This was a lot of information to take in and the issues were complicated. I felt that the sequencing of the parts presented, 1, 2 & 3 flowed well educationally. As my kids say, “I just got schooled!” In this case, it was a relevant topic that has been confusing to me for some years so I was grateful for the schooling.
I have 3 kids. My daughter, the youngest, is 19 so I have been down and around the slippery slopes of torrent cafes with my kids. While I learned many details about current Copyright Law, Fair Use and Creative Commons by watching this collection of videos, I was most impressed with the final selection, the TED talk given by Larry Lessig. My own children and my students are part of what Lessig refers to as, “Remix Culture”. I found the presentation profound and it left me with many more questions than answers. What I cannot deny is that technology has changed our kids. Technology is a literacy for this generation. If indeed we are living in “an age of prohibition”, it is time to begin a reformation that will both allow creativity and some form of protection. I have no idea what that will look like, but it doubt that current Copyright Law can continue to hold relevancy in the face of an entire generation of “pirates”.
My Response:
Lorrie,
Yes a lot of information to take all in. I think it was summed by the statement,”if you have to pay for it, it is probably copyrighted”. I totally agree that we are in a Remix Culture. One of the things that I took from the videos is that I should go overseas or out of the country if I really wanted to use things without permission. It was amazing to see the total disregard for the artist’s work.
As I look at these videos, I reflected on how much I may have infringed on someone else's work. In my classes I used to take video clips and start discussions with them. I thought the idea after watching "Dream On", a comedy on HBO. I would use clips from Disney movies all the time, thinking that since it's animation, I wouldn't have to worry about material being too sensitive. Well I'm glad that my idea never went viral or anything, because when it does, it starts to cost.
The underlying theme here to me was that money was the underlying theme. I am very saddened that many works will never be seen, because the filmmaker didn't have enough cash to keep his documentary current. This happened with the film "Eyes on the Prize", a movie about the Civil Rights movement. Half a million dollars to renew? In my personal opinion, this is still an attack or an effort to erase a vital component in American history.
Duwaine, I like you often found myself infringing on someone’s else’s work by using videos and photos to teach teachers how to integrate some piece of technology. What’s worst is that I would say to them, “I know that we have to be aware of copyright when we’re working with our students, but this is not being published and is for educational purposes for this instruction.” How foolish! I knew better then and definitely know better now.
ReplyDeleteAs you explained your use of the media to start discussions and as I used it to demonstrate technology, I now better understand the term, “Fair-Use”. The definition as explained by Peter Laszi, the lawyer makes it clear for us not to stop doing what we do but do it better and more focused. He says that using somebody else’s copyrighted music, pictures or words without paying or asking permission is fair-use as long as it benefits society more than it hurts the copyright holder. So your opinion that the film “Eyes on the Prize” is “still an attack or an effort to erase a vital component in American history” should be thought of as something that can be erased because of the definition of Fair-Use. Would it not be fair to say that the film would benefit society more than it would hurt the copyright holder?