DougF points out the the New York Times for an article on an alternative soundtrack someone made for Harry Potter. There is a brief clip that mentions the edit of The Phantom Menace done by a fan and corporate reaction. Here's an excerpt:

In 2001, for example, an anonymous "Star Wars" fan was so displeased with the helium-voiced character Jar Jar Binks in "Star Wars, Episode I: The Phantom Menace" that he recut the film, removing the character, a stunt that became known as "the Phantom edit."

George Lucas, the creator of "Star Wars," initially was intrigued by the alternative version of the film. But when bootleg copies began selling at comic book conventions, and other edited versions began to trade online, his firm, Lucasfilm, sent letters to the news media indicating that it viewed such projects as copyright infringement.

A spokewoman at Warner Brothers said that the studio was unaware of "Wizard People, Dear Reader" and declined to comment further.

It is not clear that Mr. Neely's soundtrack violates the studio's copyright. Jonathan Zittrain, co-director of the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard Law School, said that while the copyright holder retains the rights to derivative works, it was possible "Wizard People" was protected under the rules that allow "fair use" of copyrighted works for purposes like criticism, comment and news reporting.

"The long-term strategic threat to the entertainment industry is that people will get in the habit of creating and making as much as watching and listening, and all of a sudden the label applied to people at leisure, 50 years in the making ? consumer ? could wither away," he said. "But it would be a shame if Hollywood just said no. It could very possibly be in the interest of publishers to see a market in providing raw material along with finished product."