DAVID POST: Stephen Soderbergh, copyright infringer?

Actor-director Stephen Soderbergh has been getting a great deal of attention recently for posting his newly-edited versions of classic films . . .

Soderbergh was the lead plaintiff in the 2006 case of Soderbergh et al v. Clean Flicks of Colorado et al., (433 F.Supp.2d 1236). Clean Flicks (and the other defendants) were in the business of preparing and distributing edited versions designed to be more “family friendly” (i.e. with the nasty stuff edited out) of previously-released motion pictures. . . .

The plaintiffs – Soderbergh included – were successful at shutting the operation down, on the grounds that the edited versions prepared by Clean Flicks violated their rights under sec 106(2) of the Copyright Act to create “derivative works” of the films . . .

Is he just a hypocrite, who thinks that he has some kind of “artistic license” to do what he denies to others, that his creativity is somehow more valuable than the creativity of others? That’s what it looks like to me, I must say.