An interesting movie about copyright issues

[zahush76]

There are a lot of arguments in this forum around this issue, and i thought about recommending this movie as a basis for debate - and maybe some extra angles on the subject.

 

The movie's name is : "RIP: A Remix Manifesto"

 

Here's the synopsis:

 

In RiP: A remix manifesto, Web activist and filmmaker Brett Gaylor explores issues of copyright in the information age, mashing up the media landscape of the 20th century and shattering the wall between users and producers.

 

The films central protagonist is Girl Talk, a mash-up musician topping the charts with his sample-based songs. But is Girl Talk a paragon of people power or the Pied Piper of piracy? Creative Commons founder, Lawrence Lessig, Brazils Minister of Culture Gilberto Gil and pop culture critic Cory Doctorow are also along for the ride.

 

A participatory media experiment, from day one, Brett shares his raw footage at opensourcecinema.org, for anyone to remix. This movie-as-mash-up method allows these remixes to become an integral part of the film. With RiP: A remix manifesto, Gaylor and Girl Talk sound an urgent alarm and draw the lines of battle.

 

Which side of the ideas war are you on?"

 

Have fun watching

 

[zahush76]

Just saw the "Brandsetter" thread, and i think these questions, among others, are treated in the movie.

 

Also debates about the RIAA, BMG, GE, etc. Interesting and fun to watch.

[Eric VB]

Haven't the visual arts been tackling this same issue for far longer?

 

Is a collage an original work of art or merely an interesting (hopefully) collection of others' original works?

[Byrdman]

My position is really quite simple and does not involve rtaking sides:

 

The people who do creative work should get paid for it. People should not get paid for other peoples work. (This includes men in suits of course) i.e. the sample based musician should pay the sampled musicians for the privilege of using their material but should be entitled to make money out of their own work.

 

 

 

 

[zahush76]

The problem is that today, in most cases, if you want to pay for the privilege of using a sample of someone's music - the money goes to the copyright owner - which isn't the artist himself in most cases.

 

But the movie goes even further than this. In one scene they show the case of a Muddy Waters blues song from the 40's, and the issue is that he said he made it up by himself - when it turned out to be based on a slave song from the begining of the century. Is it stealing?

 

Also, legaly speaking - each time you play or sing "Happy Birthday to you" - you are violating the copyright laws. This tune that was composed by two sisters in the 19th century, is copyrighted. Didn't know if anyone was aware of this.

It goes on and on, and debates about the internet technology, making art a democratic phenomenon and so on. Really interesting stuff.