Remix culture

1,116
-1

Published on

A summary of Kayley Thomas's and Carol Wu's presentation for Mindy McAdams's New Media and a Democratic Society course at the University of Florida

Published in: Education
1 Comment
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • how do i jam this banana so far up my hairy ass that i can massage my prostate with it? i always have to throw up about 3 inches in..
    someone told me u were an expert on this subject ;)

    if u cant help me out u can do it tmorrow.. till then bby :*
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,116
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
9
Comments
1
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Remix culture

  1. 1. *You can steal this Powerpoint
  2. 2.  Writer & Director of RiP: A Remix Manifesto › An open source documentary film about legal and artistic issues in remix culture › Ultimately a defense and celebration of remix culture  Founder of Open Source Cinema › A collaborative filmmaking web site  Web Producer/Board of Directors at HomelessNation.org › A social network & support site for Canadian homeless  Project Lead on Web Made Movies for Mozilla Drumbeat › An open video lab & production studio
  3. 3.  Harvard Law School professor featured in RiP: A Remix Manifesto  Writer of books concerning issues of remix, particularly art, technology & copyright › Remix: Marking Art & Commerce Thrive in the Hybrid Economy, Code: And Other Laws of Cyberspace Version 2.0, Free Culture: The Nature & Future of Creativity, The Future of Ideas: The Fate of the Commons in a Connected World  In Free Culture, he argues: › For a “free culture” encouraging innovation vs. a “permission culture” which favors “owners” of ideas over sharing of ideas
  4. 4.  Similar concepts with similar artistic ethos behind them – a somehow transformative work of another person’s work – but › “A mashup involves at least two different sources (neither of them original) and overlaying them to create a distinct third entity” –Ulresque › A remix instead revises a singular work with the possible edition of original material  Girl Talk’s work is a mashup; Dan O’Neill’s would be more of a remix.
  5. 5.  There are non-artistic kinds of mashups too. Map mashups and web application mashups in which people combine components of different programs and tools to accomplish something new: › Programable Web Mashup Directory › Google Maps Mashups
  6. 6.  “The art of hijacking the mainstream media, corporate advertisers, and the public domain to get across a message against one-way communication. Basically, culture jamming is sabotage of corporate or public property for political purposes” (Wikihow).
  7. 7.  Mashup › Apocalypse Pooh  Remix › Scary Mary Poppins  Culture Jamming › No Logo
  8. 8.  Remix creations are bound up in legal & ethical conversations about art, ideas, property & licensing. The laws set in place are often gray at best – difficult to understand and impossible to interpret and apply consistently and, as becomes the big question, fairly.  Copyright is a part of “intellectual property” law & begs the question: is an idea something that can and should be owned and protected like any other form of property?
  9. 9.  If a work is in the public domain, it has no copyright restrictions & is thus free for anyone to use.  What is in public domain can be complicated, but in general: › All works published in the U.S. before 1923 › All works published with a copyright notice from 1923 through 1963 without copyright renewal › All works published without a copyright notice from 1923 through 1977 › All works published without a copyright notice from 1978 through March 1, 1989, and without subsequent registration within 5 years –Teaching Copyright  Now, anything you publish is automatically under copyright and will be, by default, for the term of your life plus 70 years. › You can, however, “donate” your work to the public domain through Creative Commons
  10. 10.  Copyrighted works can potentially be used for remixing purposes under the law of fair use, designed as a limitation on copyright.  Whether or not someone’s appropriation of another’s work for some other purpose is “fair use” is determined in courts by these broad considerations: › Purpose & character of the use of the copyrighted work  Is it transformative? Is your work the same as the old work or have you done something with it in a new & different way?  Commercial or non-commercial? › Nature of the copyrighted work  What kind of work are you remixing – factual vs creative? › Amount & substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole  How much is too much? › Effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work  Are you addressing a different audience or purpose? Will you infringe upon the original’s?  But no one case is the same – “Fair Use” might protect the remixer, or it might protect the remixed object.
  11. 11.  Myth of Fair Use for education › Teachers think they can copy at will (ie. Coursepacks & handouts) because it’s for “educational purposes” - not necessarily the case. Should protecting intellectual property prevent teachers from helping their students grow in their own intellectual pursuits? › http://www.utsystem.edu/ogc/intellectualproperty/copypol2.htm  Dancing baby case: (Video)  The case will help define the limits of “fair use” in the digital age. › Prince sued for copyright infringement – what is at stake in this brief, barely recognizable snippet of his music? Who is being harmed, and what is being challenged? Is fair use being applied here? › The Lenz video was clearly “noncommercial and transformative,” writes Kwun.  It uses only a small portion of the original song—the whole video is less than 30 seconds long—and there is “no plausible market harm” to Prince  Is fair use only in the eye of the copyright holder?  Other cases: Google book search settlement ; Blog headlines
  12. 12.  The Copyright Paradox  In Neil Netanel’s recent book Copyright’s Paradox, he advocates for a copyright system that puts freedom of expression at the forefront. He argues that copyright has been thought of as a property right despite the fact that it was originally conceived as a balance designed to encourage original expression. As a result, freedom of expression has come into direct conflict with copyright.
  13. 13.  In the spirit of RiP: The Remix Manifesto, Jonathan Lethem proposes in “Ecstasy of Influence” that: › Any text that has infiltrated the common mind to the extent of Gone With the Wind or Lolita or Ulysses inexorably joins the language of culture. A map-turned-to-landscape, it has moved to a place beyond enclosure or control. The authors and their heirs should consider the subsequent parodies, refractions, quotations, and revisions an honor, or at least the price of a rare success. › A corporation that has imposed an inescapable notion—Mickey Mouse, Band-Aid—on the cultural language should pay a similar price. › The primary objective of copyright is not to reward the labor of authors but “to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts.” To this end, copyright assures authors the right to their original expression, but encourages others to build freely upon the ideas and information conveyed by a work. This result is neither unfair nor unfortunate.
  14. 14.  If remixing requires access to copyrighted materials, what does it mean to acquire those materials illegally? And to share them?  BitTorrent › The program is open-source and legal to recreate, but what is hosted and downloaded is not in some places › Pirate Bay is located in Sweden, where copyright laws are not the same as in the US – should US copyright holders be able to prosecute them?  Legal threats & their responses
  15. 15.  Canada has joined Russia and China as the biggest violators of U.S. copyright law, according to the U.S.-based International Intellectual Property Alliance. › http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2008/02/12/tech-copyright.html (Canada)  The United States filed two complaints with the World Trade Organisation against China over copyright policy and restrictions on the sale of American films, music and books. The move, which drew an angry response from Beijing, represents an escalation in the dispute over the huge trade imbalances between the two economies. › http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2007/apr/11/usnews.china (China)  Should United States control the copyright materials in other country? Should other countris do what United States asks about the copyright?  Chinese websites that violates the copyright material of United States: › http://www.qiyi.com/common/typelist.html?category=%E7%94%B5%E5%BD%B1&key =%E7%BE%8E%E5%9B%BD (Film) › http://mp3.sogou.com (Music)
  16. 16.  Should medical and scientific discoveries that can benefit mankind be considered protectable, exclusive intellectual property?  Patents may hinder the progress of the medical invention, preventing other people from adding to ideas to create a new and better whole. › Is gene a discovery or an invention? › Is patent a fair policy for the third world country? › http://www.calbaptist.edu/dskubik/intl_bio.htm

×