Wk 1 Blog Comment 2: Copyright Issues

photo by Mike Colletti

Trina Dralus:  My thinking during Good Copy, Bad Copy:
While viewing Good Copy, Bad Copy I became aware of the conflicting opinions I have on the topic of copyright issues. I began to wonder how I really feel. I have always felt that the artist should maintain credit for the work they have developed. I also feel that the artist should be compensated for his or her work. However, I often wonder how much of the compensation actually goes to the artist and not the record label and so forth. I am also left wondering why copyright laws prohibit the public from building upon the ideas of others. This current generation has grown up with media at their fingertips. Why not allow them to use text, film, etc. to learn about their past and have a voice in their future as was stated in Good Copy, Bad Copy (2009). I thought this idea was brilliant. This is how these students learn. Why stifle this learning? Why not build upon the great ideas of the past to create a powerful idea for the future?

My mind was also opened during the section that discussed the Nigerian philosophy about copyright. This theory believes that copyright should not be about getting people for using work, but should be about using work legally and paying the artist for the work they have done. They don't have piracy because of this philosophy. The public pays the same for something new or something copied. So why copy it? This makes so much sense to me. The artist is compensated for his or her work and the public can then use this to create work of their own.

This idea allowed me to be very open to the idea of blanket licensing. This would allow for credit to the creator while still allowing open creativity. Money could still be made as the point of marketing was brought up. Marketing is what makes the money, not the copyrighting. Again, this makes perfect sense to me. So this can make copyright issues a nonissue. I wonder if that day will ever come?

@Trina

I was also torn between the two sides of the issue while watching Good Copy, Bad Copy.  On the one hand, I understand the protection of an artist’s intellectual property, whether it is film, music, dance, art or design.  I remember a case from the Mass Media class I teach, regarding Philo Farnsworth vs. RCA, during the days of television’s infancy.  Farnsworth invented one of the vital components that made television work, and his idea was used by RCA without permission.  While he eventually won his case, the financial hardships caused by the court proceedings left him a broken man, while RCA went on to be the major force in television development.  You can’t help but feel sorry for him.

On the other hand, letting new artists work with ideas already developed to create something different is an important part of the development of society.  We are always trying to invent a better mousetrap, as the saying goes.  As I said in my original blog post, there is a direct relationship between the telegraph and the television, even though you might not think so on first glance. 

What is needed is an understanding among all the creative forces out there, without the lawyers and without the courts getting involved.  It is amazing that the most developed country in the world can’t figure that out, and that “third world” countries like Nigeria and Brazil can.  So I agree that some form of blanket licensing makes the most sense.  It will make copyright issues a non-issue; however, I am not holding my breath until that day comes.

Wk 1 Blog Comment 3: Copyright Issues

Britni Hendrickson

photo by Mike Colletti

Copyright has always been confusing to me. I mean I know that when you use someone else’s work you must always give credit where credit is due but I had no idea that copyright had an actual (limited) lifespan. I also really appreciated the clarification of “fair use.” My first year of teaching, my fellow co-workers made “fair use” sound as though it was a given right, however it is not. There are limitation that we must be aware of. I also really appreciated the multitude of different points of view in the film Good Copy, Bad copy. One quote that I had to write down and think about was that copyright should not been as a limitation but yet “copyright is an incentive to create.”  This just really got me to thinking about analyzing copyrighted works, and fair use, and some of the ways this all effects not only teachers but also our students.

I am all about a shared culture, but I do believe that there still needs to be a copyright in place for those who want credit where its due. Creative Commons rocks in my opinion! I think they have not only the access but also the control that is needed. I see both ends of the spectrum. I see artists that want credit for their work no matter what, and I see people that are taking great works/materials, adding to them and creating new cutting edge innovative materials. Where exactly do we draw the line? Like with the sampling idea. This sampling takes so long and often times add in several pieces from several artists. I never really got my one questioned answered when it came to sampling, and that was, is sampling illegal? I did understand that there really is no written rule in regards to a set length when using media.

@Britni

photo by Mike Colletti

If anyone says he completely understands copyright and fair use, he is either a lawyer or a liar (no offense meant, Professor Bustillos, I just liked the play on words).  If I asked our faculty about fair use, they would all claim it is a right they have as teachers to use whatever they can to get the lessons taught.  And aren’t teachers the most blatant “borrowers” of other people’s materials?  So we are all guilty of not understanding either term.

I must agree that Creative Commons rocks.  What they are attempting to do is to create the shared community of intellectuals that all great societies, from ancient times to now, used to become great:  shared knowledge.  Unfortunately, elements like greed and jealousy create the rifts that split up these creative communities.  Don’t get me wrong, because I believe credit should be given where it is due.  I just think that once credit is given, there should be some allowances for taking something to the next level.  That is what defines progress and what we always want to see in our students – the need to succeed and use the brainpower that they have.

Wk 1 Blog Comment 1: Copyright Issues

Melissa Lodhi

Image courtesy of Morguefile

I find the issues surrounding copyright law fascinating.  I am particularly interested because much of my career revolves around these laws.  As a professional choreographer, my own intellectual property is protected but I run into massive risks when using music to accompany my work.  Trying to publish or share my work is impossible without original music, which is unaffordable in most cases.  The video “Good Copy, Bad Copy” was eye-opening.  I am extremely baffled by how so many artists are able to produce work that is technically infringing on copyright.  It sounds like all remixes and remakes of songs are stealing intellectual property.  Copyright law is a jumble of pitfalls and loopholes.  In order to pay artists for their work, all 3000 songs on my iPod have been purchased on hardcopy or through iTunes, but I have on many occasions used the work of artists as accompaniment for my work which is technically a no-no.  

@Melissa...

I understand your concern over copyright issues with the music you select for your dance shows.  I face the same issues when I select material for my speech team members to perform.  As we take 8-10 minute cuttings from longer length literature, we are always in fear of some author coming back at us for changing his intent by our adaptation, or just because we performed his selection without permission.  It is even more of a challenge due to the publication of so much material on the internet. 

I think of George Harrison losing in court for "stealing" the melody of "My Sweet Lord" and how ridiculous it seemed to me at the time.  At some point, every conceivable way to arrange notes will be used; will that be the end of new music?

You really hit the nail on the head with your term "perplexing." It really is!

Wk 1 Reading: Copyright Issues, parts 1-3

Image courtesy of Creative Commons

First of all, the TED Talk video: ReMix Culture by Larry Lessig, was a great way to end this week’s video barrage. It put the whole copyright lesson into a capsule that made the most sense to me. And, I will definitely use the video as one of the closing elements of the Mass Media class I currently teach. It just ties all that we are reading and studying about together.

I agree that there needs to be a meeting of the minds on both sides of this issue, as some compromise needs to be agreed upon. If not, creativity will be stifled, or worse than that, become illegal. I can’t help but think of Fahrenheit 451, the great Ray Bradbury novel, and the use of firemen and book burning to control our existence, or even George Orwell’s classic 1984, with Big Brother watching our every move and Thought Police punishing thought crime.

Don’t get me wrong, I am all for protecting what is mine, and everyone deserves that right as well.  However, if we were not allowed to take what already exists and make it better, where would we be now?  Our technology advances can be traced back many generations of creations, all taking it one step further in order to make something new.  Sending electricity through wires led to sending controlled impulses (telegraph) through wires, which led to adding sound (telephone), and then taking the wires away (radio), first without sound and then with voice, and then adding pictures (television) and so on.  Yes, I know there were copyright and patent battles and agreements throughout the process, but the creativity was not stifled.

We have provided our current generation with the greatest technology at an affordable price.  We need to let them take this material and stretch the limits of what that technology can do.  Whether it is through an organization like Creative Commons, taking the legal high road, or through “subversive” unauthorized experimentation, isn’t the idea that our children are exercising their minds and learning new things what is really important?  As Larry Lessig said in his closing of the aforementioned TED Talk video, [our kids] “live life knowing they live it against the law…in a democracy, we ought to be able do better at least for them…”