1.
(4:31)
The first part of the film that helped me to understand something about copyright would have to be the extension of tracks. In the documentary, we are shown that Dr. Dre used three-chord riff from the song "Get Off Your Ass and Jam." While this guitar riff was adjusted to be faster and higher in pitch, it can still count as part of the original song due to the nature of the chords. The riff was from the song, the original writers and mixers were not compensated for the use of their property, and therefore, this would count as copyright infringement.
(8:50)
Another piece I found interesting was that as long as one does not make profits off of the intellectual property that was stolen, people can still be charged. During the film, we saw a DJ get penalized for the mixing of The Beatles' "White Album" with Jay-Z's "The Black Album" to make "The Grey Album." Even though no one got any form of monetary gain from the release of this album, it would still be looked at and found as stolen property.
(25:42)
Copyright law is different for other counties. In Nigeria, there is no governing body to dictate copyright of people's intellectual property. This would cause a huge sharing of many different types of music, films, and ideas.
2.
In the Maggie Case, I would say that the primary concern was the use of the picture of Maggie on MSU's website was out of context of what was happening at the time the picture was taken. The secondary concern would be the remixing of the picture. When that picture was taken, Maggie was being a symbol of a movement to stop using goods that were used in a sweatshop. This picture was skewed to make it look like she was having a good time with friends. Maggie being a symbol can directly relate to the text about Achmed the Dead Terrorist. When a person sees something or someone, they define it in their mind as something concrete or symbolic. To an American teenager, Achmed can be seen as a comedic satire of Middle Eastern extremist. To someone of a Muslim decent, this can be seen as a farce and disrespectful. It all depends on the context of the person seeing the action. For anyone who was present when the photo of Maggie was taken, they would have seen that her presence was part of a political movement. By the remixing of her image, anyone who were to visit the MSU website would see a normal student having fun in a campus common area. The person's view of an object or person is skewed by what someone is making us look at in the moment. Whether that be the person we are supposed to be watching or another person entirely is what is the defining fact of that thing.
Hey Andrew,
ReplyDeleteI also found those parts of the film very interesting! I had no idea how copyright infringement or copyright laws were enacted internationally. Nigeria was especially interesting due to it's large film industry. It's right at the top next to Bollywood and Hollywood (I remember them saying in the film that they actually produce more films than Hollywood but it's a difference in certain technology and distribution that sets them apart). How do you think this might shift the way people treat film or music? Do you think people would treat it as less of an "artform" or produce less of a quality film? I'm curious because I truly believe that people create out of an innate desire to create. I was actually listening to a TED talk about creativity and how our ancestors were creating art on caves years before they were able to understand how to grow food and develop agriculture which just proves how innate art is for many people. But despite that, I wonder how the quality would change?
I think it's really interesting how you compared Maggie's use as a symbol by her university to Achmed the Dead Terrorist as a comedic representation of a terrorist since both are interpreted differently due to how they are "delivered" to their audience and appropriated for the specific situation. Maggie's situation being a school website and Achmed's situation being a stand-up comedy skit.
Thanks for sharing!
- Joelle