Copyrighting is to prevent people form utilizing other people’s hard work and calling it their own with the possibility of claiming more fame and attention than the original artist. This restriction on duplicating work is both a privilege and a set back for both parties: the artist and the community. Lawrence Lessig makes a good point at around 17:32 when he starts to talk about the youth being affected by the limitation copyrighting puts on their access to media. He mentions that the youth will grow up in a world where you can’t stop them from accessing media but “drive it underground” (18:00). I feel in a sense, the ability for the older generation to allow the youth to develop the capability to discover all that has been driven “underground” so to speak only enhances their skills to do the exact opposite of what the purpose of hiding the media was for. This develops their capability to develop skills such as hacking and encrypting internet codes.

The example of The Grey Album shows how copyrighting has the ability to diminish the ability of artist to create new works of art from old. Yes I do think that mixing two well-known songs together and calling it your own is a bit far fetched and a little out of the border of completely being someone’s own creation. In the article by Sam Howard-Spink on The Grey Album, he talks about how copyrighting is mainly for artist recognition. I think that the idea of copyright does infringe on one’s ability to be creative and imaginative. It is very helpful in a sense to stimulate ideas from someone else’s work, but then again how did those artist generate their original ideas? I think being able to create a piece that is one hundred percent original is what makes a true artist. At this day and age, anyone has the ability and potential to be a DJ by remixing other people’s hard work and calling it their own.

I think that people should be allowed to use other people’s work if it cannot be recognized as the original piece or make a monetary deal with the original artist or even a compilation with them. I think learning from the people who came before us gives us the ability to grow. In the reading by Lawrence Lessig, he talks about the idea of RW, read and writing culture, and how it does not necessarily always pose as a negative influence (95). The ability to change the way a track or beat sounds may be more innovative than what the creator may have thought of. In a way we learn from “remixing” the old music into new. I think the way the copyright regulations are now should remain the same because I feel we as growing artist should challenge ourselves to innovate new genres of music and mediums for art instead of merely copying from the people before us. It would be helpful for those in the future to look back on what we produce now to give them a reason to want to copy our work. We should definitely take in influences from what we feel and create original media.

Howard-Spink, S. (2005, July 4). Grey Tuesday, online cultural activism and the mash-up of music and politics (originally published in October 2004) | Howard-Spink | First Monday. Retrieved May 28, 2015, from http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1460/1375

Lessig, L. (2008). Comparing Cultures. Remix: Making Art and Commerce Thrive in the Hybrid Economy (pp. 84-116). New York: Penguin Press HC, The.

Lessig, L. (2007, March). Laws That Choke Creativity. Retrieved May 28, 2015, from http://www.ted.com/talks/larry_lessig_says_the_law_is_strangling_creativity?language=en#t-1069018