In the video “Laws that Choke Creativity”, Lawrence firstly talk three stories to express his argument. He mentions two kinds of culture. One is the read-write culture and “It is a culture where people participate in the creation and the re-creation of their culture” (Lawrence). Another is the read-only culture which is “top-down, owned, where the vocal chords of the millions have been lost” (Lawrence). When we look back twentieth century, the culture are more from read-write culture to read-only culture until the appearance of internet. Lawrence believes that internet is an opportunity to change this situation and revive the read-write culture. Then he talks about digital technologies and shows some examples. People add something new based on the old things and make them different. It seems that this creation bring the hope for the revival of read-write culture. However, the problems arise from this. There is a contraction between the law and the use of digital technology. This use of digital technology violates the copyright and is illegal. Lawrence feels unsatisfied with this because he believes this culture where people produce for the love of what they are doing and not for money should be supported. He believes we cannot count on the change of laws and he provides his own solutions. The first one is that the artists and creators who embrace the idea can make their work more free, but not free for commercial use. The second is that we need the business that build out the read-write culture so that the ecology of free content can grow on a neutral platform. This will create a competition between more-freely and less-freely. Actually I don’t know whether his solution can work. I believe the regulation of use of digital technology like this is reasonable. We should promote the development of this culture, but we are not sure that all purposes for using this technology is good and beneficial. I believe the effects of laws are not completely harmful.
There are many people stealing ideas of others and make profits off from them. I think that’s why Lawrence mentions “the love of what they are doing and not for money should be supported.” (Lawrence 2007) The internet provides two sides of effects on us. While spreading the creative ideas all around us, it also generates unlawful actions. Solving this problem would be always controversial, and there would be no on right answer.
I think you brought up some interesting points about the TED talk. I do believe that in some ways, the way most people use technology inhibits innovation and creativity. I remember being young and always being curious about everything around me. But now a days, I feel as though people can just solve most of there problems with a quick google search. This leaves the majority technologies users at an impasse. Like you said in your post, “culture moved from this read-write to read-only existence” (Lessig). But I believe there are many passionate people who remix technology and move it forward. Can you think of anyone who uses technology to their advantage? How so?
I see you have a clear point about how law both limit and manage the society well. It is a balance that can be hardly break. Lawrence shows that law can be a strong limitation to creativity and it is really hard to find a balance point between law and creativity that does not break laws. My point is, there is no prefect system, so does the law. Policy makers are always trying to figure out a better way to make a better policy so there will be more percentage of people become happy. We don’t really need a quick solution for the problem, what we need is patient and we shall find the answer.