Saturday, January 24, 2004

Blockbuster rents porn

At least according to CNN - see here. Could be an interesting case. I'm not really sure what the standard is for rented movies. If they were showing the movies on their premises then there would be a duty to seek and discover hidden dangers (which pornographic movies would presumably qualify as) as the customers qualify as "invitees." But, then, the movie wasn't shown on their premises. If rented movies were a sold good, then there would be strict liability for product defects (including, presumably, pornography on a children's video tape), as there is for any product sold. But, then this wasn't a sale - title clearly remains with Blockbuster.

Assuming there is a negligence standard, I'm not sure that viewing each movie would be cost-effective - fairly few people alter videotapes, after all. I'm sure some teenagers thought it would be a funny prank - and it did make national news - but, in reality, this is pretty idiotic. I guess at least they altered Home Alone 3 rather than The Little Mermaid, so maybe the demographics are slightly older - but really it's a pretty obnoxious thing to do.

The moral: Responsible parents buy DVD players for their children - if they love them. :-)

No comments:

Blog Archive