Group items tagged

While it is true that oneof the goals of the Copyright Act is to discourage infringement, it is by no means the only goal of that Act. The Constitution grants to Congress the power "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." U. S. Const., Art. I, § 8, cl. 8. We have often recognized the monopoly privileges that Congress has authorized, while "intended to motivate the creative activity of authors and inventors by the provision of a special reward," are limited in nature and must ultimately serve the public good. For example, in Twentieth Century Music Corp. v. Aiken, 422 U.S. 151, 156 (1975), we discussed the policies underlying the 1909 Copyright Act as follows: "The limited scope of the copyright holder's statutory monopoly . . . reflects a balance of competing claims upon the public interest: Creative work is to be encouraged and rewarded, but private motivation must ultimately serve the cause of promoting broad public availability of literature, music, and the other arts. The immediate effect of our copyright law is to secure a fair return for an `author's' creative labor. But the ultimate aim is, by this incentive, to stimulate artistic creativity for the general public good." (Footnotes omitted.) We reiterated this theme in Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co., 499 U.S. 340, 349-350 (1991), where we said: "The primary objective of copyright is not to reward the labor of authors, but `[t]o promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts.' To this end, copyright assures authors the right to their original expression, but encourages others to build freely upon the ideas and information conveyed by a work." (Citations omitted.) Because copyright law ultimately serves the purpose of enriching the general public through access to creative works, it is peculiarly important that the boundaries of copyrigh

"The third single to be released was "Deer in the Headlights",[3] released on May 24, 2011 (but as an iTunes Exclusive, was made available for download the previous day). The single was announced in a different way than what is considered traditional. Starting May 16, 2011, every day of that week part of the song would be added to the sneak peek.[14] It was originally just called "New Song", and fans had to guess the new song. The first part of the song to be released were the drums, followed by the addition of bass, guitar, synthesizer, and vocals over the next four days. On the final day, the title for the song was announced." This came to mind when I read the "studio as a compositional tool." Owl City made the layers of his new song very transparent to his listeners as a way of introducing his latest song. Unfortunately links were only active for 24 hours with each instrument. So, I have nothing for you to listen to...

Interesting history of the bootleg radios (Free Radio). Some logos are really cool, the second one looks like an RKO Radio Pictures but says "Free Radio" and has a hand of an individual holding the tower... In the end of the article there is a FAIR USE message that says: "This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.." Isn't that what we all want?  They also make sure that they "DO NOT CONDONE ILLEGAL PIRATE HF RADIO ACTIVITY": it's better to have a legal radio station than have  "FCC KNOCKING AT YOU DOOR."

"UCLA Professor of Law Neil Netanel discusses the evolution of sampling and the jurisprudence of sampling, and the current state of copyright law in regard to the practice. He also discusses where the line between "fair use" and copyright infringement is currently considered to be, and the risks that artists take on when they choose to sample existing works." Exactly what we talked about in class: uncertainty, dangers, chained creativity (fewer sampling due to the expense of clearing rights, as well as having to hide the samples deep within the track due to fear of lawsuits).

Burzynski stands to be the first person in history to own the intellectual property rights for a cancer treatment that was not created by a pharmaceutical company. FDA didn't want to approve it.. WHY? Cancer treatment is a billion-dollar industry and the pharmaceutical companies stand to lose if a safe alternative treatment becomes the standard...

After I stumbled upon the iconic Obama "Hope" poster, I remembered that back in 2009, artist Shepard Fairey was being sued by the owner of the original photograph (AP). Back then I was not very interested in copyright issues, so I never checked what happened with this case. It's interesting and kind of fair that AP and Shepard settled on working together, sharing the rights, and collaborating on other images+photographs. Even though Shepard transformed a "stolen" photograph, his "theft" actually put the original photo on the map. I consider it to be a fair solution for a fair use case.

Wiki how to the rescue? A small guide to some of us embarking on audio remix final projects.

This site tries to categorize how to do a good remix!  I find the idea of a "how to" for remix a little bit hypocritical...

These design ideas are a remix of two objects that may not be together normally but come together to create some very unique and helpful pieces- such as a coffee mug with a pocket to hold your "biscuit" (or cookie), or a car buckle to be a key chain holder. I think this is an example of new media in the sense of the design and ways to think of life- the way advances in technology changes people's lives is similar to the potential that these products have in people's lives.

Indonesia overrides med-patents to make the cure more affordable.. 

"Freemium" can build a customer base for apps on iOS/Android/etc., but does it generate revenue? If we apply this model to remix, then having The Beatles hate on Danger Mouse's Grey Album makes complete sense. From a business perspective...

i agree this is a big challenge. does remix culture, as we've outlined so far, contribute or enhance this dilemma?

I guess we (as "remixers") have to consider how we want people to respond to a remix. What is their next step when they hear/see it? Just to share it, or to somehow engage with the content more deeply that perhaps leads to a purchase? I don't think we've quite outlined yet our main endgame, or deliverable from the "consumer," with a remix.

No Doubt, my favorite band. Who would have thought someone would use them - and one of their top hits - to give us a history lesson. Makes me wonder why do people create these parodies? Is it simply to make fun of something, or are the "artist" trying to bring important issues to our attention? 

This article just reiterates some of our analysis from last week on music services and the industry as a whole. The best take away really is the headline. Too Expensive to be free, too free to be expensive. The music industry falls somewhere in the middle of this perception of value. And admittedly so do many forms of media (TV via Hulu, NYT and paid subscriptions, etc.)

An artist talks about growing up in a culture of social media.

Around my sophomore year of high school, I remembered a great instrumental I'd heard at some point in my life but couldn't place. I sung it to a friend (ber ner ner ner ner neeer ner ner…) and while she recognized it, she couldn't place it either. We made it our mission to figure it out, asking everyone we knew, and eventually someone posted the attached link to my facebook. This class made me suspicious that perhaps the instrumental wasn't actually created by DJ Kool. Using whosampled.com, I found out that the this awesome piece has nothing to do with him. The entire instrumental is taken from "The 900 Number" by The 45 King (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axJpBlxW6n0). But then I looked up The 45 King, and discovered that he, too, is a DJ. "Let Me Clear my Throat," which gets the credit for this instrumental, is actually a remix of "The 900 Number," which is a remix of Marva Whitney's "Unwind Yourself" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ym7IoodKeWI). And Whitney is just the singer; I wasn't able to find the sax player behind it all. I think it's upsetting that most of the credit goes to DJ Cool, who merely added a worthless hook you wish wasn't there and small bits of songs which barely alter The 45 King's work. At least Mac Miller, the most recent borrower I could find, changed it up a bit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3GGN51_pjE

Ways to "remix" magazines, or ways to work on our first remix project. 

This is so cute!  But, in relation to class it shows how technology can be used for things outside of the house.  For instance, they used an old cell phone remixed as a gps to find the fallen balloon and train.   Technology, bringing the average human closer to space (corny line).

These mix tapes on DatPiff are clearly underground since all it took for me to get to them is google searching "mxtape". Does the ease of getting them lessen their street cred, or does the potential to make it big out weight that?

"Culture in Decline" homepage - the creator Peter Joseph, surrounded by all the most iconic images of our visual culture. All the images are so painfully familiar, so ingrained in our western minds, yet so upsetting and maddening. We close our eyes and cover our ears while our culture is declining because we don't want to know the truth. Instead of helping the ones in need, we lose ourselves in consumption (iPhones, Nike shoes, hamburgers, cars, bars, beauty salons, you name it!). It's time to wake up. Actually, the time to wake up is way past due: we're already late, and the damage is done. It's time for a serious damage control. (What I now have in mind for my creative project will require a portion of Peter Joseph's work).

I'm trying to find substantial info on this topic and am struggling, but this forum gets to the heart of the matter. Can you copyright a number? Intel had trouble with this many years ago with its processors... Boeing, on the other hand, has been able to copyright its 737 airliner. So, has the law evolved?