Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > Chatter > General Discussion


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 04-03-2004, 12:08 PM   #1 (permalink)
Insane
 
Location: Toronto
Censorship

I don't really understand censorship sometimes. I know it's there because little Timmy's head will explode if he sees a woman's nipple (but it's fine to sit him down in front of unbelievably violent video games for hours on end.)

There's one thing I don't understand, though. Why do we censor things like the Twin Towers?

For example, a Spiderman (if I recall) game was delayed about a month because they had to take out all images of the World Trade Centres. This was over a year after the attacks..

Also, they won't show the "Simpsons Go To New York" episode on any networks now, because it contains the World Trade Centres.

Why? I don't get it. Who is going to be so mortified by seeing these images (of the Towers in perfect condition, at that)?

Don't get me wrong, the attacks moved me at the time of their happening. I don't like to see images of the flaming towers. But seeing the towers in their former condition doesn't exactly send me spiralling into a pit of depression. What about Battlefield 1942? Vietcong? Won't war veterans be horrified to see their own hell portrayed in this way?

If it's all that easy to traumatize you, all you would have to do is think about the towers right after the attack. It seems to me like these companies are conforming to a very small minority, and it sucks.

For the record, I was only using the WTC as an example, this can be applied to several other things.
__________________
wra
Fenton-J-Cool is offline  
Old 04-03-2004, 12:27 PM   #2 (permalink)
Still fighting it.
 
flamingdog's Avatar
 
I agree with you wholeheartedly, and quite frankly, it's time Jenga was outlawed.
flamingdog is offline  
Old 04-03-2004, 12:28 PM   #3 (permalink)
follower of the child's crusade?
 
Jay Z released a remix of a Biggie Smalls song called Juicy that had the lines

"Now I'm in the limelight cause I rhyme tight
Time to get paid, blow up like the World Trade
Born sinner, the opposite of a winner
Remember when I used to eat sardines for dinner"

And the word "World Trade" was cut out of that, I never really understood why.
__________________
"Do not tell lies, and do not do what you hate,
for all things are plain in the sight of Heaven. For nothing
hidden will not become manifest, and nothing covered will remain
without being uncovered."

The Gospel of Thomas
Strange Famous is offline  
Old 04-03-2004, 12:31 PM   #4 (permalink)
salmon?
 
Location: Outside Providence
Quote:
Originally posted by flamingdog
I agree with you wholeheartedly, and quite frankly, it's time Jenga was outlawed.
Exactly, do you have anyt idea how many times I've been involved in... I mean heard of Jenga related kill frenzies?
__________________
"Lick my frozen metal ass!"
theguyondacouch is offline  
Old 04-03-2004, 12:41 PM   #5 (permalink)
The Cover Doesn't Match The Book
 
Midnight_Son's Avatar
 
Location: in a van down by the river
it's not like that anywhere else, just in the good old USA...the land of the free.......................(free?...WTF?)
__________________
SWM, tattooed, seeks meaningful tits and beer. Enjoys biker mags, pornography, and Sunday morning walks to the liquor store. Winners of erotic hot dog eating contests given priority.
Midnight_Son is offline  
Old 04-03-2004, 01:09 PM   #6 (permalink)
Crazy
 
Location: Central Illinois
Actually they delayed the Spiderman movie because there was a scene in which a helecopter is caught in Spidermans web between the two towers. They took it out, touched it up and most people don't know the difference.
__________________
Your part is silent you little toad - a line from the new phantom of the opera
Luki is offline  
Old 04-03-2004, 01:23 PM   #7 (permalink)
Insane
 
Location: Toronto
It may have been Duke Nukem Manhattan Project. But either way..
__________________
wra
Fenton-J-Cool is offline  
Old 04-03-2004, 01:44 PM   #8 (permalink)
Psycho
 
Location: Rhode Island biatches!
Agreed, cencorship is going waaaaaaaaaaaaay too far in this country. I posted this quote in another post but I think its relevant here. I don't know the direct quote but it was by a former prime minister of Canada who said, "If you never see anything that offends you are you really living in a free country".
__________________
"We do what we like and we like what we do!"~andrew Wk

Procrastinate now, don't put off to the last minute.
The_wall is offline  
Old 04-03-2004, 02:28 PM   #9 (permalink)
Junkie
 
fhqwhgads's Avatar
 
I don't know about you, but I've seen the Simpsons episode you're referring to about 4 times on TV since the attack.
fhqwhgads is offline  
Old 04-03-2004, 06:15 PM   #10 (permalink)
Psycho
 
sprocket's Avatar
 
Location: In transit
Didnt you ever see the southpark where AIDS finally became funny? You have to wait 22.5 years before you can joke about something tragic Then its funny.
__________________
Remember, wherever you go... there you are.
sprocket is offline  
Old 04-03-2004, 06:20 PM   #11 (permalink)
Psycho
 
Fenton-J-Cool what do you have against video games? As far as I know, video games have been on someone's target list just like the other cencorship items you mentioned. When a child does something violent, the news flashes images of doom and quake.
Aletheia is offline  
Old 04-03-2004, 06:43 PM   #12 (permalink)
Tilted Cat Head
 
Cynthetiq's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Manhattan, NY
In regards to 9/11, having been present to watch the towers collapse here in NYC, it's about SENSITIVITY. As for the boobs, I cannot even begin with that topic just look at my sig and you'll see how I feel about that.

I lost a number of friends, collegues, fellow New Yorkers. ALL 8 million New Yorkers were traumatized in some fashion, add to that the roughly other 8 million that commute into the city some who watched from Ferry boats, trains, busses, and cars as the Towers burned and collapsed.

My wife's mother happened to be across the street from the towers that day. She has flashbacks when she HEARS a plane fly over head. Not ALL planes, but when the engine hits a certain pitch she freaks out.

The vietnam stuff, the WWII stuff, it took many years for people to finally come around. And even now, for some of those survivors there is still some issues. Just happens to be there are less of them alive right now.

For me, I need to see the images, that's how I'm dealing with it for myself.

Here's an excerpt from my journal.

Quote:
I still don't understand how it impacted me. I was working in Times Square at the time and the wife was in SoHo. We had some contact in the early hours of the morning, but mainly I had to keep it together because I had 15 direct reports all falling apart as they were coming into the city. There were also 20+ people in the call center where my desk was that were flipping out. I had to be strong and show leadership.

My appetite for watching, reading, seeing, 9/11 related things is insatiable. I've been to galleries of photographers that had pictures that were not shown on TV. All the people who look at the war on terror and think that it's pointless and a waste of time wouldn't feel that way if they say the picture of the severed bound hands. Photos of pools of liquid flesh of the people who jumped to their deaths instead of being burned or crushed alive.

I wonder if what I feel is similar to those that lived near Pearl Harbor and what they witnessed on December 7, 1941.
__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.
Cynthetiq is offline  
Old 04-03-2004, 08:52 PM   #13 (permalink)
Insane
 
Location: Toronto
You know what, that could be implemented for anything. Yes, people were traumatized. They have flashbacks when they think of planes. What about the huge number of people in the world who are afraid of clowns? No more clowns on TV?

Again, September 11th was just an example, and the best one I could find.
__________________
wra
Fenton-J-Cool is offline  
Old 04-03-2004, 08:57 PM   #14 (permalink)
Insane
 
Location: Denver, CO
Allow me a rant:

Yanking the WTC from Spiderman has absolutely nothing to do with censorship. Not airing the "Simpsons Go to NY" episode is not censorship.

Sure, there's a conscious decision by someone not to include the WTC in Spiderman, or not to air the Simpsons episode, but, considering that it comes from some guy in some corporation, it's not censorship.

The government preventing, by fining or imprisoning or otherwise coercing, people or companies from saying/printing/broadcasting certain things is censorship. Because the directive comes from the government.

The people that run the corporations, however, have every right to include or remove specific images or ideas in their products. The WTC was removed from Spiderman essentially for marketing reasons. Not due to government coercion.

If you want to see censorship in action, watch the FCC crack down on "offensive content."

Quote:
A spate of recent incidents on television and radio has provoked the FCC to crack down on those stations that have violated regulations that limit explicit discussions of sex and excretory functions to late night hours.

It also has propelled lawmakers to move legislation to significantly raise fines for violations, to as much as $500,000 per violation in some cases from $27,500.

"It is time for a tough new code," Copps told the group, according to a copy of his speech. "And the code I'd like to see is not some bland statement of general principles, but something explicit and including incentives to encourage compliance."
Italics are mine. Here's the LINK.

Okay, I'm done ranting... for now....
__________________
"We must have waffles. We must all have waffles, forthwith. Oh, we must think.
We must all have waffles and think, each and every one of us to the very best of his ability."
-- Professor Goldthwait Higginson Dorr, Ph.D.
FleaCircus is offline  
Old 04-03-2004, 10:21 PM   #15 (permalink)
Tilted Cat Head
 
Cynthetiq's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Manhattan, NY
Quote:
Originally posted by Fenton-J-Cool
You know what, that could be implemented for anything. Yes, people were traumatized. They have flashbacks when they think of planes. What about the huge number of people in the world who are afraid of clowns? No more clowns on TV?

Again, September 11th was just an example, and the best one I could find.
sure. if there were enough people who had issue with it, it probably would be instituted as such. People call in, write to complain about things that they find offensive. It just doesn't galvanize because there aren't so many of them in comparison.

Working for a media conglomerate, I hear people say stuff about censorship all the time.

first lets make sure that we are talking on the same wavelength

Quote:
cen·sor
A person authorized to examine books, films, or other material and to remove or suppress what is considered morally, politically, or otherwise objectionable.

An official, as in the armed forces, who examines personal mail and official dispatches to remove information considered secret or a risk to security.

One that condemns or censures.

One of two officials in ancient Rome responsible for taking the public census and supervising public behavior and morals.
Psychology. The agent in the unconscious that is responsible for censorship.
Recently CBS, a member of the Viacom family was being blamed for censorship because they refused to air a Moveon.org and PETA commercials during the SuperBowl.

Remember that media is driven by $$$. The media has some of their own agenda which is to turn a profit. They put on what they feel people want to see and hear. CBS felt that it wasn't appropriate to air those two advertisements because they do not allow ANY of those types of ads at all. Censorship? Possibly by that definition above.

But remember here in the USA, PRIVATE companies are allowed to spew forth whatever they can chose within the guidelines of the FCC. It is the governement hat is NOT allowed to censor anyone private citizens OR corporations by the tenets of the US Constitution.
__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.
Cynthetiq is offline  
Old 04-03-2004, 11:43 PM   #16 (permalink)
/nɑndəsˈkrɪpt/
 
Prince's Avatar
 
Location: LV-426
I don't know if it's censorship or not, but when they bleep out words like "jesus" or "retarded" on television, that pisses me off.

Then again the same goes for when they blur pics of breasts and shit like that, but then again I am from Europe, so all I know is of decadence.
__________________
Who is John Galt?
Prince is offline  
Old 04-04-2004, 06:07 AM   #17 (permalink)
Apocalypse Nerd
 
Astrocloud's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Cynthetiq


But remember here in the USA, PRIVATE companies are allowed to spew forth whatever they can chose within the guidelines of the FCC.
Actually there are no guidelines by the FCC... but they can fine people for breaking them. Ironically they refuse to publish any clear guidelines because Michael Powell claims that it would somehow violate (and thus harm) the first amendment.

Quote:
Finally, I have heard some of you call for an FCC rulemaking to create more “clarity” as to what is prohibited. I want to warn you that this is unwise. You do not want to ask the government to write a “Red Book” of Dos and Don’ts. I understand the complaint about knowing where the line is, but heavier government entanglement through a “Dirty Conduct Code” will not only chill speech, it may deep freeze it. It might be an ice age that would last a very long time.
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-245663A1.pdf

Of course, between you and me -if the FCC actually published a code... Then they couldn't fine people arbitarily as they have been doing -because people could just point to the code and claim that they're complying. If they do write guidelines and it somehow violates the first amendment -then obviously the guidelines would be struck down. (Although with THIS Supreme Court anything is possible.)
Astrocloud is offline  
Old 04-04-2004, 06:25 AM   #18 (permalink)
Tilted Cat Head
 
Cynthetiq's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Manhattan, NY
Quote:
Originally posted by Astrocloud
Actually there are no guidelines by the FCC... but they can fine people for breaking them. Ironically they refuse to publish any clear guidelines because Michael Powell claims that it would somehow violate (and thus harm) the first amendment.
you and i have had this debate before. There are no clear exact word for word guidelines, but there are guidelines even though they exist as ambiguous as they are.

I've spoken with MTV Legal, Rights and Clearances, and Standards of Broadcasting departments on this and they have a very hard time with it because there are no definitive words to work with. But that is where the FCC is smart, since language ever evloves and lives, slang and words ebb and flow and change over time. Words considered profane in the past, are no longer, and words not are now considered.
__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.
Cynthetiq is offline  
Old 04-04-2004, 07:54 AM   #19 (permalink)
Crazy
 
The good part of censorship is that it relieves you of the necessity of thinking for yourself. Our government seems to want to releive us of that responsibility with many of their actions. How can a 5 second delay protect us from the violence around us every day in the city. How can one less nipple on view protect us from the violence of poverty and homelessness. Let's start looking at real issues and not the ones those in power want us to consider.
samiam is offline  
Old 04-04-2004, 07:59 AM   #20 (permalink)
Apocalypse Nerd
 
Astrocloud's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Cynthetiq
you and i have had this debate before. There are no clear exact word for word guidelines, but there are guidelines even though they exist as ambiguous as they are.

We have but I didn't have such a great quote from Michael Powell. Doesn't this trend towards applying ambiguous rules on free speech disturb you? Do you honestly trust the decision makers in the FCC to do what's best for us? You get into cases where one party is favored while other parties are not. The present FCC guidelines allow for favoritism. As long as there is a grey area and artists venture into it: then they can fine whoever they want for whatever they want.

Of course, there's already a discussion thread about this too.

http://tfproject.org/tfp/showthread....0&pagenumber=1

I guess my question is: "Aren't you disturbed by this?" Even if you like the current trend by the present FCC to arbitrarily determine what is allowable... Don't you see that when the lines are indistinct and blurred they will allow the FCC to make decisions based on favoritism. Whether or not the FCC rules "Ebb and Flow" -I believe that the rule of law states:

Quote:
Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
And that abridging this right -even allowing a loophole (by not specifically stating what is allowed) is a kind of coercive hand. Even if one trusts the present Government to make the right decisions for us. How can one trust that the next administration or the one's after that will be as fair?
Astrocloud is offline  
Old 04-04-2004, 08:40 AM   #21 (permalink)
Wehret Den Anfängen!
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
Quote:
Sure, there's a conscious decision by someone not to include the WTC in Spiderman, or not to air the Simpsons episode, but, considering that it comes from some guy in some corporation, it's not censorship.

The government preventing, by fining or imprisoning or otherwise coercing, people or companies from saying/printing/broadcasting certain things is censorship. Because the directive comes from the government.
ObPedant: The government prevents anyone else from playing "The Simpsons go to New York". Fox chooses to prevent itself. So, technically, if the government didn't enforce the current infinite duration copywrite, one could eventually see "The Simpsons go to New York" even if Fox didn't want you to.
__________________
Last edited by JHVH : 10-29-4004 BC at 09:00 PM. Reason: Time for a rest.
Yakk is offline  
Old 04-04-2004, 09:05 AM   #22 (permalink)
I'm a family man - I run a family business.
 
Redjake's Avatar
 
Location: Wilson, NC
Quote:
Originally posted by Luki
Actually they delayed the Spiderman movie because there was a scene in which a helecopter is caught in Spidermans web between the two towers. They took it out, touched it up and most people don't know the difference.
That's not entirely true. That scene with the World Trade Center towers was NOT in the movie, ever. It was the first teaser trailer for the movie. I still have it from when you could download it. That trailer was never going to be in the movie itself. The production team explained that the teaser trailer was done independently of the movie, and had no part in the movie itself

Also in Metal Gear Solid 2 (videogame), in the beginning of the game Snake dives off the George Washington Bridge in New York City. The game was delayed for a couple of weeks so the crew could take out the WTC in the background.
__________________
Off the record, on the q.t., and very hush-hush.
Redjake is offline  
Old 04-04-2004, 09:46 AM   #23 (permalink)
Tilted Cat Head
 
Cynthetiq's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Manhattan, NY
Astrocloud,

yes, I agree with everything you've posted now and in the past. We aren't on different sides of opinion.

Looking back in history one can see where the government is wrong and how the people eventually change it. As times change and cultures change I'm very sure, that it will change equally.
__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.
Cynthetiq is offline  
Old 04-04-2004, 06:28 PM   #24 (permalink)
Insane
 
Location: Denver, CO
Quote:
Originally posted by Yakk
ObPedant: The government prevents anyone else from playing "The Simpsons go to New York". Fox chooses to prevent itself. So, technically, if the government didn't enforce the current infinite duration copywrite, one could eventually see "The Simpsons go to New York" even if Fox didn't want you to.
I'm not entirely sure where you're going with this, but I have to add my two cents:

First, in the US, there is no "infinite duration copyright." Works copyrighted by an individual are protected for the life of the author plus 70 years, works copyrighted by a company are protected for 120 years. A long time, but finite.

Second, there's a difference between the protection of intellectual property, as in copyrights, and censorship. Copyright allows the creator of a work to control how and when and where it's disseminated. Censorship means that the government has that power.
__________________
"We must have waffles. We must all have waffles, forthwith. Oh, we must think.
We must all have waffles and think, each and every one of us to the very best of his ability."
-- Professor Goldthwait Higginson Dorr, Ph.D.
FleaCircus is offline  
Old 04-05-2004, 03:33 AM   #25 (permalink)
Delicious
 
Reese's Avatar
 
What gets me is that The superbowl is 90% beer commercials and they say it's family entertainment. Why is it a kid can be bombarded with ads showing how fun it is to drink and party, but they can't see a boob?

/me goes back to listening to KMFDM, I'm tired of being polite and PC.
__________________
“It is better to be rich and healthy than poor and sick” - Dave Barry
Reese is offline  
Old 04-06-2004, 02:31 PM   #26 (permalink)
Wehret Den Anfängen!
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
Quote:
Originally posted by FleaCircus
First, in the US, there is no "infinite duration copyright." Works copyrighted by an individual are protected for the life of the author plus 70 years, works copyrighted by a company are protected for 120 years. A long time, but finite.
For the last 60-odd years, every time copywrite has been in danger of running out of time, they have extended it by another 20 years.

While at any time, copywrite is finite in duration, if you extend it by 20 years every 20 years (retroactively), copywrite is for all intents and purposes, infinite.

Imagine if you where in jail for 1 year, but every year they could extend your jail sentance by a year. Imagine if they had been doing this for the last 60 years. Would you call that a limited sentance?

(The supreme court considers it to be a limited sentance: they covered this issue relatively recently, when the last "extend copywrite for 20 years and keep mickey mouse out of the public domain!" law was passed.)

Quote:
Second, there's a difference between the protection of intellectual property, as in copyrights, and censorship. Copyright allows the creator of a work to control how and when and where it's disseminated. Censorship means that the government has that power.
The government enforces the right for a corperation to deny you the right to say something. The source of the power of copywrite lies in the hands of the government. Hence, pedantically, copywrite enforcement is a form of censorship.

This is why there is a balance between "freedom of speech" and "the right to determine who can publish a work". Both are constitutional rights, and they oppose one another in practice.

And I was being pedantic, but copywrite, trademarks and, with the insane patents being passed nowadays, patents, are indeed a forms of censorship. My speech rights are limited by the trademarks and copywrites of others, and the government can criminally prosecute me if I violate them. (as well as enforce civil judgements against me)
__________________
Last edited by JHVH : 10-29-4004 BC at 09:00 PM. Reason: Time for a rest.
Yakk is offline  
Old 04-06-2004, 08:24 PM   #27 (permalink)
Insane
 
Location: Denver, CO
Yes, the government enforces the right a corporation to deny you the right to say something provided it's something that they have protected by copyright. Same goes for things in which an individual holds copyright.

What if I came over to your house and threw a blowout party, raiding your fridge and liquor cabinet in the process? Could I claim my "right to assemble" as justification for throwing a party at your house without your permission? For taking your booze without your permission? For eating your food without your permission?

Of course not. So why should it be any different with intellectual property? Why should "free speech" be justification for taking something which I have originally written (or invented), and therefore belongs to me?

I understand you were trying to make a point, but I don't see how copyright of intellectual property limits your right to free speech any more than laws against trespassing on private property limit your right to assemble.

The short version of my rant is this: The first amendment places limits on the powers of the government, not on the exercise of the property rights of the citizens.
__________________
"We must have waffles. We must all have waffles, forthwith. Oh, we must think.
We must all have waffles and think, each and every one of us to the very best of his ability."
-- Professor Goldthwait Higginson Dorr, Ph.D.
FleaCircus is offline  
Old 04-06-2004, 09:10 PM   #28 (permalink)
Wehret Den Anfängen!
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
Quote:
Originally posted by FleaCircus
Of course not. So why should it be any different with intellectual property?
Because intellectual property is a figment of people's imagination, far more so than property.

The existance of government enforced monoplies on ideas comes from "To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;" in the constitution.

Quote:
Why should "free speech" be justification for taking something which I have originally written (or invented), and therefore belongs to me?
You original wrote or invented it.

Thus, in order to promote such actions, the congress of the USA can secure for limited times the exlusive right to it.

You do not "own" it. You simply have the exclusive right to it for a limited time. This is only somewhat similar to property, hence the term, but it isn't the same beast.

If someone drinks your beer, you can no longer drink it.
If someone prints your book, you can still print it.

If invisible aliens arrived and took all the water in the world, we would all go thirsty.

If invisible aliens arrived and copied every note of music in the world, we wouldn't even notice.

In effect, I disagree with your "and therefore belongs to you". Thoughts, words, and ideas are not property. They do not behave like property, the history of how they are delt with legally isn't like the history of property, and the constitutional justification behind laws dealing with them is different than those that justify property.


But, like I said, I was being Pedantic, as in over literal, as in only true if you arrange definitions in annoyingly specific ways.

It is government-enforced content-sensative restrictions on what you can say or print or show: a form of government censorship.
__________________
Last edited by JHVH : 10-29-4004 BC at 09:00 PM. Reason: Time for a rest.
Yakk is offline  
Old 04-07-2004, 04:12 AM   #29 (permalink)
Tilted Cat Head
 
Cynthetiq's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Manhattan, NY
intellectual property doesn't mean you aren't allowed to talk about it, there's no censorship there.

You just cannot PROFIT from it in any way.

Thus I cannot print a Mickey Mouse image onto a tshirt, but I can take Mickey Mouse and make a parody picture of him and print that on the tshirt. I'll probably have to defend my design in a court of law, but it certainly is not censorship.

Mattel's Barbie within the song,"I'm a Barbie Girl" with Barbie being a "public" figure was well within rights of being included in a song. Courts sorted that out a couple of years ago.

Remember there's parody that allows for someone to speak of intellectual property and copyrights.
__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.
Cynthetiq is offline  
Old 04-08-2004, 07:51 AM   #30 (permalink)
Insane
 
Location: Toronto
Quote:
Originally posted by cybermike
What gets me is that The superbowl is 90% beer commercials and they say it's family entertainment. Why is it a kid can be bombarded with ads showing how fun it is to drink and party, but they can't see a boob?

Actually, I read an article about a kid who went on a shooting spree and then burst into flames after seeing a nipple slip at the Oscars this year.
__________________
wra
Fenton-J-Cool is offline  
 

Tags
censorship

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:26 PM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360