Objectives:
- Become acquainted with copyright as a historic, cultural and economic paradigm and its value and pertinence to creative works.
- Explore the changing nature of copyright in the context of “Remix Culture”
- Examine your own and others values and paradigms of ownership and authorship of cultural media.
Artifact:
The role copyrighting plays in society is that it preserves one’s intellectual property. The value of copyright is that it prevents one from stealing an original idea from someone else and using it for their own benefits. Although this concept seems very straightforward, there are many controversies regarding as to what is considered as “creative” and “original.” Larry Lessig’s reading provides us an insight of the two styles of creativity; RO (Read only) and RW (Read and Write). RO gives the power to the creators while RW allows the possibility for others to join in and give input. RO is supposedly set for professionals, while RW is for professionals and amateurs as well. Although they are both very significant to our culture, they are both judged differently from a legal standpoint, as RO appears to be very supported by our laws but RW is considered illegal due to copyright claims that are set in stone with our government regulations. Lessig believes people should be able to remix songs, or utilize the ideals of RW with no legal issue. “There is no plausible argument that allowing kids to remix music is going to hurt anyone. Until someone can show that it will, the law should simply get out of the way” (Lessig 114). He encourages this notion further in his TED talk, by stating that we should have a culture where “people produce music out of love, not just for money”. I too agree with this in the sense that as long as people aren’t profiting from the mix of music, I don’t see why the issue of copyrighting should come in play. Only when one is taking music created by others and keeping the revenues themselves should be dealt with accordingly by the law.
With that in mind, I believe that remixing songs actually bring more attention and revenue to the original songs, as most people would be curious to see where the song had originated. Ed Sheeran, for example, created a great song with “I See Fire”, but Kygo, an EDM producer, created a famous remix that millions of others, including myself have loved and adored. I think that remixed songs can actually enhance the original work to a certain extent. This can be observed by Danger Mouse’s album. By remixing two well-known artists in creating a new style of music, they not brought fame and publicity upon themselves; they have also brought even more attention and recognition to Jay Z and the Beatles. However, I believe that such remixes should be constructed in such a way that part of the profits should go back to the original artists, and that copyright laws should apply this rule in one manner or another. This is because although the RW people carry some sort of creativity and intellectual property themselves, their creativity was a source of the creativity from the original artists, so some credit should go back to them. I feel like this is also a way for us to appreciate the music culture to another level as we are respecting those who established the pavement for us to enjoy. Copyright laws are very important to maintain, but it shouldn’t be regarded so black and white on originality. Since the concept of creativity is very vague, this law should only be enforced to ensure that every artist is receiving credit when credit is due, including those have remixed the original songs as well. This will truly enhance the music culture, which will continue to enlighten us for the next generations to come.
Reflection:
Before accomplishing this assignment, I had never thought that copyrighting hindered the growth of creativity; I had just assumed that the role of copyright is to prevent those that would steal intellectual property from others and profit from them. I definitely feel that after this assignment, I understand copyright laws better and can see how it does impact the foundation for creativity. As seen through “Remix Culture”, copyright laws are stated that they hinder these growth and that as long as they remain this way, new passion and desire for music would disappear, and the art of this culture would detoriate significantly.
However, I believe copyright laws should be established, because without them, who would have the motivation to be creative when they can just rip older productions of work as their style? I feel that this would diminish music art completely, as new artists wouldn’t be motivated to create something except to copy from the old, while the artists that have been around would quit their profession as their work is simply being mocked and recreated to make others money. I think that there should be some laws available for copyrighting, and that they can go on a case by case basis. One of the recent copyright violations occurred to Robin Thicke and Pharrell Williams, as their hit song Blurred Lines seems very familiar to the Marvin Gaye’s Got to Give it up hit in 1977. As a result, Thicke and Pharrell had to pay Marvin Gaye’s part $7.3 million on their infringement. Here is a mash up of these two songs, along with a Rolling Stone article that further defines this case:
From this, we can see that copyright laws is beneficial, as Robin Thicke and Pharrell should not have made as much as they have by stealing a sound from an older song; this isn’t true creativity and it stems the work of others. Therefore, my rule of thumb for this situation is that if an artist is making money by utilizing the RW method from older songs the should give some sort of royalty to the other artists content that they end up using. I think that with this sort, both parties would be happy and the art of music would still prosper.
Future:
In the future I hope to understand the extent of copyright laws, and how they can be utilized better so that they can distinguish from those that are truly creative to those that rip from others. I want to see how these laws would come in effect as newer music is realeased, because we are influenced by the older generation, and as new artists get their inspiration from older artists, this law may have to be tweaked sooner than later. I want to understand better what boundaries are set that can define whether or not an artist’s work is considered illegal, according to the government. I do however, think that copyright laws are important to have to a certain amount, as it does preserve the ideals of creativity and originality that so many listeners enjoy.
Sources:
Grow, K. (2015, March 10). Robin Thicke, Pharrell Lose Multi-Million Dollar ‘Blurred Lines’ Lawsuit. Retrieved March 16, 2015, from http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/robin-thicke-and-pharrell-lose-blurred-lines-lawsuit-2015031