Who is Copyright For?

As both an aspiring writer and musician, I have often thought about the implications of copyright law, especially in the terms of digitalized music. Obviously, there is a part of me that dreams of becoming a part of what Lessig calls the “RO” world, in which case, I want my creations to be protected (2008, 84). However, I have always felt that amateurs are restricted in absurd ways by the extent to which the copyright law cracks down on attempts to explore established pieces of art. Even if this “remixing” is seen as “derivative” (2008, 91), Lessig provides a perfect example, using his experiences at Goethe Institute to show why it is important to experience that remixing (2008, 92). Even in my own experiences, remixing has been crucial. My first attempt at a short story was a blatant rip-off of Flannery O’Conner and I used a Dandy Warhols chord progression to write my first ever original song. Since then, I have only grown as a writer and a musician, but they were important stepping stones for my possible career and growth. Maybe I raise the same questions Lessig does when I ask whether copyright laws only prevent the growth of young artists. What is really at stake if copyright laws continue to expand? What is more important, the cultivation of new, educated young artists, or the assurance that every single replication of a piece of art is attributed back (especially monetarily) to the original creator?