Wednesday, January 28, 2015

Copyright responses

Do you agree that many artists borrow as a fundamental part of the artistic/creative process? Should artists have the freedom to do so?

Yes. I think everything that artists create today is somewhat borrowed from other artists that they have been exposed to. It is also important that artists have the right to use media such as commercials and movies to be able to make statements or modify them into a new creation in some way. 

The authors make a distinction between borrowing that is derivative versus borrowing that is transformative. Is one wrong and the other right? How can we tell the difference and who ultimately determines that?

I think that derivative art can be wrong, if you are taking someone else’s work and releasing it as your own without crediting the original artist. Transformative would mean taking someone else’s work, modifying it or re-purposing it in some way and crediting the original artist. I think that it is only wrong if you are releasing someone’s work without making a new piece, but simply releasing it as your own. 

What other examples of appropriation can you think of?
Appropriation could be stealing music or movies online, but I know that a lot of people do that. It could be downloading a movie and redistributing it, or releasing someone else’s artwork/film as your own.

How would you feel if another artist appropriated your work?
I would feel pretty upset, but at the same time I think it would depend on how they did it. If they were trying to release it as their own creation, I would be really mad. However, if they were using one of my films for a different purpose then I don’t know if I would care that much. 

In what ways have you been influenced or appropriated another work?
In a lot of the films I make, I like to use found footage such as commercials from the 60’s (if I am trying to make a statement about consumerism or the media’s effect on culture). I think that this is a huge part of my style as a filmmaker and I couldn’t imagine not having the right to using this media. 

In the current remix culture, when anyone can create something using digital technology, how is authorship being redefined? Consider the ideas of the "instrument" (piano vs turntable or computer, paintbrush vs camera) as well as the "process.”

I think that authorship now can mean a collection of other works mashed up into one or the alteration of other works. In Girl Talk, they take other pieces of music and mash it up into their own. This kind of process is used in so many different art forms, such as visual art and filmmaking. For example, in a collage you can add in images and words from many different sources such as ads in magazines, photos from everyday life or parts of other art. 

No comments:

Post a Comment