This Blog post consists of a Blog post from my classmate Jeri Kennedy, which can be found at http://web.me.com/kjeri/Site_2/Media_Asset_Creation/Entries/2011/5/2_Day_of_longboarding.html#. Following Jeri’s Blog post is a response I posted in reply to her blog post.
This is a copy of Jeri Kennedy’s Blog Post.
Copyright Part 1 (Intro)
The documentary was riveting. I was intrigued with the different cultures and how they were represented. Nigeria being the number one producer of movies was quite a surprise and I liked their approach to the copyright issues. Piracy is not a problem if the product goes directly to the public and pirated copies cost the same as the original copies. The idea of having a blanket copyright fee or adding fees to phone or ISP billing is interesting but I am not sure it would be fair to all. I considered some of our citizens that are on a fixed income that do not participate in file sharing and that would penalize them if they had to absorb the fees. There is certainly not a simple solution and the problem just continues to get more complex as technology makes advances.
Americans, I think, tend to want the less expensive pirated copies when possible. Additionally, we don’t like the corporate moguls that set the prices of movies and music and ensure they make a hefty profit. There have been some music stars that have denounced their labels and worked to make sure the money does not prevent fans from accessing the music. I think Brazil has the right idea - one we may have had long ago in America - that the music made available to the public is meant to advertise the musician in order to get fans for the live shows.
We also have the technology that we could provide CD recordings of the concert available for sale immediately following the concert - I would LOVE that!
Copyright Part 2 (Fair Use)
The Disney clips were amazing! I think the time they spent on finding the clips must have been extensive! The movie was informative and entertaining. I presume it has proven the legal defensive stance of Fair Use since I am sure Disney would have been litigious if possible.
Originally I was fairly pro copyright - protect the creator. Then after watching the series of videos I began to reconsider. Fair Use is still quite restrictive and limiting, though is better then having no access at all.
I am concerned with being able to defend the use of copy written material as part of my teaching. In the example of “To Kill a Mockingbird” used as part of a civil rights unit I would consider the movie or clips from it would not be NECESSARY to teach the unit, though it would be beneficial if it was included. So in my estimation it would not fall within the Fair Use guidelines.
Copyright Part 3 (Creative Commons)
This is such a simple and useful solution to the copyright battle! This concept is new to me, having never heard of it before starting this program, is absolutely the answer to this troubling problem.
I think Creative Commons is something that should be integrated into education beginning at the earliest years in schools. Children need to be taught what is okay to use and encouraged to create their own materials. It is crucial to build their knowledge base and balance it with embracing their need to create!
Questions.....
So when Dr. Seuss (copyright holders) began heavily marketing his characters a few years back, that was, i presume, to be able to renew the copyright and save it from being used for other purposes by absolutely anyone, correct? That must have been before the change in the duration of the copyright.
How does it work with songs then? I caught the end of the premiere of the new show, Voices, and the contestants were definitely singing songs that had to have been protected. They were major hit songs by major artists. Did they have to secure a license to perform them then or is there a loophole there? We all know “Happy Birthday” and many of the songs Girl Scouts used to sing are protected so what is the difference?
At one time writers were told to copyright there material by sending it to themselves through the mail and leaving it in the envelope unopened until they needed it for litigation. If I understand it correctly, simply having the finished product now automatically copyrights the material, or does it need to be published in some form such as posting to a web site, emailing, capturing on video, etc?
This is my response to Jeri’s above post.
@Jeri
I have been hearing about bands that have actually taken things further than just making CD’s of the concert available for sale at the end of a concert. There are bands that not only allow people to bring recording devices into their concerts, but also post to their own websites free downloads of recordings of their concerts, that they themselves have had professionally recorded. In many cases they do this be cause they want to share their music with their fans, and would rather that those fans had access to quality recordings, as opposed to poor quality bootleg recordings that didn’t do justice to their music.
No comments:
Post a Comment