Comments on: Extra Credit: Lawrence Lessig Talk

By: Satie Munn

Satie Munn — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 18:15:58 +0000

After watching this video, my views on copyright laws have also changed. All over Youtube there are “remixes” that blend together images and music that are not owned by the people remixing the material. Most of that stuff goes under the radar and users do not tend to notice that there may be copyright infringements. I do believe that plagiarism is a serious issue. If I had personally written information and done the research, I would not want other people “stealing” my ideas. Although this idea seems very simple, there are many facets to copyright laws, especially in todays world with advancements in technology. I agree with others on this board and believe that possibly finding some kind of middle ground between the two parties. I think there is a difference in remixing material together and blatantly copying something else another person has created.

By: Tracey Watson

Tracey Watson — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 17:40:13 +0000

The subject of copyright laws is a very touchy subject. I do agree that there should be some sort of middle ground found between the two parties, because I have come to the realization that the people who illegally download things from the internet are going to keep doing it as long as it is easy for them to do it. I think that if a middle ground is not found them it will result in a bunch of unsolved court cases and wasted money. But if one is found then it will make both parties happy.

By: Kristie Neeser

Kristie Neeser — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 04:42:37 +0000

I think Professor Lessig’s views on copyright were thought-provoking, and I appreciated his call for a middle ground. I’m just not sure how one determines whether content is for commercial or non-commercial use. Like what if there were ad revenues from a YouTube page featuring an amateur video using content from a professional artist? Also, I may be a consumer of the remix culture, but I don’t often generate content by reinventing material from others. I do create content however, so I participate in read-write and not just read-only, but it’s usually my own musings or photographs.

By: Kathryn Nesbit

Kathryn Nesbit — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 03:38:12 +0000

I think that there should be a middle ground created that would make both the remixers and copyright holders happy. I do not think that just taking someone else work and calling it your own in fair. Instead make it the law that if more than 40% of the remix is exactly like the original than the person is in violation of the copyright laws. I know that determine what 40% would be exactly but it would give people the chance to use some other person’s material to some extent without fear of a lawsuit. It is a very fine that the remixers must walk and I think it would be best for both sides to sit down and come up with guidelines on the proper use of another’s work. One thing that would help is if the remixer gave credit to the people he borrowed from.

By: Craig Boyd

Craig Boyd — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 03:02:07 +0000

I thought his presentation was incredibly well put-together and convincing. I have seen few people argue competently against stringent copyright laws, but I think he did an outstanding job.

Our group project was actually on copyright law and music piracy, which is very prevalent today. It’s a problem that probably will never be solved and is tough to enforce, so maybe we should just embrace reform in copyright laws. I agree with what he says at the end that it is poor for a democracy to have countless citizens that are knowingly living as “criminals.”

I thought all the things about the remix culture and the sample videos were really creative and entertaining. I haven’t partaken in those sorts of remixes before, aside from some very basic photoshopping, but I can relate to those who do it and I really appreciate the art inherent in it.

By: Rebecca Napoliello

Rebecca Napoliello — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 21:58:14 +0000

In watching the video, I was very surprised to see someone promoting the change of copyright laws in order to allow freer use of music and video content on the internet. He makes a very good and convincing argument on this topic, allowing the viewer to see the incredible benefit changes in copyright laws would be to reviving the World’s creativity. I agree with his statements that we must again use common sense as was used with the land property rights concerning air space to find a balance for this debate. Therefore, in watching the video, my view of copyright laws on such intellectual property as music has changed to one which promotes freer use of the content and revival of creativity as opposed to promoting copyright laws fully.

By: Patrick Britton

Patrick Britton — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 21:30:19 +0000

This video clip impacted my view of copyright, in that it demonstrated to me that laws concerning copy right today maybe outdated (kind of how trespass laws were outdated by the invention of the airplane). With the revolution of digital technology and the ease of being able to re-mix creations of other artists to recreate a completely new idea cannot be limited by copyright laws. These laws were to protect the artists; but as we progress into the 21st century, it seems those laws protect nothing more than profit of the music/movie industry. I think Lawrence Lessig made an excellent argument stating that limiting artistic re-creation is not only not hurting any artists’ original work but is creating an extremist sentiment on either side of the copyright laws. Beyond those two extremist sides, I think it is time for the Government to catch up with the digital revolution and adjust their outdated laws.

By: Ashley Davis

Ashley Davis — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 19:08:31 +0000

After watching this video, I changed my views on copyright law. I had never really viewed it as a negotiable matter, or that copyright law was something that should be changing. Throughout the video, I both agreed and understood everything he was saying. I think it would be beneficial to change copyright laws to allow creative use of copyrighted material but continue to prohibit its commercial use. I am not sure how exactly this could be regulated successfully. Though I have never been creative enough to make videos like the ones shown, I think it is a mark of the way technology is changing. It also shows how our generation uses culture and how we display our creativity. The younger generation is being creative in these new ways, and I agree that those new creative outlets should be allowed and protected.

By: Matt Tsun

Matt Tsun — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 16:39:40 +0000

The most interesting thing about this video was the fact that for the first time in my life, I heard someone arguing against copyright law without simply stating something along the lines of “they’re just stupid, I want to download music for free etc.” His comparison to the trespassing example was a great way to show the controversial nature of copyright law and I think that for those who have heard his talk, it has made each and everyone of us think, at least for a second, about how we feel about this restricted remix culture.

I feel that I am very much a part of this remix culture. Even though I have never edited a video, or posted anything on youtube etc., I still view these pieces as a part of my generation. As Lessig mentions in the talk, this is a defining characteristic of our generation. This is how we create. Older generations watched TV, we create it. Every time I use Photoshop to edit a picture, I think to myself that this is the technology of the times, that generations before us never had this ability to edit and re-create to this extent. The knowledge and familiarity of my generation to this technology is astounding and will undoubtedly continue on in the generations that follow us.

By: Michelle Loyd

Michelle Loyd — Mon, 03 Mar 2008 17:36:44 +0000

Yes I do think that I am a part of the remix culture. I agree with what he is saying in that the things children and young adults are producing now is the culture in how it is seen through our eyes. Remixing things and creating new things is how we are able to express ourselves to the world. Also it is our creativity and our remixing that keeps the world of technology so up to date and steadily growing. So why is it now that there is such tension between the laws and technology creation. It is like they are trying to limit the new ‘remix’ generation in the very thing that they exposed us to. The people who make the laws are not apart of this generation and that also needs to change. The laws need to change with the times because the world is at a point now that the technology and the set up of the world today will fail to prosper if old laws are still in effect. The world now operates in ways to avoid or get around the law (not caring too much it they break the law). So this must mean that in some cases, the laws do not fit the people any more and they need to change and allow for new laws to be created for th present culture. This clip was very interesting to me because i never had that information explained to me that way. I is another creative way to explain what is happening with this generation and the world. When he was explaining the remix culture, there was no denying that it was something that I was a part of through and through. Even if I am not the one creating new technology, I am a part of the culture in how I think, act, and respond to the new creative technologies that are made.