My thinking during Good Copy, Bad Copy:
While viewing Good Copy, Bad Copy I became aware of the conflicting opinions I have on the topic of copyright issues. I began to wonder how I really feel. I have always felt that the artist should maintain credit for the work they have developed. I also feel that the artist should be compensated for his or her work. However, I often wonder how much of the compensation actually goes to the artist and not the record label and so forth. I am also left wondering why copyright laws prohibit the public from building upon the ideas of others. This current generation has grown up with media at their fingertips. Why not allow them to use text, film, etc. to learn about their past and have a voice in their future as was stated in Good Copy, Bad Copy (2009). I thought this idea was brilliant. This is how these students learn. Why stifle this learning? Why not build upon the great ideas of the past to create a powerful idea for the future?
My mind was also opened during the section that discussed the Nigerian philosophy about copyright. This theory believes that copyright should not be about getting people for using work, but should be about using work legally and paying the artist for the work they have done. They don't have piracy because of this philosophy. The public pays the same for something new or something copied. So why copy it? This makes so much sense to me. The artist is compensated for his or her work and the public can then use this to create work of their own.
This idea allowed me to be very open to the idea of blanket licensing. This would allow for credit to the creator while still allowing open creativity. Money could still be made as the point of marketing was brought up. Marketing is what makes the money, not the copyrighting. Again, this makes perfect sense to me. So this can make copyright issues a nonissue. I wonder if that day will ever come?
Blip.tv video: Good Copy, Bad Copy Directed by ANDREAS JOHNSEN, RALF CHRISTENSEN, HENRIK MOLTKE (http://www.goodcopybadcopy.net/),http://www.blip.tv/file/359180/ retrieved on 6/8/2009
My thoughts on US government finally admits most piracy estimates are bogus by Nate Andersen
The article written by Andersen (2010) was very eye opening. This article explained that claims made by the US government about piracy and copyright infringement were over-exaggerated and often misleading or incorrect. I guess it shouldn't surprise me that many studies and claims made to the public are based on false information or incorrect measures. I also wonder who we are paying to look into this, and how much are we paying this individual. Talk about accountability issues!
I agree that copyright questions are challenging and hard to completely understand. The Good Copy, Bad Copy was a great section to read and see where the two sides stand. I think there will always be somewhat of a gray area when it comes to what can and can't be used based on copyright. I completely agree with you about the artist maintaining the most of the credit on the work they have done. Music is a big area of concern in copyright. While record companies seem to take most of the money and credit, the artist at least has their name on the label. Very few people know what record company puts out, but you can definitely identify the artist in most cases.