Suit Against Film

Re “A Stone-Solid Legal Right,” editorial, March 10: I can accept, albeit reluctantly, that The Times would be biased in favor of the entertainment industry and pretty one-sided on most 1st Amendment issues. But your editorial on the Supreme Court’s ruling to allow the Oliver Stone suit to go forward takes an absurd turn in “because he ate too many Twinkies.”

Stone, not unlike many movie producers, dwells on violence and even bad taste. More, he is evangelical about his prurient products--as though it were his divine right to assault our senses.

It seems to me that the Supreme Court has performed a worthy service in sending a message to movie and TV producers about their re- sponsibility to the public at large. Even if we elect not to see their product, we can become victims of their influence--and all the rating systems in the world are a shallow defense for those who would glorify violence.

RODERICK R. GEER

Torrance

*

I don’t know which frightens me more: “copycat” killers or the new class of copycat lawsuits based on specious reasoning to which the Supreme Court has now left our country vulnerable.

BRIAN ROSENBERG

Los Angeles