Something that we are all confident about is that not all
whom violate copyright laws will be caught and punished. On very rare occasions
do we hear of our peers actually getting in serious legal trouble over breaking
copyright laws, especially in regards to music. What the documentary Good Copy, Bad Copy did clarify for me,
however, was just how blurred these copyright laws are in our developing technological word that is believed to be in a creative crisis.
Right off the bat, Dr. Lawrence Ferrara, the Director of New
York University’s Music Department, introduces the technique of sampling. At
[3:31], attorney Paul V Licalsi explains that taking someone’s recorded beat
and then transforming it into something else in the studio, you run the risk of
being held in court and being sued for copyright infringement. Around 9 minutes
in, DJ Danger Mouse’s Grey Album is
used an example for unlawful sampling. Taking Jay Z’s vocals from his Black Album and skillfully fusing it
with samples from The Beatles’ White
Album, DJ Danger Mouse illegally created his own album for pleasure. Even
without the intent to sell it, it still became a huge ordeal for it grew in
popularity almost instantly. With the technology available and by only handing
out his CD to a few friends, DJ Danger Mouse caught the attention of The
Beatles’ publishing company but there was nothing they could about it for his
album had already reached a large audience and only continued to be quickly
copied and spread. Reaching the end at [57:00], we see the last bit of proof in
the documentary that there’s no beating today’s and tomorrow’s technology as
Girl Talk remixes a Brazilian remix of a Gnarls Barkley song.
Hi Ashley,
ReplyDeleteYou chose some really great examples that highlight the ambiguity of the copyright laws today, however, I would have liked to see those examples placed in context with the obvious threat that powerful copyright laws have placed on creativity, especially in the music world.
Your first example concerns the severe consequences of using other people’s creative content and making it your own. You could have mentioned the groundbreaking lawsuit that occurred when Dr. Dre sampled a two second remixed beat from an old, popular funk song an remixed it into a completely different sound, similar to a siren, that incorporated perfectly with his hip hop song “100 Miles and Runnin’.” When Dr. Dre was sued for using the sampled beat, it was a definite wake up call for the music industry that copyright was not something to be messed with. But where is the line between creativity and stealing? Perhaps the purpose of the content?
As you stated with your second example, Danger Mouse broke music, creative, and copyright boundaries when he remixed the Beatles and Jay Z to make a fresh new sound that could carry across cultures and genres. If Danger Mouse had created the remix for monetary gain, he surely would have been sued to his grave. However, since he claimed to be doing it as a school project and did not make a dime, there was nothing they could do. So, is the music industry concerned about only money? It would seem so. If this documentary did nothing but show how copyright and it’s overbearing laws need to reform to fit the digital age, than I say it was pretty successful. Now, this does not motivate me to become a copyright lawyer and work my way of reform from the inside, but it definitely gave me more respect for the artists who are brave enough to defy the powerful corporations and record labels and simply make music for the sake of music.
Regards,
Clare Davis