Q. 1. Movie studios often edit their films to conform to content also other Standards also sell the edited versions to network television also other commercial buyers. In this case, explain however, the studios objected when Clean Flicks edited the films also sold the altered versions directly to consumers. Similarly Clean Flicks made unauthorized copies of the studios' DVDs to edit the films however, objected to other's making unauthorized copies of the altered versions. Is there anything unethical about these apparently contradictory positions? Explain why or explain why not?

2. Clean Flicks also its competitors asserted, in part, which they were making "fair use" of the studios' copyrighted works. they argued which by their actions "they are criticizing the objectionable content commonly found in present movies also which they are providing more socially acceptable alternatives to enable families to view the film together, without exposing children to the presumed harmful effects emanating from the objectionable content. if you were the judge, explain how would you view this argument? is a court the appropriate forum for making determinations of public or social policy?