Interactive Media Fall 2006 Assignment 7 Due Noon October 22
1. Text, Chapter 2 pp. 115-139 and
Review the U.S. Gov't Copyright site at: http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html.
For an alternate view, see Creative Commons: http://creativecommons.org/.
Jeff Koons & copyright infringement: http://www.potters.org/subject04499.htm
Please read the Digital Ethics article on electronic reserve under my name in the library-click on search the catalogue>instructor>julian>Ed Media A
Do you think it's O.K. to use someone else's image? How much?
How do you know? What will you tell your students?
Post 1 p. reflection on all readings above
2. Work on classmates' art review wikis
3. Continue working on your Ink City video, be ready to add sound
Flying the Internet
Himalayan Art Resources
About Me
- June Julian
- The objective of this blog is to promote international understanding and communication through art. Please contact me for permission to use the text or images. Department of Art Education, The University of the Arts, jjulian@uarts.edu
2 comments:
Copyright
After reading the articles, for this week’s assignment, I felt that I am even more on the fence with this issue of copyright. While I was reading Digital Ethics: Computers, and Photographs, and Manipulation of Pixels, I thought back to a section I read in our text. There was a piece that was call Untitled #36(Ramoncita at the Cantina) by Ken Gonzales-Day, where he took a known art piece and manipulates it by digitally reconstructing an image of a man, dressed as a woman, into the picture. By doing this, the art took on new meaning. So how much has to change to be considered original? This reminded me of the song by The Red Hot Chili Peppers, “Danny California”, where someone disputed that the rift in the song was the same as Tom Petty’s “Last Dance with Many Jane”. Again, how much has to change to be considered original, and what happens when the original artist okays the recreation of his or her work. Artist Weird Al Yankovic recreated case in point, the song “Riding Dirty” by Chamillionaire. Chamillionaire loved, what he call, his(Al’s) version of the song, and gave him his full blessing to publish the piece. So then is copyright not infringed when the original artists give consent or are recognized for their inspirational work? I personally would not want my work or ideas stolen, but if someone would offer to create my ideas or use my characters, with the agreement that I would be recognized, that would be completely acceptable. This led me to other examples, in our text, of artists who have done the same with the digital field of art. I then began to think about how I relate to this topic. I work as a graphic designer at the local newspapers, and the words I here every day, in the art department, are “ Just Google it”. Whenever we have a product or ad that needs to be designed, we use the Google images, search engine, to find any image we need. However we do have a subscription to Metro, which is a month CD library set of images, which our company pays for us to use. But “Googling” an image off the Internet is faster and easier then having to find an image off the hundreds of CD that we are provided. This may be the inlet problem of copyright troubles with the Internet. Once something is put onto the web it is very difficult to retrieve it completely. With the way the Internet is set up, with every individual able to use, trade, access, disburse, collect, change, and manipulate information, it make it almost impossible to regulate copyright laws. I think of placing information on the Internet as spilling a glass of water into the ocean. If you are quick enough you can retrieve some, but the rest will be disbursed and added to the collective whole. As for the Jeff Koons scenario, I think you have to take each individual case and look at it. I don’t think he should have been sewed. I mean if that is true, then should all nude models sew for pictures of them? Could they say they were doing a performance piece? What about Marcel Duchamp’s L.H.O.O.Q.? Doesn’t that infringe on the copyright of the Mona Lisa by Leonardo da Vinci? As mentioned by Vanji, we have had this discussion with our Aesthetic class, and it does make a great case puzzle. I will also reiterate that my view on this subject is indifferent. I feel that depending on consensus of the original creation and artist, and depending on the percentage of change to a piece of work greatly determined its copyright infraction status. If this were something in my classroom that was an issue, I would provide my students with the knowledge and example of copyrights to their work, similar to what June has done in this section with her students.
Post a Comment