Blog Response 6

In the short video Laws that choke creativity, Harvard professor Larry Lessig addresses the current conflicts of broadcasting and its copyright issues. He creates his core argument of example 2 comparing Lord Blackstone ideology “Land protected by trespass law for most of the history of trespass pass law by presuming it protects the land all the way down below and to the indefinite extent upward” to conflicts that go against it, in this case air planes-whom travel across the country above land that is protected by individual ownership.  If original creators are publishing it, then it’s clear that the public will have access to reproduce and share, not to keep it in a black hole. He argues that copyright should be more lenient and encouraged to the youth since its part of “culture”, Lessig displays this by showing several video clips of how original copyrighted content was transformed into something entirely new. He stresses that as long as the remixed content is not made for profit than copyright material should be of fair use.

In my opinion all remakes should always credit its original source-ALWAYS! YouTube has a policy that in order to use copyrighted material the creator must be speaking or making comments while the original content is playing-for example video games (although that’s still a controversial issue) to add the original content in the remix can only be a minute long. There are several different ways of remixing, Lessing provides examples of Jesus singing I will survive and President Bush and Prime Minister Blair lip synching, not only was it hilarious but it does in fact make great sense of entertainment. Even with music, you tubers are collaborating with each other to create parodies of their favorite songs by adding a sense of karaoke, only, with their own lyrics. A recent example of a YouTube remake is Antoine Dodson’s rant on his sister’s rape on the news. His rant was turned into a song by amateur you tube comedians who go by the name “Gregory Brothers”, the catchy song titled Bed Intruder has over 27 million hits in less than two months, it’s available on iTunes too! (People are actually buying it!)

Copy right issues also bring up more controversial subjects like artwork, fashion and new inventions. Although Lessig focused more on video content, it raises the question whether artwork can be imitated into something new. Will this be a remix, remake or plagiarizing someone else’s visual ideas?

-SSIRA9018

Subject Heading:

NX-Arts in General 

DA-Great Britian

Advertisements

One response to “Blog Response 6

  1. People splice up video and audio content all the time. Once it is made into something different from the original it should just be considered a new idea. It is a new creation. There is a video on youtube.com that is Disney’s Alice In Wonderland that someone sliced up and put to music. Now someone has created new art. I totally agree with what Lessig says in the video. I am sure if that person was making money off it Disney would find out and take them to court. The video really isnt something new though because its still clearly from Alice In Wonderland. It was just “remixed”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s