Money vs. Creativity

Copyright infringement is a term that is not so simple to comprehend. Throughout the film Good Copy Bad Copy, the fine line between original creativity and utilizing past works for new and transformed creative purposes is difficult to draw. The film makes it obvious that copyright infringement is fundamentally any work of original art being used in new contexts, whether that be music, art, videos, etc. It is considered illegal for the sake of the original artist both financially and reputably. This dilemma no longer involves the simple piracy of DVDs and CDs sold on the street. Instead, it has shifted to the digital world of the Internet, which is rapidly expanding through time due to the easy access of music and tools for remixing purposes. The question that arises, then, is whether or not the many complexities of copyright issues will die out for the sake of creativity.

“Copyright is not about stopping people using your work, but about getting people to use your work legally.” (30) It’s obvious that there are too many occurrences through which people freely take a work and remix it for their own purpose. This is technically not considered legal without artist’s permission to do so. Piracy is the unauthorized taking of intellectual property without compensating. When we scroll through Youtube videos and laugh over the many remixed videos that artists have so cleverly created, we fail to remember that there these videos are technically forms of piracy. To get an author’s permission to use any part of their original work can take several years. Not to mention, it’s a very intricate process. Girl Talk claims that it would cost millions of dollars and “it would still take 50 years to go through all the legal hassle, and that’s just absurd.” (13) What is controversial is whether or not the new work is an original piece. Girl Talk utilizes parts of multiple songs and different beats to create his own version of that song. In doing so, his creativity is displayed, but the unoriginality raises a question as to how much is too much to use from previous work. The fact of the matter is that Girl Talk still recognizes and appreciates the artists for their original pieces, so why is his creativity an issue? Really, it all has to do with money.

“Seven billion dollars has been lost in the record industry in the past six years.” (34) This statistic alone demonstrates just how much illegal digital downloading has affected the music industry as a whole. But people continue to illegally download because they have been claimed to progressively lack respect for the original artists and prefer to retrieve their music free of charge through servers like Limewire.

Finally, Brazilian musicians point out that in their country, "the street vendors are actually the ones who make the most money from these remixes.” (43) So, where does copyright come into play in a situation like this? If the music is continuing to be created without the financial factors involved, it must simply be the creativity that keeps these artists going. So, as we compare the United States to other countries like Brazil and Nigeria, it is obvious that the ultimate issues at hand in the US is mainly about money. We are not protecting the artist’s originality, but moreos, his or her profit. These other countries freely allow producers to remix and produce works of their own, despite the fact that they are collaborating old pieces into their new work.

Lawrence Lessig would most likely support this notion. “57 percent of teenagers have created and shared content on the Internet.” (53) He believes that the natural use of creativity should be encouraged, even if this means utilizing old works and transforming them as their own. We thrive on these old works in order to produce something new and successful.  After all, they are the backbone through which we generate new ideas to mix the two together to form a new work of art. With these quotes taken into consideration, it is obvious that musicians are simply not being recognized as holding the rights to their work due to illegal downloads and the rapid progression of remixed work in the US. If copyright laws were to be completely eliminated, then an artist would no longer be financially respected for their individual work. However, without remix, creativity would not hold a place in the reproduction and merging of previous work. The paradoxical issue at hand is simply the fact that artists are essentially protected for financial purposes, but it does not necessarily promote them as a whole for their intended originality. The laws themselves hinder the free use of creativity in going off these past works to create something new. “The perception of the consumer on the value of music has declined.” (38) The question is, why is this exactly the case? Why would we appreciate artists any less now than we used to? Ultimately, the balance between creativity and protection must be found in order for this problem to be resolved. While creativity is certainly something to be recognized, an artist’s original work deserves to be held to its standards of originality as well. 

 -Vanessa Coppola