Pretty Fun to Cut Stuff Up

In the span of my years as an EWM major here at FSU, I have of course taken the required class, Writing and Editing in Print in Online. This class, an introduction to the major, roughly skims the surface of what it means to fairly use other texts in the course of making your own. Remix, remediation, appropriation - all of these terms are now an integral part of the text making process with the rise of the digital age, and we are demanded of to think of how this changes our view of copyright laws, intellectual property, and what really defines a text. However, the texts I was introduced to as a young freshman provided a two dimensional view of copyright: "Copyright is a bad and outdated idea that will not work in the digital age." After being exposed to Good Copy, Bad Copy and the ideas of Lawrence Lessig, it is clear that a three dimensional and well-rounded look at copy-right is in order, not to remove it, but to utilize it to inspire creation and protect the rights of creators while updating it for a digital age that holds the ability for texts not possible prior to our current technology. Good Copy, Bad Copy facilitates information about copyright in a way that gives the viewer a global perspective on copyright and the way it is working in our world today.




The film beginning with Girl Talk, an infamous re-mixer in the early 2000s, was not surprising. It is incredible how the film paints Girl Talk as this re-mix hero, defying the grumpy, arrogant man in court and creating beautiful art in the process, and yet then complicates the notion of remix and copyright infinitely and exponentially throughout the rest of the film. A quote that struck me as a solid, indisputable truth was," The losses to our companies are about 6 billion dollars a year." (16:23) The explanation of copyright and its original intention coupled with the latter quote seemed to strike a chord in me; economically, for the United States of America, file-sharing does a certain amount of damage to music corporations. That is a fact one cannot deny. If copyright's original intention was to inspire creation, innovativeness, and security in the fact that your ideas cannot be stolen, a blatant disregard of copyright and the idea of compensation will work in reverse of copyright's original purpose. "If you look at the advantages of file sharing, each culture gets all knowledge and culture of the world at its fingertips. Each citizen is enriched in a way not seen since the advent of public libraries." (21:37) Let's think about these concepts together. The conflict is obvious; how is one to create a system that inspires creativity when the lack of the system also inspires creativity? This leads me to understand something I had not thought of about copyright - with the correct balance, we can find the two ends of the scale that inspire re-mix and original creation simultaneously.

"Copyright is not about stopping people from using your work, but getting them to use your work legally and giving you money for what they've done with your work." (30:43) While there is merit to the positive angle Nigeria takes on copyright, the quote above does not take into account what defines a new and original text. Should a loop Girl Talk uses from a song that is stretched out, lowered a half step, and put into an entirely different context be attributed to a former artist when it sounds nothing like the original? When is a text able to stand on its own and be credited to only one author? Can any text stand on its own and be credited to one author? We've been through the idea of heteroglossia, and yet it continues to come up; how many voices are incorporated in a piece, and who decides who gets to get the credit for it? Additionally, who decides what voices you can and can't use? This film is clearly not just about the stealing of ones full and complete work and passing it off with no changes as one's own, but the complexity that comes with the majority of texts being put out in today's age. Amateur texts are the norm - everyone can become a journalist, video editor, D.J with blogging, social media, and downloadable apps on your computer or smart phone. I'll admit that I don't have the answer to these queries, but this quote and Good Copy, Bad Copy made me realize these questions are incredibly important in re-evaluating and re-considering of copyright. Lawrence Lessig's ideals fit into what this film has made me realize: "I fundamentally believe in copyright and its need in the digital age. But it has become so expansive and powerful that it inhibits creativity." (23:04)

While it might seem like I'm joking or including insignificant material, a closing point of this film that sealed the deal on my new found copyright perspective was the very last line: "Pretty fun to cut stuff up." Our generation has the opportunity for this kind of fun, and in the grand scheme of things, new creation spurs from history and inspiration. New genres arise from intertextual genres, and a new genre of text will only spur from the clashing and bonding of old genres. Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, and Instagram are perfect examples of new and emergent rhetorical discourses that emerged from the combining of old, recycled rhetorical discourses. Without an update to the way we think about text, we will never be able to fully revise our copyright laws.