It's Not All Good(Copy) in the Hood - Blog Post Pt. 1

The issue of copyrighting is of upmost interest to me and probably one of the stimulating topics we’ve discussed thus far, simply because it is something we all grapple with on a weekly, maybe even daily, basis. Here I am, an college student who is majoring in English and sitting in a coffee shop – cliché I know – writing my blog posts for this class and after watching Good Copy Bad Copy. Per usual, I first skim over some of my classmates’ posts simply to see how on/off base my argument is going to be for the next 800 or so words. And then I start to make sense of this video, where filesharing as a global phenomenon is understood differently by different cultures. This short documentary captures the ongoing struggle between current copyright law and the ever-changing technological advances, mostly through examples of different cultures and viewpoints on the issue, which allow basic users like myself to sample music, mix it up, remix it again, share the material with my friends and even go so far as getting involved with piracy. What intrigues me most about this issue is one, the ease – and sometimes unintentionality (think: Marvin Gaye and Robin Thicke’s current copyright battle) – of filesharing and sampling, and two, the “law” trying to keep up with it as best as “they” can, although rather unsuccessful.

 

Although there were many, three distinct moments from the documentary, in sequential order, helped me understand something about copyright/creativity/industry/invention:

In the world that we live in today, one that is so digitally driven, the extraordinary potential of digital technology, which has “given the everyday person the ability to use sounds/images to say things about politics/culture” (~21:30 min) is quite sobering and insanely creative all at the same time. In the video they gave the example of the George Bush mashup that made it look like he was singing a popular song, when in actuality, it was just a talented yet probably bored a person behind a Mac laptop, cutting bits of video from presidential addresses and putting music over them. This could seem pretty harmless at first glance, but when you bring people at the head our government into it, it becomes a touchy situation to some. Sure, the creativity behind it is catchy and hilarious, but what does this say about the future of our generation and video industry? Are we becoming so simplistic that we laugh at something so pedestrian?

Secondly, one of the guys in the film created a mashup of the Beatles White album with Jay-Z’s Black album into his own “Grey” album. This is an example of how when things get out of hand, they really are out of your hands. He was a creative genius, mixing two completely different genres and did it all in good fun, but that doesn’t mean the Beatles or Jay-Z were happy about it. He simply handed out a few copies of his new album to his friends, and poof, the rest was history. It was so successful that had it been legally for sale, it could have been the most profitable album of 2005. This example just goes to show that new content that pushes the boundaries from a textuality standpoint can often be a dilemma. He wasn’t trying to profit from the sampling, and he shut it down immediately after being approached about copyright infringement, but once something is out there, it is out there. The ease of filesharing in today’s society is unmatched, just a click of a button really. This is something I try to remind people, and myself, about posting pictures on social media. Fifty years ago, if someone had a raunchy Polaroid of you, you could rip it up and that would be the end of it. Today, you upload something that you may regret later on down the road and think, “oh, I’ll just delete it”…wrong. You can delete images and other multimedia all you want, but they never really go away. Just like in the “Maggie Case” in “Rhetorical Velocity and Copyright: A Case Study on Strategies of Rhetorical Delivery”, Maggie had wanted the media attention, she wanted to get noticed for her protests; however, her image ended up being used in a way that she didn’t expect and didn’t want. Well honestly, that’s just tough luck, because when you put something/someone/yourself out there, you run that risk. Just like a song that had been sampled/mixed and shared, Maggie put herself in a position where she knew she was being photographed, and left the door of opportunity open for a remix.

This brings me to my last point that left an impact on me. At the very end, around the 55^th minute, the man who initially spoke in the film said, “this way of spreading musical ideas (the passing down and recycling of ideas) is the most efficient way to have artistic growth”. He is right. I think of my writing style, and I certainly wouldn’t be the way I am without literary influences that have come before my time. You can grow as a writer, and as an artist, thanks to the technological develop of today’s industry and various inventions. But where does the line get crossed? Well, the most recent case of copyright in pop culture that comes to mind is the legal dispute between the family of Marvin Gaye, since he is deceased, and Robin Thicke, for his song “Blurred Lines”. The Gaye family believes that Thicke (and Pharrell Williams) have copied – unintentionally or not – parts of Gaye’s “Got to Give It Up” for “Blurred Lines”, which has made millions of dollars and is known globally. In a state to the Associated Press, the Gaye family said: “With the digital age upon us, the threat of greater infringement looms for every artist. It is our wish that our dad’s legacy, and all great music…be enjoyed and protected, with the knowledge that adhering to copyright standards assures our musical treasures will always be valued.”

Make your own judgment here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ziz9HW2ZmmY

These examples from the film and current events are just some of the reasons why because of digital growth, we are walking a fine line between becoming a burden to ourselves and ultimately ruining “it” – originality, growth, etc. – for everyone. In the film, someone said, “freedom drives a more vibrant, important economy than restriction and control” (~53:10). While I am a strong believer of pushing the boundaries when it comes to creativity, one must always weigh the consequences and think before they act. Because once it’s out there, it’s out there; and if you’re not careful, you could have a copyright lawsuit on your hands .