Appropriation Stipulation

           Ridolfo and Rife unpack several important terms in their article that are relevant to copyright and fair use issues. Rhetorical velocity is a complex term to understand but it involves a strategic rhetorical delivery in which the creator anticipates the possibilities of the recomposition of a text based on how they think the text might later be reused and recirculated (Ridolfo and Rife 229). Rhetorical delivery here generally involves the strategic dissemination of any piece of work. Recomposition refers to a remixing of the original work either through a different media outlet, in a different context, or presented in a new form. Appropriation involves taking something, usually without permission, and using it as your own or in a context not anticipated by the creator or subject of the piece.




        These terms are intimately connected because they all revolve around issues that arise when something - a picture, a song, a video, a story, etc. is recirculated in a manner not intended by the subject of the work or creator of the work. This was Maggie's case in the issue involving Michigan State University. She was photographed during a protest opposing decisions made by MSU and did not support the University's actions at the time. Her picture was ironically repurposed several times throughout the school's website as a promotion for MSU. The way MSU appropriated the picture says "Look at me, I'm a typical female student at this great university having a bunch of fun in the snow." However, the reality of the picture is erased in this unauthorized use. I believe the term rhetorical velocity carries the most weight in the article because it is an original concept that brings forth several issues.

        For instance, is it always possible to have proper rhetorical velocity? Maggie was completely unaware that her image during this protest could have been appropriated by the university in this way. Perhaps the organizers of the protest could have prepared the protestors better for the event by suggesting they identify themselves better or at least look more like they're protesting and not just having fun in the snow.

       I understand the complexity of this case and think it is a great example for unpacking these terms and having a case to base these issues on. However, I personally do not believe MSU was in the wrong here. When you get down to it, in the particular shot that was taken of Maggie she really is just a student playing in the snow. There was no way to predict this appropriation, but again, the protestors might have wanted to take more care in being serious in order to get their message across. They should have anticipated media taking their photos, as this was the intended purpose of their protest, and behaved differently or had signs in their hands. Additionally, I don't agree with the Walt Disney example and how Disney's actions are likened to the University's actions in this scenario. Walt Disney has a copyright on those particular stories and does not allow them to be used in any other way. For instance, a day care used the likeness of Mickey Mouse on their walls and was sued by Disney. MSU doesn't own the picture of Maggie although they controlled her portrayal in it. Maggie could very well create a website or campaign creating awareness about the actual situation occurring in the photo. Or she could use it as her profile picture or in any other way she pleases. MSU doesn't own her photo or her likeness.

      I believe rhetorical velocity and delivery best apply to Carolyn Miller's definition of genre. When creating a work it is important to consider what the work will be labeled as and how it will thereafter be circulated. Being conscious of this delivery goes hand in hand with Ridolfo and Rife's concept of rhetorical velocity. Placing a work into a category and genre both limits it and creates a new social context for it. The consciousness of possible social action involved in rhetorical velocity is closely linked to Miller's understanding of genre and furthers it in some ways.