When the film TITANIC was released on VHS a few years ago, a video store in Utah sold copies of the film with the nude scene featuring Kate Winslet spliced out. All in the name of family values. Paramount did little about it at the time.

Now that concept has perverted into CleanFlicks, a Utah based video chain that offers so-called "E-Rated" (edited) versions of films on VHS and DVD. All the objectionable content has been removed. They even offer an online rental site similar to NetFlix. This has sparked debate on sites like Metafilter and Slashdot.

CleanFlicks recently filed a pre-emptive lawsuit against 16 top Hollywood directors for their right to edit. As expected, the DGA responded with a countersuit.

First of all, let's call a spade a spade. This is an organization that censors films on behalf of Mormons in Utah. (The overwhelming majority of CleanFlicks locations are located there.) There's nothing wrong with controlling objectionable content in your own home. But is it permissable to take someone else's work (artistic or otherwise), altering it without permission, and selling/renting it for profit? What it really boils down to is copyright.

Some argue studios edit films for airlines and television, so this shouldn't be a problem. The owners can edit the work however they see fit, as they control the rights. But a Mormon in Utah illegally copying a DVD via DeCSS to his hard drive, editing out what he defines as "filth", and burning it back onto DVD-R to sale and/or rent in his video store is a problem. While there surely is a market for "edited for content" films on DVD and video, this isn't the way to go about it.

Or to put it another way: Would it be okay for someone to buy a book, cross out lines and rip out pages of material they didn't like, and sell it?