Sara Anderson

Cory Doctorow, Activist

One person I know who fights vehemently against current copyright law is Cory Doctorow. He advocates liberalizing copyright law and allowing free sharing of all digital media. He believes the creator of the media should be the only agent allowed to sell the media, but beyond that he is a huge promoter of Creative Commons and other ways to freely share intellectual property. His interviews and talks have been some of the first things to get me thinking about copyright, which is why he is the focus of this post.external image images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRqFj--Hxqu-V93wNdywD8HR7f2p0-RH_ghRossdHAFzowFHyr5

He co-edits an excellent blog called Boing Boing, and has written quite a bit of fiction. I am a fan, even though his books can be a bit strange and kind of heavy handed. He is quirky, funny, and very passionate. I find his views a bit idealistic, and I don’t think his ideas would apply well to our current society. I do like that Creative Commons is around for people who want to share their work, and at this point in my life that is how I would get my own work out there (if I had anything complete).

external image blagofaire.png

I suppose I’m more “middle of the road” minded. I found myself really identifying with the Lessings reading. The “criminalization of an entire generation” seems to be a theme I’ve seen many people speak to, and one that makes sense to me (xviii). I am of course open to spirited debate.

Langford Wiggins
Week 5

Copyright Laws at its Best

While considering this week's reading I thought of Copyright Laws, pertaining to the argument of originality vs. creativity and the idea of artworks improving, expanding or creating creativity through the reproduction of original works. I am a firm believer of reproducing great art forms to depict other stories and/or purposes. I especially believe in the reproduction of art forms as a means of providing experience for artists and exposing new generations to the past performances that provide valuable lessons for the present.

The best example of the reproduction of original artworks and the use of Copyright Laws in a major medium would have to be the theater.

external image 0.jpg

For centuries directors, producers, and actors have been reproducing original masterpieces as a means to providing a new aspect on the phenomenon. I remember watching the Academy Award winning animated film Disney's The Lion King and almost a decade later the Broadway Version, using the same concept but telling the story in a new way, opened.

external image the-lion-king-broadway_0.jpg

external image iconic-lion-king.jpg

I've learned to appreciate the use of advanced technology in theater to tell the original story and to exemplify the advancements within different culture. Copyrights Laws in theater do not prevent creativity in my opinion but provides guidelines around the use of artworks and allows orginal playwrites to be credited for their work.

Even Grease has been reproduced time and time again in an effort to utilize new art forms and technology as a way of telling a new story and giving actors the experience needed to improve their craft.

external image playbill_2093_169182128.jpgexternal image greasebroadwaylp.jpg&maxx=0&maxy=150

However is the price for licensing stunting the creative process? Also, I was wondering if Scott Ballum was correct in say that, "This regulation is not going to stop the remixing anyway, only criminalize it."

Work Cited

via PSFK:

Sagorika Sen
Week 5:
My favorite intellectual copyright cases :)

This week’s readings made me look at copyright law from multiple perspectives

My favorite intellectual copyright dispute has to be the Isaac Newton V/s Leibniz dispute of who invented calculus. It was in the 16th century that Leibniz was credited with inventing calculus. However Englishman Isaac Newton in 1704 published “Optiks” and he called himself the father of calculus. This soon turned in to an an intellectual fight between the two countries of Germany & England. Newton apparently claimed to have thought of the “science of fluxions” and wrote about it in 1665 but only shared itwith a few colleagues. Newton has accused Leibniz of stealing his thoughts from one these early first drafts. Leibniz died in 1716 before the debate was settled. However the two countries today have agreed upon the fact that Newton & Leibniz are both co inventors of calculus.

220px-Justus_Sustermans_-_Portrait_of_Galileo_Galilei,_1636.jpg AAAAgalileo_telescope.jpg

Galileo Galilei in most history classes and General Knowledge books, quiz competitions has been attributed as being the inventor of the telescope ( from my personal experience of the above). It was Bertolt Brecht’s play “Galileo” that first introduced me to the idea of the telescope being plagiarized. The Play begins with Galileo traveling to the Netherlands where he first saw an actual telescope being used and sold in the Dutch market.Galileo was in fact the first scientist to use the telescope for urposes. It was Lippershey who is in fact now credited to have invented the actual telescope. As Brecht says in his play “ humaness of Galileo ,Plagiarism of inventions”

The most recent copyright infringement of sorts that had me captivated was from the movie Hangover 2. Ed Helms who plays the character of Stu Price in the movie wakes up next morning with a tribal tattoo on his face identical to the one that Mike Tyson has in the first part of the movie series. Tyson’s tattoo artist S.Victor Whimill filed a lawsuit against Warner Bros since he had obtained copyright for the “Artwork on 3D” .Warner Bros in court said that they were willing to didgitally alter the film once it came on home video. However on June 17th both parties had an out of court settlement.

Artistic impulse v/s strictures of the law. Some questions that stood out in my mind were from Jeffrey Cunnard's lecture. Is APPROPRIATION an inevitable collision witht he law? He says,occassionally serious injuries occur but mostly not. "What is Art"? SINCE the 20’s bird in space sculpture granted - Jeffrey Cunard- Every artist is open source.d, borrow form other aritsits . Drawing inspiration. What is forgery & plaigiraims? modifying work ,rewriting something.


Elizabeth-Burton Jones
Week 5:
The Life of a Local Singer

external image Music_Panels__Compiled_by_smashmethod.jpg
Before coming to CCT, I thought I was going to go to Law School. I wanted to be a Divorce Attorney. I had done all of the typical law student tasks. I volunteered at the Canton Municipal Court since the 5th grade and then became an intern for the same court.

Around this time last year, I was gearing up for the LSAT and I was taking a Pre-Law Communication Class. But, what a difference a year makes.

The readings for this week are very interesting to me because I have actually lived this “copyright” experience by recording music and singing music in coffee shops. external image Copyright_symbol_9.gif

Last year, I recorded a Christmas album. This Christmas Album was originally intended for family and friends, but during the production process I still had to check and make sure that I wasn't violating any copyright laws.

First, I did all of the song research and picked all of the songs that worked for my voice. Next, I found all of the songs and then worked out theOrder of Omega 033.JPG keys with my band members. Then it was finally recording time.

At the time of the conceptualization of the cd, I was taking a Pre-law Communications class over the First Amendment. Coincidentally, we were learning about copyright around the same time as my cd production. After certain classes, I would talk to my professor and make sure that everything was all right for me to produce this album. In class we discussed the Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. ( and the Sonny Bono act My professor helped me figure out the ins and outs of my cd.

The songs that I recorded included: "I'll Be Home for Christmas", "God Rest Ye Merry Gentlemen", "Santa Baby", 'Silent Night", "Have Yourself A Merry Little Christmas". Other songs that we were going to do included "Last Christmas" and "So This is Christmas". To research these songs, I had to go to different web pages and look at when they were produced. To make sure everything was satisfactory, I checked the original dates of the songs. I had to make sure that the songs had reached the time period where they could berecorded.

On the day of recording, we recorded live (meaning we didn't break down the instruments we just all played at the same time). During our break, I talked to the music producers and we discussed copyright. The producer wanted to know how I was going to use the music. Then later, just to check again, one of my band mates actually sent me information about copyright.

The whole process was very interesting. Being a cover artist, I run into copyright decisions all of the time. It determines if I can get paid, it regulates where I can
perform. It is everywhere. Therefore, while reading certain articles I just thought about my own process with copyright. Sometimes, I wonder if it's worth it to just perform covers, but I truly believe in the beauty of taking a song and making it your own concept and I enjoy the end

So you think you want to sing and continue to do cover songs.......

What are your options:
1. Get an agent
Although this seems relatively easy, there are still stipulations that control the agent to talent relationship.

2. Audition for Reality TV
  1. external image american_idol_tv_show.jpgexternal image X-Factor.jpgexternal image 2012-07-19-Americas_Got_Talent.jpg
Cover songs tend to drive the reality TV music market and new music is often discouraged during primetime competition mode.

3. Put your music on YouTube

external image wmg_youtube.jpg
Watch around 1:48
Well you need to be careful with that as well. YouTube is a great way to share your music.
However, a lot of new artists have been placing statements that say that they do not own the rights to the music. According to different webpages and answers, people are actually getting their videos taken down because of the infringement.

4. Buy the copyright?

Some webpages say that you can purchase the music for special usage.

Click the link for the video:


What does the class think about buying the copyright?
What about waiting a period of time to be able to use a song?
One webpage mentions all of the Youtube covers and their status. Do you believe that every cover is legal?

external image sadcharlie2.jpg
Some interesting material:

Works Cited:,r:14,s:15,i:237,r:7,r:1,s:0,i:139,r:1,s:0,i:152


Creativity v. Intellectual Property Law: friends or foes?

Paulina Johnson

Creatives are in an interesting place with intellectual property laws, particularly because ownership is what enables us to make a living.

A recent interview I watched did a great job of theorizing about the issue. Chase Jarvis, a renowned commercial photographer and director, interviewed Larry Lessig, Richard Kelly, the former president of the American Society of Media Photographers, and Oleg Gutsol, the CEO of 500px (a photographic sharing community). The great thing about Lessig’s Creative Commons is that it allows creators to say “here are the rights that are reserved, here are the rights that I’m giving away.” It empowers creators to participate in the open-source creative culture, striking a balance between promoting innovation and retaining creative authorship and profitability. It is by no means perfect, but I do not know of a better method for providing an economic base and creative reuse in cultural production. I believe the Creative Commons is a great step in the right direction.

One particular case study that the speakers brought up was the case of Noam Galai. (video: 12:24, a few minutes long). Galai, a photographer, was a victim of copyright infringement of his piece “The Stolen Scream,” and the video goes into more detail about what happened in his particular case. It’s interesting to note that the speakers mentioned the idea that copyright infringement can drive such an emotional response in the creator that they are dissuaded from producing more work; yet, in this case, Galai was able to remain calm and embrace the situation that he found himself in.

external image screamgraphic.jpg

Another dimension of this issue is found in the fact that protecting intellectual property not simply lawmakers’ responsibility-- responsibility and cultural paradigm shifts need to happen among creatives and among the entire public. The speakers mentioned that people typically hold copyright as an issue only applicable to “the rich, to corporations, and not to the everyday artist” (Jarvis). People need to understand that they inherently possess intellectual property rights and that these issues can affect them. Due to the nature of the creative landscape today, it is becoming harder to identify the source of a certain piece of media, especially in regards to things like memes which can be remixes of media from various creators. The speakers noted that social networks often strip media such as photographs of their metadata, which normally would enable someone to determine who the author of the photograph was. We as a society need to get better at simply giving others credit. People don’t believe that sharing without at least giving credit is wrong, and that IP law is “so far above them” that it doesn’t apply to them.

Owing to the fact that our culture is a lot more likely and willing to share and appropriate art, artists need to become better at stating “this is what I have available commercially, and this is what you are free to use,” etc. In an interview featuring author Tim Ferriss, Ferriss notes a model of sharing that has increased in use today among many mediums, but especially in the photography world (video:18:00). Many creatives are participating in a form of content marketing: giving away free content that they want to be shared, which establishes them as leaders in their field, while retaining a high user experience for those who wish to engage with them on a more personal level and pay for their time and experience. One example of this today is the idea of blogging and vlogging-- offering one’s expertise and accessibility others’ expertise for free, while offering books, video tutorials, and workshops for purchase. Ferriss describes it as “giving away your best content as a way to introduce people to your work and to drive people back to your other work.”

Another example of this on a larger scale is CreativeLIVE, a live, worldwide, creative classroom. CreativeLIVE is such a great resource for those wishing to learn, and for those wishing to teach. Many photographers and industry leaders give a workshop through creativeLIVE that is broadcast live worldwide for free, and is offered after the live broadcast for a price.

Overall, we need infrastructure that enables us to move more freely between licensing work for fair & educational use vs. social use vs. commercial use, and hopefully we will be able to innovate in this area in the future.

works referenced:
the stole scream image:

Elisabet Diaz Sanmartin

Minnie and Mickey Mouse performance in North Korea
Kim Jong Un and other leader's of the Communist Party watching the Disney Performance
Almost surreal were the images of the president of North Korea, Kim Jong Un, surrounded by other important leaders of the communist party, enjoying a show featuring Disney Characters, last ninth of July. Mickey Mouse, Minnie and Winnie The Pooh among others were dancing while a mix of Disney films’ images such as Dumbo or Snow White were projected behind them. This event was one of the rare moments that the hermetic North Korean government included elements of American culture in its state-run TV Channel, but the reality is that Disney character’s are getting popular in North Korea with the constant introduction of Disney’s school supplies coming from China. Four days after the show and with the declaration of Disney Inc. that they never authorized the performance, the U.S government made an official statement requesting North Korea to respect the international law concerning intellectual property. As expected, North Korean government turned a deaf ear to the American request. (Flacker)

che Tshirts.jpg
Che T-shirts
Supermodel Gisele Bundchen wearing a Che Bikini

Half a century before, in 1960, the cuban photographer Alberto Korda, took the most famous picture of Che Guevara. Korda’s picture started to be reproduced frenetically, after the death of Che Guevara in 1967; it has been stamped on uncountable T-shirts, posters and all kinds of objects. Without the protection of copyright the image has been used by everybody and nowadays is part of popular culture. Even Andy Warhol used it in one of his colorful paintings. Korda believed in communist ideals and almost never claimed the intellectual property. Just one time, he sued a company, Lowe Lintas Advertising, to prevent the use of Che’s image in a vodka commercial, and the money he received was donated to a Cuban Hospital. Korda stated in an interview that he never request copyright because "As a supporter of the ideals for which Che Guevara died, I am not averse to its reproduction by those who wish to propagate his memory and the cause of social justice throughout the world." (BBC News)

Che Guevara was an important figure of the Cuban Revolution but it is hard to believe that the revolutionary Che Guevara would have been a mass icon without the free use of Korda’s image. He became a symbol around the world. This phenomenon raises the question of how copyright limits the diffusion and the impact of an artwork. Concerned with this issue, the comic artist Shuho Sato, who sold more than ten million copies of his work “Say Hello to Black Jack”, liberated his work from copyright last September fifteen. From that date any person can access to his website and “be free to novelize, televise, create merchandise, or in any way adapt the original work for either commercial or non-commercial purposes without having to pay royalties.” Sato is trying to experiment by giving a “second life” to his work. He hopes to explore author benefits and profits beyond copyright laws; a system that he considers is “gradually becoming stale//.” (Cushin)

Say Hello to Black Jack. Shuho Sato

Sato’s initiative questions the idea that copyright protects an artist’s way of profiting. Copyright laws are treating in the same way artists and corporations without seeing that there is a huge difference in the way they treat their production. If I were Walt Disney I would found hilarious the image of Mickey Mouse dancing in front of the communist party, and I would have enjoyed the unexpected impact of my creation.


Flacker, Martin. “On North Korean TV, a Dash of (Unapproved) Disney Magic”
The New Yoerk Times. 9 July. 2012. mouse-and-other-disney-characters-on-north-korean-tv.html?_r=0
“Che Guevara photographer dies” BBC News 26 May, 2001
Cushin, Tim. “Award-Winning Manga Author Opens Up His Work To Be Used By 'Anyone, Anywhere, For Anything,' Royalty-Free”28 de agosto, 2012


Lauren Jones

Daniela Edburg “Drop Dead Gorgeous”

Daniela Edburg, an artist currently living and working in Mexico City, draws inspiration from past great works of art, film and cultural fads so as to make a social commentary on the idea of guilty pleasures and the overconsumption of said items.

external image 01.jpg
external image Whistlers_Mother_high_res.jpg
In “Death By Oreos” (above), Edburg evokes Whistler’s “Arrangement in Grey and Black No. 1” (left) so as to explore that fine line between indulging in a sweet tooth and gluttony. In his work entitled “Postproduction”, Nicholas Bourriaud evaluates the common practice of modern artists, particularly from the 1990’s to the present, use of recycling past images in current works. He states that, in essence, the method of presentation or the material of the work is no longer primary - it is the reevaluation of the old ideals by a new voice that makes the piece novel. In this way, Daniela Edburg is simply employing a great work of art as a jumping off point (a vessel) so as to create a whole new strand of commentary and dialogue with the viewers.

Following this particular pattern, Edburg also recalls the great film, Alfred Hitchcock's "The Birds" (bottom left), in her tribute of Death By Bananas (bottom right). This photo is a reenactment of the climactic scene in which the films heroine and main character, Melanie Daniels, finally succumbs to an onslaught of birds - or in the reproduction, bananas.

external image birds.jpg
external image 04.jpg
In this series, Edburg’s photography takes on the theme of dark humor that is both poignant and biting. Through her lens, she is able to point out both our love overindulging and the negative repercussions it has primarily on women. What happens when a girl loves something like AngelFood cake or expensive shampoos or gummi bears a little too much? She dies. Today’s society is unforgiving when it comes to personal flaws and superficialities, Edburg exploits photography so as to ask her audience what the effects of these impossible standards of perfection we set for ourselves have on women of western cultures.

external image 03.jpg

external image ingres_grande_odalisque_l.jpg

Works Cited:
Wikipedia summary of (DMCA) Digital Millenium Copyright Act

William Fisher (Harvard Law School), "Theories of Intellectual Property."

Nicholas Bourriaud, “Postproduction” (2002).

Whistler’s “Arrangement in Grey and Black No.1":

The Birds:

Ingres's "The Grand Odalisque":

Daniela Edburg’s “Drop Dead Gorgeous”: (in order of appearance)
Death By Oreos:
Death By Bananas:
Death By Slim Fast:

Arielle Orem- Week 5 Wiki

Lately it seems that every week another musical artist is being sued over copyright infringement; this week’s artist: Kanye West. According to the __Huffington Post__, West is being sued by New York record label TufAmerica over two songs from his new album My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy. TufAmerica claims that West’s songs __Who Will Survive in America__ and __Lost in the World__ copies Eddie Bo’s 1969 hit __Hook & Sling__. According to HuffPo, TufAmerica purchased the rights to Bo’s song about 15 years ago. Here’s where things get wild: Roc-a-Fella records (West’s label) paid TufAmerica $62,500 to use a sample of Bo’s song. TufAmerica is claiming that the terms of the contract only allowed West to use the sample once; by using the sample in multiple tracks, West has allegedly committed an act of copyright infringement.

It seems that it has become standard procedure for musical artists to purchase rights to use other artists’ songs in their own work. What is intriguing to me about this case is that West followed this procedure and is still being sued. It seems to me that West could argue that in the second song, he is actually sampling his own music (the first song on the album- which was done legally). What do you think?

Meggie Schmidt Week 5
When reading about intellectual property laws, many examples came to mind that related to the arts. Firstly, in terms of literature, ideas from novels are constantly being copied. A current example is the new trend of Vampires. Vampires have been around as myths and in novels for a long time. When Stephanie Meyers wrote the “Twilight” book series in 2005, people’s fascination with Vampires exploded. Vampires were suddenly not seen as scary blood-sucking creatures, but as humans who were trapped with no escape for eternity. Once the “Twilight” book series was developed into movies, it started a trend of vampires sinking over into television series such as True Blood (2008), Vampire Diaries (2009), and Being Human (2011).
vampire diaries.jpg
vampire diaries.jpg

true blood.jpg
true blood.jpg
being human.jpg
being human.jpg

Before these television series, there was Buffy the Vampire Slayer, which aired from 1997 to 2003.

These books, television series, and movies all have in common the theme of Vampires. Who can really be credited with this idea? Are they all copies?
In terms of Art, people copy works by famous artists on a daily basis. In high people, people would splatter paint on a canvas, attempting to copy works by Jackson Pollock.
Copying art is traced back many centuries. Artist would copy each other’s works or ideas based off if the work was successful or if they were asked to copy a certain event. For example, Rubens copied a work by Caravaggio titled “Entombment.”

Rubens, Entombment, 1612-1614 Caravaggio, Entombment, 1602-1604
The article below, from Art News, profiles the work of a new artist, Kelley Walker. It examines the new artist as she incorporates the ideas of others who came before her and transforms them into her own as well as the controversy behind copyrighting in the art world. She doesn’t like the word “appropriation” as it covers several topics and in today’s generation art galleries and museums are filled with works that can be traced to other artists. These works have in turn borrowed from artists who came before them, movies, newspapers, and many other sources. When it comes to the arts, copyright laws are not clear-cut. The line between copying another’s work is hard to define. One artist used the word “image transfer” to define new artists plan when creating works. With fast access to images through the internet, copying is significantly easier then it was in the past.
Copying another’s work has been around for centuries. In terms of the arts, can copying really exist? In the end, two works never look exactly alike. It would be impossible.

Sources Pollack, Barbara. “Copyrights.” 22 March 2012, ARTnews LLC, 48 West 38th St 9th FL NY NY 10018. All rights reserved.,0,214,317_.jpg