I cannot wait to see this film! It is an exciting time in the (r)evolution of intellectual property – particularly with respect to the interest garnered by organizations like the Creative Commons and their omnipresent campaigns for change. What are your thoughts? Should remixes be presumptively permitted as fair use? How much change would the secondary artist need to incorporate for their art to rise to the level of a sufficiently transformative and, therefore, permitted remix?
Archives For remix
So central is the idea of the freedom of speech, that the Bill of Rights places it first and foremost as the primary tenet of a democratic republic. Specifically, “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press[.]” Further, this potent protection providing freedom of speech presumptively applies to all forms of artistic expression: words, images, sounds, movements and more. In an era where anyone with an Internet connection and a thought can be a writer/publisher, the importance of such a right has perhaps never felt more real to “We the people.”
In addition to this freedom, the U.S. Constitution provides a means of incentivising our creative authorship by protecting it for a limited time from misappropriation. Specifically, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 8 of the U.S. Constitution, affectionately known as the Copyright Clause, reads: “Congress shall have Power to…[secure] for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries…[.]” By granting authors the right to prevent infringers from profiting off of unauthorized copies of their works, Congress provided a means by which creators of copyrightable content could make a living through the ability to monopolize their content for a set period of time.
Therein lies the contradiction. Continue Reading…