. If you don't use the device (which no person who trusted their own judgement would) then you'll be fine.

how? (1, Interesting)

jeffy124 (453342) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814132)

how would this thing even work? figuring out what should be censored out cant exactly be calculated on-the-fly as the movie is playing. clearly, it looks like there's a subscription service at work here whereby the box identifies the disc inserted, and calls in to find out what should and should not be shown.

curious that it's RCA that came up with this device. They're also a record label. Looks like this could shape up into an interesting showdown between heavyweights.

Re:how? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8814180)

RTFA

Re:how? (1)

Eccles (932) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814221)

how would this thing even work?

It says in the article. Didn't you read it? (Score:5, Funny)

The folks who produce the player also produce "phantom edit" programming for each movie, so the DVD player skips scenes based on that. Approximately 500 movies have been done so far.

Walmart (0)

gorlok (657595) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814133)

Even at $79 , how many of those do they actually expect to sell?

Why is this a Censorship story? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8814137)

This is as much of a censorship story as me saying "Mozilla Thunderbird sucks as a newsreader because it lacks a good killfile".

This is a device being sold on the market. Censorship is a word used in reference to a Government office and Government behavior. There is a difference. RCA cannot force you to use its player or punish you for not meeting its standards through capture or violence.

Kosher? (5, Funny)

verloren (523497) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814140)

"automatically scans movies and censors them to make them kosher"

Time to throw out my copy of Babe: Pig in the City.

Actually, it was time to do that years ago...

Re:Kosher? (1)

whovian (107062) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814209)

As well as Porkies [imdb.com] (basically an earlier version of American Pie [imdb.com] ).

Content Database (0, Redundant)

Zebra1024 (726970) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814142)

It sounds like they have some type of database that stores what content to censor for a particular movie. I wonder how they are going to keep this databse up to date for new movies? It seems this would only work for DVD's and not live TV.

RTFA (1)

Moth7 (699815) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814207)

You let it scan the movie before hand and only then when it has the data stored will it work.

Artistic? (5, Insightful)

the_mad_poster (640772) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814144)

A Hollywood consortium, including some of Tinseltown's top directors, has sued Clearplay and others, arguing that they are abusing the films' artistic integrity.

Ah, yes. The artistic integrity of, say, the excessive violence in 48 hours? Or, perhaps, the gratiuitous nudity in American Pie.

STFU, morons. 99.9% of Hollywood's tripe is about as artistic as my ass after a binge at Taco Bell.

If people want to screen a movie they paid to see, that's their perogative. An excellent application for this is to effectively turn a "questionable for children" movie into something that you, as a parent, feel is sanitized enough to show your children.

Wake me up if some idiot starts mandating this technology in ALL players. Until then, this is just an interesting technology that people can choose to use if they want. Yawn.

Re:Artistic? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8814202)

Wake me up if some idiot starts mandating this technology in ALL players. Until then, this is just an interesting technology that people can choose to use if they want. Yawn

what a piece of paranoic "the government doesn't want me to watch what I want" trash of a post. How big a tin hat are you wearing this Friday morning?

the player gives options on how to filter the content. this includes ability to have no filter, thus allowing the controlling party (ie, a parent) ability to watch something when the kids are out of the house. even if congress mandates the technology, they're smart enough, knowing the uproar it would cause, to permit the option to disable.

Don't believe the hype! (1)

Anvil the Ninja (38143) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814151)

"Subscribers can then watch standard copies of the 500-or-so films on its list." It sounds like they're just pre-screening films and making a database of their findings. Pretty low-tech.

Big Deal (1)

SquierStrat (42516) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814152)

If parents want to censor their kids, fine. If this type of thing were mandated, then I'd be pissed.

It's a product with a market: parents who don't want their kids to see nudity and hear filthy mouths, such as my own (my parents didn't use such devices haha.)

What about plot? (1)

Nomihn0 (739701) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814153)

Seriously, Clearplay doesn't check what what scenes are crucial to the understanding of the movie. Take Solaris for example. Many of "ipiphony" scenes for the characters included Clooney flashing his ass. Had I seen the movie without these scenes, as difficult as they were to watch to begin with, the movie would have been rendered incomprehensible.

What's wrong with this? (5, Insightful)

Quixote (154172) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814154)

Maybe I haven't had my morning coffee yet, but I don't see what's wrong with this? In fact, if anything, it is a good thing! Let the morally uptight^H^H^H^H^Hstanding get this player and censor their own movies to their hearts' content. The rest of us can then watch the movies in their entirety.

I think it's a Good Thing(tm).

The problem comes when someone else tries to impose his/her morals on ME. By censoring DVDs at source, that is what happens. This player, OTOH, brings censoring to the destination. Great idea.

Good thing (1)

adzoox (615327) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814157)

This is a good thing. Back in the day - I wanted our english/journalism class in high school to see "Shawshank Redemption" but we couldn't because of the language. If this DVD player would have been around - we'd have been able to watch it and watch "glory" in History class as well.

Where'd my movie go? (5, Funny)

RobinH (124750) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814164)

I put a copy of Pulp Fiction into this thing, and all I got out were 13 seconds of credits! Where did my movie go???

Re:Where'd my movie go? (1)

iworm (132527) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814184)

"Debbie does Dallas" becomes a 3-second feature...

Reminds me... (3, Funny)

Professeur Shadoko (230027) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814233)

Back in school, 10 or 15 years ago, I had just begun learning english.. and the english teacher showed us this movie, hiding subtitles.

Of course at the end I had NO IDEA of what really happened in the movie. Who the characters were, etc...

But I knew ONE thing for SURE : the f-word is the most important word in the american (maybe not english) language ;-)

Re:Reminds me... (1)

RobinH (124750) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814253)

Back in school, 10 or 15 years ago, I had just begun learning english.. and the english teacher showed us this movie, hiding subtitles.

I definitely need some clarification on this one... you say your teacer showed you Pulp Fiction? You're kidding, right? Why would they do that?

An Absurdity (2, Insightful)

beforewisdom (729725) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814166)

A religious movie comes out where the producer makes up scenes that inspire bigotry and the movie is about two hours of nothing about a man being beaten to a pulp. CVS airs the superbowl, refuses to take a commercial asking people to vote for someone other then bush, but they gladly take pro bush commercials. No one complains.......hardly The majority of the 6 plus billion people on this planet have breasts and those who don't have seen them. A woman's nipple is exposed on television and the earth in the United States is shaken!

What kind of idiot... (3, Insightful)

DrXym (126579) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814169)

... buys or rents a DVD and then buys a player to selectively cut parts out of it? If you are offended that much by a movie, why rent it in the first place? If you're scared a child might watch it, then why not use the parental lock that a lot of players come with?


Besides, it will butcher movies, not replace the content with milder cuss words like on TV. If you have ever watched Malaysian TV you will know exactly what it will do. Entire chunks of film will simply disappear leaving an incoherent mess in its place. Imagine (trying) to watch something like Pulp Fiction through it for example.


People who buy this are idiots and following on from its DIVX fiasco it is more proof that RCA really doesn't have a clue.


Of course something good might come out of it. If all the god bothering prudes equip themselves with one of these, it will leave Blockbuster et al with no excuse for not stocking certain titles.

I know it's hackneyed... but... (1)

enrico_suave (179651) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814171)

First they came for stern [thesmokinggun.com]

Then the came for the porn [baltimoresun.com] (news article not porn link, fyi)

Now they sell "self correcting DVD players" (how long till you can only buy those?)

*shrug* where's our first amendment now, biach!?

E.

I'm still wondering (4, Insightful)

Professeur Shadoko (230027) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814176)

WHY is it unacceptable for children to see people making love (fucking, if you prefer), but it's okay if they see people killing each other with firearms.

What the f... ?

How is this censorship? (5, Insightful)

mtrupe (156137) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814178)

Parents and owners of these things are simply decided what they do and do not want their familty to see. Are you saying that I must allow my young children to watch nudity, violence, and bad language or else I am some kind of fundamentalist?

These are tools for parents, nothing more, nothing less. Last I knew parents were allowed to raise their own children. Yeah- censorship is bad, for grown adults, but I plan on censoring the heck out of what I allow my children to see. There is no freedom of speech or freedom to view anything for a 9 year old.

Another way to look at this is as a tool of free speech. It allows parents to further control what their children see whild not forcing entire censorship. I would like to continue to watch movies as my daughter gets old enough to understand what she is seeing on the screen. Most of the time sex scenes and foul language does little to add to the story (I know there are exceptions, like Boogie Nights, for example).

Anyway, just my two cents-- there is no reason to freak out here. RCA and Walmart aren't trying to censor what you are allowed to see, rather, they are providing parents with a tool that will help us to raise our children as we see fit.

Would be cool to watch porn on this (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8814185)

Imagine the experience of sitting down with a few porn DVD's. The pool cleaner guy knocks on the door. The young wife answers, and lets him in to have a glass of water. The movie ends. The freshman coed comes to her professor's office hour to ask about making up a test. The movie ends. The girl trying out for cheerleader camp meets with the two head cheerleaders to go over a dance routine. The movie ends. It'd be minimalist cinema of the kind not seen since Warhol.

Parental Control (2, Interesting)

Xenothaulus (587382) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814187)

I have 3 kids, and I don't let them watch most of the crap I watch anyway, sex/violence or not. Nudity is okay, (hey, we were born that way,) but explaining to a 5 year old why two people are naked and wrestling is rather uncomfortable. As is explaining why people are getting shot, etc.

However, I would rather just not let them watch those kind of movies until they are old enough to understand them, or at least old enough to understand my explanations of them. (HAHA!) I'd rather not use a machine to do what I consider to be my job- filtering the world for my children until they are ready to experience it full blast.

$79 to remove all the good bits! (1)

antic (29198) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814188)

Good luck to them!

Oh, and it only works with the "500 or so" films on the Clearplay list.

Whichever Hollywood consortium is suing these guys, they're idiots. "Effectively pirating" their work. Christ. If people buy this product, it's because they want sex and violence OUT of the movies they watch. i.e., they don't want what you're giving them. How about developing DVDs yourselves that have kid-friendly versions of popular movies instead of just suing anyone who beats you to the idea?

Re:$79 to remove all the good bits! (1, Insightful)

mtrupe (156137) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814240)

I'll buy one. This is great. I can continue to watch movies without excluding my daughter. I don't care about all the sex scenes, and if it bleeps out swear words, I can probably figure out what was said.

Its not censorship if you willingly accept it and even embrace it. Censorship is bad, don't get me wrong, but in my house the parents are dictators and what (very young) children view is censored. That is just good parenting.

No more an abuse than fast-forward?? (1)

toesate (652111) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814191)

The article mentioned that it is "...no more an abuse than a viewer fast-forwarding a tape in his own home."

But this player sure sounds like skipping over a portion of the content, rather than "fast forwarding" over the content.

In my opinion, their analogy sounds grossly incorrect.

I don't have a problem with this... (1)

Whispers_in_the_dark (560817) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814203)

If I should be allowed to watch whatever I want then it doesn't seem unreasonable for others to view the same thing edited to their tastes. It's not like I would have to watch the edited version -- I get to choose on the exact same DVD. Hopefully RCA will have enough sense to make it a per-viewing option (even if it defaults to censored). If not, then they better hope I never purchase one as it will go right back to the store.

Also, "artistic integrity" only goes so far. One may have the right to say anything one likes, but noone should be required to listen to it. And if that means that only parts of one's message gets out to some folks, while everyone can choose to listen all of it, I think that this is perfectly fine. Let the individual adult viewer choose. If the artist wants to make sure everyone hears the entire message then it seems to me that it's up to the artist to make the entire message palletable.

How is this bad? This is perfect. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8814205)

This is the best answer to the "broadcast decency" discussion, and one can only hope that this will become more widespread.

If you read the article, this is a (subscription?) service offered by the company, who SCREEN movies and flag parts of a DVD as "contains nudity", "contains strong language" etc.
The *user* can then chose to skip those scenes.

This is *exactly* how it should work. Put everything in the dvd, and if a viewer doesn't like watching nude scenes, or swear words, he can chose to skip over those parts.

Instead of forcing ClearChannel, Viacom and other ``public'' broadcast stations to censor their content to the lowest common denominator, let the users worry about filtering out the crap they don't want to see.

Now we only need a radio that has the Howard Stern (and similar) broadcasting schedule and stations programmed, with a button to skip over them, and then those FCC "complaints" will become irrelevant -- just tell the users to turn on their filter.

Censoring... (0)

Ziwcam (766621) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814215)

I think this is going to contribute further to the decline of human society. Parents already all-too-often put on a TV show and plop the kids down in front without knowing what they're really watching. Now, parents are going to throw in one of those pre-screned DVD's, and assume its safe and appropriate for their children, without actually watching it first and making sure.

question (1)

weekendwarrior1980 (768311) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814224)

How does it work? Does the DVD contain information on where the inappropriate contents are? If so then, will it work on older DVDs as well?

Dear RCA... (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8814227)

I would appreciate a version that can remove all scenes with Ben Afflick in them.

Sincerely,
J. Lo.

At what cost to the art? (1, Insightful)

re-Verse (121709) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814234)

I think if people want to watch something devoid of extremity, they should simply find movies that don't have this stuff in them in the first place. I mean - can you imagine how Incredibly Stupid 'Requium For A Dream" would seem if any scenes with drug use, sex, or violence were skipped? And yet its an incredibly touching film, and one that I shared with my 60 year old mother, who loved it.

Maybe its because I try not to watch bad movies, but I am a firm beleiver in artistic license... and if a GOOD director thinks there is a reason for me to see some sort of provocative scene, I'm going to assume it has an important part of the story, and shouldn't be skipped. Mind you, I don't really watch TV, but it seems that the gratuitous stuff you see on there probably has no point but ratings.

I grew up in a house where I saw some pretty intense films at a fairly early age. I had a parent that would discuss the films with me, and I never felt violated by anything I saw. Remember that anything that is hidden from us, we generally end up coveting. This kind of 'feature' could end up doing more harm than good.

darn (0, Flamebait)

gcore (748374) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814235)

I wonder why americans seem to find the human body so offensive...

what the (pretty butterflies) is this? (5, Funny)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814237)

this is the stupidest (happy mountains) i have ever heard of in my whole (dancing kittens) life

what (singing birds) thought this (rolling hills) up?

if you don't like the (grazing deer) movie, don't watch the (blooming flowers) movie!

cutting it up into sanitized (falling rain) pieces is akin to giving yourself a (bubbling brooks) frontal lobotomy

i just don't understand the (belching volcanoes) censorial instincts of some pinheaded (churning lava)

Cinema Paradiso! (1)

dbretton (242493) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814250)

Just like in the movie, but now the little prist sits in your DVD player. Cool!

Just like that little gnome who sits in your fridge and turns the light off when you shut the door.

natural progression and dupe?? (1)

Comsn (686413) | more than 10 years ago | (#8814251)

first the v-chip in tvs, now the 'v-chip' in dvds...
even v-chips on the internet, like netnanny and whatnot.

if people want censored stuff, let em have it.

btw, this EXACT SAME COMPANY was posted on slashdot before http://slashdot.org/articles/03/01/30/229250.shtml ?tid=153 [slashdot.org]

This is a GOOD thing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#8814263)

The great boon of digital technology is that the media consumer need not just be a passive receiver. He can control his artistic experience and even modify it. It's not like painting a mustache on the Mona Lisa, it's just a copy. The original is left unsulied. This needs to be protected in the same way editing Jar Jar Binks out of Star Wars prequels is. Besides, the next time somebody whines Hollywood is too sexy or violent, you can tell them to shut their pie holes and buy a self-censoring DVD player.

Oh, and you don't =like= what it is they are editing? Well who made you the moral arbiter of the universe?

Besides, Hollywood has been acquiescing to the demands of commercial television for "clean" versions for decades. They've got =nothing= to say about "artistic integrity".
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?