Being an artist and musician myself, the ongoing battle between the corporate lawyers and the copyleft interests me greatly. I want to write a paper on the changing laws in copyright and the evolving idea of the copyleft. I want to examine every aspect of the copyleft, immerse myself in the culture, discover what average people think about the change in the art environment, and look at the issue through an intellectual, artistic, and moral view. I will be focusing on the copyleft and music, but by default it also applies to literature and visual art.
The concept of the copyleft actually was formulated as a way to improve computer software. The GNU project defines copyleft as, “…a general method for making a program (or other work) free, and requiring all modified and extended versions of the program to be free as well.” (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/). Their logic in doing so is that of evolution. They want their programs to run as efficiently as possible. By putting their software in the public domain they allow individuals to make improvements on the software making it better for future users. How does this relate to other art? Hard to say, but it’s the idea of putting intellectual property in the public domain for the purpose of creating something better that intrigues me. I also think that human being’s pride tends to get in the way to make this idea possible.
Napster changed the way people acquired music. Since then, the Internet has allowed for constant change in the way people view media. It is this constant evolution that is so intriguing to me. The media library available on the Internet is growing at an astounding rate, and perhaps unintentionally, we have created the largest database of art ever assembled. Isn’t that something that should be praised as one of the great accomplishments of the human race? Some people would say so, while other say that it’s infringing on artist’s rights. There are an increasing number of websites that celebrate the copyleft. One such website, entitled opsound, enables browsers to listen and download songs for free and allows users to do the same while uploading original sounds, or modifying previously posted noises. Their mission statement is as follows: “Opsound is a gift economy in action, an experiment in applying the model of free software to music. Musicians and sound artists are invited to add their work to the Opsound pool using a copyleft license developed by Creative Commons. Listeners are invited to download, share, remix, and reimagine. (http://opsound.org/index.php). My goal in writing this paper is to discover the views of the artists, and the corporations, and how we can evolve in the new environment.
Other sources I will be using include course texts and the following:
Copyright law
http://www.pdinfo.com/copyrt.php
http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl105.html
Fair Use
http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html
http://www.utsystem.edu/OGC/IntellectualProperty/copypol2.htm
Copyleft
http://www.copyleft-music.com/
http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/8384
Don't forget that, if you don't want to, you don't have to limit yourself to a traditional paper. There's an option for a creative project within the scope of this assignment. I've never heard of the Copyleft and this direction you're taking intrigues me.
ReplyDeleteDuring the video, I took notes and jotted down Copyleft and it's meaning. I too have never heard of it prior to the video and thought it was not only interesting but such an innovative, creative way to create a bond, or musical connection, with other artists. Since this involves music, i do think it would be even more awesome to take on a different approach other than the traditional paper. Maybe incorporate some audible examples...
ReplyDeleteGreat idea; just remember you will need to develop a thesis or an argument about CopyLeft, not just describe what it is. Obviously, you'll need to educate yourself about it before determining what you think and want to argue about it.
ReplyDelete