Still Photo From "Its A Wonderful Life", by Frank Capra
Retrieved from:
Frank Capra’s examination of failure.
http://failuremag.com/index.php/feature/article/its_a_wonderful_life/#ixzz1IUrucjzG
Wayne Todd
http://web.me.com/waynebriantodd/Site_3/Week_1/Entries/2011/3/28_Week_1_Reading_-_Copyright.html#
"I found this weeks reading about copyright interesting on many levels. I went into this topic with some ambiguity and perhaps leaning slightly towards the point of view of the rights holder. I suppose this comes from spending many years either creating media for myself or as works for hire. I was always rather leery of remix culture but this gave me much to think about. I began to think about how it has really always been around me and that I just hadn’t looked closely enough. I remembered Bonzo Goes to Washington from the mid 80s. Ronald Reagan had uttered the words “I’m pleased to tell you today that I’ve signed legislation that outlaws Russia forever – the bombing begins in five minutes.” Bootsy Collins used Reagan’s words in interesting combinations with cold war footage and his own unique bass line to make the powerful political piece “5 minutes.” Of course Bootsy Collins had both the staff & funds to clear the right to what he was using (although, I wonder if the open mic broadcast was considered public domain as I can’t imagine Reagan’s people clearing it unless unintentionally). He also had the equipment and ability to actually do the mix.
Now, I’m still on the fence when it comes to Girl Talk. I think this may just be more a case of unwillingness to do what’s necessary to be compliant. What he does isn’t political nor parody and claiming fair use probably wouldn’t work in court for him. To me he’s living off of the bones of the bloated corpse of the record industry. To me it’s just not art. But should what he does be labeled as criminal? I suppose that copyright law enforcement as we know it is not possible in the digital age. The music industry is the first to feel their traditional revenue stream dry up. Like so many other industries such as oil, health and military, the music industry relies on a business model that’s no longer valid and those who have benefitted from this model will do anything to protect their revenue, including the willful alienation of their consumer base. One interesting point that I gleaned from Good Copy, Bad Copy was the reversal of this traditional business model. The music industry used to use touring to support CD sales. Touring used to be a break-even proposition. The Brazilian re-mixers use CD’s to promote their live shows, which are the primary money makers. This hasn’t gone unnoticed by the recording industry and live music by big acts is now a very pricey proposition.
I like the idea of democratization offered by Creative Commons licensing. This is something that was mostly off the radar for me as I am so conditioned to think in traditional terms when it comes to copyright. But I remember when Eyes on the Prize came out (I was working at a PBS television at the time) and the fact that it’s out of circulation due to the copyright permissions being so expensive is indeed a form of censorship. There needs to be a way to declare such intellectual property as abandoned and placed into the public domain.
I found Larry Lessing’s talk to be the most persuasive. He really struck a nerve when he talked about the one-way “read only” nature of creativity that has been the way my entire life. This would certainly explain my ill ease with remix culture. It’s been my experience that media companies are more of a threat to artists than any so-called pirates. Like much of the economy, control of media revenue is being consolidated into the hands of a few powerful interests. And those interests also control the message. But the fact is that the ability to create the message is reverting back into the hands of the people and that can only be a good thing. I will use Creative Commons to share my work.
Overall I see all of this as part of the overall struggle today between openness and censorship. It’s a struggle between the concept of an open and free society and a tightly controlled one. It’s all about education vs. indoctrination. And of course, it’s about power and wealth and holding onto it at all costs."
@Wayne
Your comment about the PBS production "Eyes on the Prize" makes me remember a few years ago when seemingly every TV station, cable and local were all showing "Its a Wonderful Life" on Christmas Eve. It was almost impossible to find a channel which was not or had not shown it over and over again. Because the movie was literally on just about every station, it made this great movie a characature of itself. It cheapened it.
I remember that the reason this happened was that the copyright had lapsed on the film for a small amount of time and it had been placed into the realm of public domain. Luckily, somehow either the distribution company or who ever owned the original rights had the ability to reclaim them. Thanks to copyright laws this movie classic now has the respect it again deserves.
However, what about the remakes of the film or parodies? Do they have the right to refer to that work or are they works unto themselves, having just been inspired by the original??? Its a tough question and I see both side's positions as being valid.
Except of course the year "Its a Wonderful Life" became a travesty!
No comments:
Post a Comment