 | |||
| ©2005-2006, David John Goodger |
Les's Original post
Ok it’s official. I’m scared. I live in Florida and love to fish but the regulations can be quite tricky about which fish you are allowed to harvest from the ocean. If you are in the Gulf there is a specific regulation for a species and a totally different regulation for the same species if are in the Atlantic. The problem is there are areas where if you don’t check your coordinates you wouldn’t know if you are in the Atlantic or the Gulf.
I have learned so much from are “readings” and feel a little more settled. Copyright last forever, a lifetime plus 70 years for individuals and 100 years for a company. This in my estimation does not fit the modern culture of remix.
Fair use only applies for content used to: Teach, News reporting, Parody, and Critical Comments. Fair use is not a right but a defensible position. So help us God. In the consideration of fair use a court will judge on the nature of use, the amount of use, and commercial affect. This explanation helped me understand fair use. If these 3 criteria are the litmus test then I feel much better. I love Creative Commons.
I wish everyone producing anything would consider Creative Commons. Creative Commons allows the producer(s) to determine how the material may be reused. The creator may allow for derivatives, attribution, commercial use or not, and share alke. Since books, plays, film/movie are all covered by copyright it is important for educators to understand and respect the law. Copyright isn’t really scary now that I know the fundamentals. The law is in place to protect the rights of the producers but in today’s culture we need to revisit the spirit of the law. I agree with Larry Lessigs TED Talk that our evolving remix culture is calling for a remix of copyright. Modern and advancing technology demands a revisit and a redefining of the spirit of copyright.
I have learned so much from are “readings” and feel a little more settled. Copyright last forever, a lifetime plus 70 years for individuals and 100 years for a company. This in my estimation does not fit the modern culture of remix.
Fair use only applies for content used to: Teach, News reporting, Parody, and Critical Comments. Fair use is not a right but a defensible position. So help us God. In the consideration of fair use a court will judge on the nature of use, the amount of use, and commercial affect. This explanation helped me understand fair use. If these 3 criteria are the litmus test then I feel much better. I love Creative Commons.
I wish everyone producing anything would consider Creative Commons. Creative Commons allows the producer(s) to determine how the material may be reused. The creator may allow for derivatives, attribution, commercial use or not, and share alke. Since books, plays, film/movie are all covered by copyright it is important for educators to understand and respect the law. Copyright isn’t really scary now that I know the fundamentals. The law is in place to protect the rights of the producers but in today’s culture we need to revisit the spirit of the law. I agree with Larry Lessigs TED Talk that our evolving remix culture is calling for a remix of copyright. Modern and advancing technology demands a revisit and a redefining of the spirit of copyright.
My Comment:
Les,
I'm glad you feel a little more settled, because I surely don't.
I do agree with you that the laws are in place to protect the producers, however; what about the situation where the artist doesn't mind someone using their work, but the artist doesn't "own" that material any longer. I had to laugh when watching "Good Copy, Bad Copy" because the woman was asked what George Clinton thought of someone using part of his song, and she said, "I don't know. You'll have to ask him." Plus I couldn't figure out what the group "stole" from him??
I think the bottom line is that the laws are antiquated right now and need to be changed. We need to embrace the creativity of new generations and new technology. I thought the Beatles and Jay-Z mash-up was super hot and think that this is a perfect example of new combined with old.
P.S.
Love the photo...is that taken somewhere here in Florida??
I'm glad you feel a little more settled, because I surely don't.
I do agree with you that the laws are in place to protect the producers, however; what about the situation where the artist doesn't mind someone using their work, but the artist doesn't "own" that material any longer. I had to laugh when watching "Good Copy, Bad Copy" because the woman was asked what George Clinton thought of someone using part of his song, and she said, "I don't know. You'll have to ask him." Plus I couldn't figure out what the group "stole" from him??
I think the bottom line is that the laws are antiquated right now and need to be changed. We need to embrace the creativity of new generations and new technology. I thought the Beatles and Jay-Z mash-up was super hot and think that this is a perfect example of new combined with old.
P.S.
Love the photo...is that taken somewhere here in Florida??
I loved the graphic I found for this blog. It is to represent Disney's long standing copyright enforcement. The creator of this image licensed it through Creative Commons for non-commercial use.
ReplyDelete