In 2007, Lawrence Lessig (remember that name?) gave this talk at a TED conference and outlined his argument that IP law stifles creativity. Think about what you have learned about the basics of intellectual property law and how technology has outpaced legal protections. There are also some fun mashups that he uses as examples to support his view. After you watch the talk, return here and offer your thoughts. Do you agree or disagree with his main arguments?
27 comments:
I completely agree with Lessig's argument. I have always been a bit "iffy" on my internet copyright stance. However, he puts the internet issue into perspective by comparing it to the issue of airplanes flying over private property, and to the broadcast argument. Both the airplane and broadcast argument seem completely absurd to restrict today. I hope that the same will go for the internet copyright/fair-use issue
Andy Hernandez
Fri 11am
Lessig put a lot of things in perspective for me... The main point that stood out to me was that how kids now a days are becoming "pirates" and are living to fight the law. It’s very true that these newer generations are ripping everything off from the Internet, and works that have already been made. I am still curious to how he compares the Internet to the airplanes flying over people’s property. Like, will there be a point to where government will become less strict, or even stricter? With the way things seem to be going now, I don’t doubt that most things on the internet will be restricted. Creative Commons is one good thing where people can still use content based on how the author wants it to be used
Lessig makes a pretty interesting argument that I agree with. Kids these days don't understand what they are "borrowing" from the internet and feel they can use it at their disposal with little consequence. However, they do have some freedoms and need to be aware of them so that they can fight against the government and their will to restrict content all the time.
Sean Kimmons T/TH 1230
I believe that any type of IP can be used in a parody, such as the YouTube clips that Lessig showed in his presentation. However, some YouTube clips have commercial intentions behind them. YouTube users can place ads on their site and make money depending on how many views they get. Satirical pieces should get a pass from copyright laws. On the other hand, users who post clips of live performances or professional music videos without permission should not be allowed to rake in commission. These unauthorized clips could take away economic opportunities from the corporations or artists who own the IP.
Alyson Svec
Media Law T/H 1230
I agree with Lawrence Lessig's main points about Intellectual Property.
The Internet today has become a huge area to share information with people all around the world. Some people buy albums then make these songs available to the public for FREE. There are photo sites like Flickr where images of all sorts can be shared.
Like Lessig mentioned, people take and recreate by using other people's content to say things differently. There are numerous parody videos on YouTube that our generation today create to make something different, and in most cases, entertaining.
While I appreciate all of this and the technology this generation has to remake new work, I know how I would feel if I recorded a song and someone else stole it and took credit for it, so I like how there is copyright on pretty much everything. If people get permission to use it, then no problem.
T/H 12:30
Lessig put a lot of things into perspective for me. I think that everything should be copyrighted and not taken by "pirates". Artists are here to entertain us and feed our thoughts with their music, art and literature. If these people are pouring their hearts and souls out to us, "pirates" shouldn't have the right to take that from them. Artists need to make money also and have their works respected.
T-Thursday
12:30pm Media Law
"For the love, not for the money." That pretty much sums up my personal view on copyright laws. And the specific shout out to AMV made me laugh. He raises a good point, that those who create content using copyrighted materials are not in it for the money, because if they are, that is a violation of the law, but Fair Use should always live on. Fair Use is not the same as piracy, which is the wholesale of an entire work and ripping off the original creator of the content.
Morgan Wallace-12:30 T/H
I totally agree with Albert on the love not money quote. I feel like I have never really cared enough about copyrighting, especially on the internet. I now think that the whole "online piracy" thing isn't such a good thing. I mean, I always thought that the people that put the songs up there were rich anyways, so what does it matter if I take a few songs from them for free. WRONG. They have to make a living and it is their work. Sure I can play with it a little and make awesome mash-ups for Youtube, but nothing too serious.
Marisha Bailey Media Law TTH 12:30
Lessig does make a few great points. Kids these days don't know exactly what they are getting themselves into when creating their own material for entertainment. I think this relates to the example of the airplane flying over the private property. Is the government going to give us some slack in order for creativity to continue or become more strict with laws? I believe creativity is extremely valuable for technology and culture today.
I agree with Lessig's aruguments. This is a big issue that we deal with in our world today because the internet plays such a big role in our every day lives, but everyone does not take it as serious as others because sometimes its just the "easier" thing to do. People go through a lot to get things copyrighted so everyone should respect that and not use anything without permission.
Lindsey O'Neal
T/TH 12:30 Media Law
I agree with Lessig, particularly about how the uses of soundbites, images, video and words are all "copies" of someone else's property, but it is instrumental in our construction of culture and communication.
The creative world we should be striving for should embrace these actions, but it's difficult because that flies in the face of valuing the original work. I suppose it comes down to whether it's more important to give credit where the creative material originated or embrace the creativity in copies.
I really enjoyed hearing Lessig's ideas. I feel technology has advanced so much so quickly that intellectual property arguments pertaining to the internet are very overwhelming. But I argee with his argument of taking initiative on this situation now. As he emphasizes, every generation is continuously growing up in a much more advanced world than then generation before them. Children need to be educated on the value of other people's property and their own. And they need to feel free to express themselves when they are responsible enough to do so.
Sarah Mann
T/TH 12:30
Chris Blackmon TTH 12:30-1:50
I agree with Lessig in the aspect that IP is so hard to figure out now. With people remixing other artists music to their own, there has become a fine line between creativity and piracy. There is new technology coming out everyday to support piracy but also to help people grow with their cleverness. Like he said, back in the day they were just watching, but people today are making it happen.I'm not sure if the IP issue will every fully come to a final decision with everything changing all the time.
I agree with Leesing completely, he has some great examples as to what we are doing to our kids and the perception that our kids are learning to break the law just to be able to speak freely. I do think that as a culture we should be able to embrace the idea of a freeer content world and that artists and creators should make their works freeer to users as long as there is no money made by the remixer, I don't see what the problem is.
Jose Hernandez
Media Law
T-TH 12:30-1:50
Lessig's video definitely made me aware of what is occurring today regarding the internet and piracy. He put several main topics into perspective for me. I agree when he mentions that the generations now are taking advantage of the internet and using it to pirate private works. Children are breaking the law by taking music, remixing it and calling it their own. It's not okay because they are still breaking the laws of copyright. I feel that if things like this continue to occur, then the government will mostly likely have no choice but to become more stick with the internet and it's availability to the public.
Lauren Lanmon
Media Law
T-TH 12:30 - 1:50
I agree to a point with Lessig, he does provide us with some good thoughts about how the children are growing up in todays society with the thought that breaking the law is okay when it comes to media. Kids think it is okay to just go on the internet and illegally dowload some music, remix it, and make it their own because it is easy and free. But if the government continues to try and limit our abilities to use other ideas and make them our own, and possibly come up with something more worth while than the original, they are cutting our creativity. If the government limits our resources then they are limiting our creativity as well. We need creativity to continue expanding our knowledge about technology.
Thamer F.
T TH 12:30
I agree with Lessing and his arguments. He says that it's 'tools of creatity' that have become 'tools of speech.' He goes on to say that, "it's a literarcy for this generation. this is how our kids speak, how our kids things, what your kids are." I think that these laws do stife creativity- that this is how our generation expresses themselves. I think that having strick laws will be infringing on our first amendment right to free speech. I agree with Lessing that you can't take someone else's work and call it your own, but you can use their work to inspire you and help you get your message across, but you do have to give credit when credit is needed. Laws are put in place to protect those who need protection without infriging your rights, which is a fine line, but one that needs to be adressed in a justified manor.
By bringing to light the implications of creating "pirates" out of future generations, Lessig, in my opinion, paints a future-friendly picture of what the years to come could be like. Rather than a war on piracy and copyright issues, he reminds us that it can be a robust debate, that we can find our voice within past creations while protecting its origin.
Gabby McGeown (Media Law ITV)
I agree with Lessing. The idea of planes flying over homes trespassing puts it in perspective. With people doing mash ups and turning work into something else with their own creativity and just for fun I don't believe they should be considered pirates. However on the other hand artists original work should still be protected but I like the idea of artists being able to say their work can be used for non commercial purposes.
I agree that I see the copyright being vilified by the younger generation. Pirating music, movies, etc. from what I have seen is maybe not the “norm” but generally accepted as o.k. to do by most kids/teens. Intellectual property is not what pops into a kid’s head when he downloads a movie for free online. Technology has also made their generation different in what they are able to do much more with media in the recreation of existing material and the creation of new content. I agree with his argument that there needs to be a middle ground for both sides to meet on to make the system make sense but I don’t see it happening any time soon. The music and movie industries still yield much influence and can block change they do not accept for a long period of time. I do think that eventually as the generation grows up and has more influence the internet copyright laws will change, but not for the next number of years.
Steven Waskow
Tiffany Lurate
Media Law T/H 12:30
I could not agree more with Lessig's arguments. One point that struck me was the idea that our youth are becoming "pirates" and fighting the law. I have always believed this. On the other hand, laws will stifle the creativity that the youth can create through the internet. I agree that piracy is not people taking and recreating other's digital technology. There is often a common misconception of this. Lessig is right about extremism being on both sides. There needs to be a balance for both sides to agree on, so a mutual relationship can exist. I like the idea of the privacy solution = 1) that creators embrace the idea that work is available freely and 2) that businesses embrace this opportunity so free content can grow. Lessig has the right idea. He also put a lot of things into perspective for me that I wasn't too clear on before this.
• I don’t agree with Lessig’s argument that IP law stifles creativity. I do see the need for the revival of the read and write culture, but I definitely don’t think that IP law is hindering this. The evolution of technology is what is making society lack creativity. People are becoming so lazy and reliant. I don’t think it is fair to blame IP law for the new generation’s lack of creativity and appreciation for hard work. He is using the battle between innovation and invention as his argument for the lack of creativity; this is a whole separate argument that has nothing to do with IP law stifling creativity. IP law protects and promotes hard work, creativity, and its appreciation. His claim that amateur culture is solely about people producing for the love of what they’re doing is so outlandish. Of course amateur culture does not produce solely for the love of what they’re doing. I still believe in the goodness of people and wish he was right, but the reality is that there are clearly alternate motives for fame and monetary gain. He says that the architecture of copyright and the 6 exclusive rights for the owners make new age creativity illegal. IP laws are not about prohibiting creativity; permission to these exclusive rights is by no means unattainable. IP laws simply make it clear as to who is the owner and what their rights are. His suggestion for balance allowing free use for amateur purpose, but not for commercial use is crazy. This proposal would require much time and resources and I could only see it leading to further debate instead of balance. I disagree with his argument and feel his talk at the TED conference was more like 3 stories on the way to nowhere.
Daisy Saenz
Chelsey Brandes
T TH 12:30
I too agree with Lessig. As he said, "We are in a time where we live life constantly against the law." Our kids feel like they’re "pirates" and they’re creativity is stifled. Living in a democratic society like we do, I feel that these IP laws go against our First Amendment rights. I do agree with Lessig in that there does need to be limits on what is reproduced instead of just copying an artist’s works. But as he showed in some of his examples, "remixing" is something that kids are doing today, and by taking this away is only limiting their creative process.
Michelle Rohmer
ITV Media Law
Friday, 11-1:50 PM
I agree with Lawrence Lessig’s stance on the conflict between law and use of technology. Lessig describes how we live in a generation that rejects the notion of copyrighting and creates a profound solution which is that the “artist’s choice is key for technology to be open.”
"These airplanes are Trespassing" and my chickens won't stop flying into the wall. LOL
John Elmore t/th 12pm
I agree with Lessig.
I also think that the internet is too powerful of a source for information NOT to be shared and used.
I just got critiqued in my media design class for using a clip art image that i googled... and didn't get a copyright to use the image. I'm sure whoever designed it and put it on the internet wouldn't mind letting me use it for a 3 minute college presentation...
Cheers for creative commons.
T-Th 12:30
Lessig really put things in perspective for me. I also agree with his idea on having a more creative commons outlook on copyrighting. Technology is becoming more advance every year and the internet making so many things available to us makes, its hard not to tap into your creative side and use images that arent your, and using beats and songs to express ourselves. Things are going to change soon. Technology will make sure of it.
Post a Comment