Comments for Jessica Isla-MAC Week 1 Reading

Jessica, I love Danger Mouse too!!!!! Those tracks are amazing.  I totally agree that Danger Mouse does owe acknowledgement to the artists that he sampled the tracks from, but he interpreted the music creatively himself. Thus creating a new musical piece. Look at it this way, if I tell you a story or provide you with advice that helps you, and later in your life you share that information with someone else, am I owed a copyright? Absolutely not! If you re-told the advice, I would not expect to even be mentioned.  Maybe you would say, "Valencia Winston" once said.....but I highly doubt it. The advice that you share with others may be based on what I originally said, but the situation would be entirely different.  This is the truth about information. Everything that any of us have been told, or learned, or seen, has come from the experiences and others. Based on these laws, we all owe copyright royalties to everyone!

Jessica's Original Post:

Week 1: Blog Post #1 - "Readings" on Copyright Issues 
After looking at the videos on Copyright Issues, it was clear to me that I was very unaware of how large of a range the phrase encompasses.  When hearing the phrase “Copyright Issues,” I mainly think of written pieces of work, movies, or music.  It never really occurred to me that Dance would fall into that category.  I mean it does make sense that a piece of choreographed material would fall under that category, but I would never really think that "improv" would also fall under that category.  I do, however, fully understand the part where someone needs to have tangible proof (e.g. a video, document, recording, etc.) of the actual creation.  Just viewing these videos really opened my eyes as to how much effort is put into trying to claim something as your own.  I feel bad for those small few who create a masterpiece, but have no proof to uphold a copyright claim.

I also think that it's crazy if things get so serious that they are brought to court, that there are civil and federal offenses.  That definitely ups the stakes a bit, don't you think???  I wonder how many federal cases there are?  I knew that these issues were big, but I never imagined that it could be a federal offense.

 

In the documentary, Good Copy/Bad Copy, I was a bit taken aback by how nonchalant the DJ was when speaking about "sampling" tons of other artists' music and then mixing them together to call his own.  I guess you could say that it's a form of art, but at the same time... all he did was piece together parts of other people's work.  Is that really art?  By the way, I did have a chuckle to myself when the man talking about the song, "Get Off Your Ass and Jam," mentioned the part about the "learned judges" talking about such song titles with profanity like that.  Nonetheless, I do think it's interesting that the some people view such use as being "de minimis" (meaning that the law doesn't deal with something so insignificant), but in fact it's not.  It's illegal. (Side Note: DJ Danger Mouse's The Grey Album is AMAZING... I have it!)

NOTE: If you sample, you license.

Comments for Debbie Pastel-MAC Week 1 Reading

Debbie, I am happy to study the copyright law as well. I absolutely love this stuff, and am very excited about diving into the information.  I remember watching "Eyes on the Prize" in high school. It was a documentary which aired on PBS.  If my memory serves me correctly, it was a Social Studies assignment. We all had to watch the five-part series and complete a paper about what was learned. Now of course I live in Alabama, and only 56 miles from Birmingham and about 140 miles from Montgomery. That said, this area was a hotbed when the series originally aired.  The problem is that now I have a daughter, who is growing up in the same area, but will not be exposed to such an important part of her personal history. We still have family members and friends who were involved in the movement.  It is a real shame that an entire generation will be rob of these important views of our past.

Original post from Debbie:

MAC: Week 1, Reading: Copyright Issues, The Fog Clears

I am excited about this class and glad that we are covering copyright in depth. We have hit on this topic briefly in the program, but it was never truly defined resulting in mixed results with my cohorts’ projects. I have just tried to keep it simple and I limited myself with Microsoft Office clip art because that usage seemed clear to me. Having watched the videos, the fog has cleared and I have a much better grasp of the entire copyright issue.

What I find most interesting and potentially frightful is the cultural impact that Copyright and Fair Use might have on society. I was concerned and upset about the explanation of the use of the Martin Luther King Jr. documentary, “Eyes on the Prize”; that it has been prohibited to be shown or preserved because of copyright laws and some people want to make a profit off of it. I agree with the commentators that this eventually comes down to censorship of history by making it private property. Individuals that want to make a profit cannot bind history, the greater good and evolution of a society depends on freedom of expression and the writing of histories’ stories. I am glad that there are groups that are fighting to preserve the rights of people to express themselves and make documentaries, thus improving our democracy.

I went to YouTube and found out that the clip we watched is old and it is on DVD and has been aired on PBS. I know that I have two of the DVD’s that are pictured in the film. I also went to Amazon, but the price is about $400.00 for the DVD. The film is available, but still out of reach. The debate continues and people persevere fighting the fights for making history accessible.

Sources: Microsoft Office Clip Art, MP900427695jpg: Eyes on the Fair Use of the Prize, YouTube, Uploaded by mediathatmatters on May 4, 2007

MAC Week 1 Reading

I really enjoyed this week’s reading assignment, because I love the intricate business side of the entertainment industry. I found it so interesting that laws that were meant to protect an artist from others making money from their work, has a flip side that constricts artists from creatively producing work.  May favorite videos dealt with the ways other countries view copyright. Brazilian and Nigerian artists are not engrossed in the moneymaking elements of entertainment, as much as they are interested in purely entertaining. What was illustrated was that the corporate world in America, which is the driving force behind the copyright laws, are consumed by this “bottom line” kind of thinking, and milking every possible penny out of consumers. This kind of greed-based mentality shows up throughout America’s financial institutions, and results in the rot that drives piracy and theft.  The best example of this was the Bridgeport V Dimension Film/Music case against Hip Hop recording artists De La Soul. While Jane Peterer was right that the sample had been used, the sample was not used in the same way as the original artist created it.  In my opinion, this made the song “Me, Myself and I” a new creation. The same is true for NWA’s “One Hundred Miles and Running.” Moreover, the original artist Parliament and Funkadelic, was not even quoted in the story.

When considering these laws, in the realm of education, it becomes even more ridiculous. Every generation is taught the world around them. Imagine if ancient pyramid inscriptions, drawings, and statues were copyrighted. How many centuries of learners would have been deprived of learning and interpreting the meanings of the artwork? I believe that this example illustrates how ridiculous these laws are.  If copyright laws had existed in the past for 100 years + 70, how many generations before us would have been neglected? I look forward to more study on these issues.