Larry Lessig opens the first chapter by introducing John Sausa who felt the, then current, early 1900's copy right laws needed more security and expansion. He more specifically lobbied against "mechanical music," that allowed the massive copying and distribution of music (culture.) He fear that people would transition from creators of culture to mere consumers. Sausa described an ideal state, Read/Write (RW) culture where people consume it and then are able to change or redirect it. He predicted a backlash of new technologies, Read/Only (RO) culture in which the audience only consumes it without any form of response."His fear was not that culture, or the actual quality of the music produced in a culture, would be less. His fear was that people would be less connected to, and hence practiced in, creating that culture. Amateurism, to this professional, was a virtue—not because it produced great music, but because it produced a musical culture"
The author, Lessgi, introduced three arguments in response to the subject of copy right and culture: (1) The Internet extends RO culture beyond the unavoidable limits of twentieth-century technology. (2) The same technologies that encourage RO culture could also encourage the revival of the RW creativity that Sousa celebrated. (3) The “hybrid”—that will increasingly define the industries of culture and innovation. I will only focus on the first two.
When I began reading the chapters I found myself wondering what Sausa would think of media platforms such as: Youtube. Would he turn over in his grave to see where technology has taken us today? Would he embrace the innovations. Youtube is a website that produces content on a massive scale but it is a platform that is used by regular people. Lessgi defined the Internet as an extension of RO culture but normal people, not necessarily professionals, are allowed to create videos and post them for family, friends, and the world to see; resulting in the emergence of a new culture. Is Youtube any different from the idea of people having freedom to get together and sing in the public? (Sausa was not against that idea.) I would argue that they are one in the same, both promote creativity and the sharing of non-specialist content. In some cases, issues of copy right infringements surfaced but generally people have the freedom take songs (written by professional artist) and revamp them; some were actually embraced by the commercial musicians. For example, pop-artist Beyonce hit song, "Single ladies," became popular because of its featured choreography and catchy lyrics but became even famous as people began to imitate (with a personal touch) the moves on video and posted them on the website. Beyonce appreciating the creativity and embracing of her music launch a contest for the best video remake. I agree with Sausa's idea that protection for peoples creative works are important but I do not agree that new technology advancements cause a distortion between people and their connection to creativity and culture. I agree with Lessgi that new technologies, even if it does not in the beginning, will find away back to RW. The Internet and music CD's (iTunes if you want to be modern about it) are perceived as RO culture but websites like Youtube transitioned it into a platform of RW culture.
The author, Lessgi, introduced three arguments in response to the subject of copy right and culture: (1) The Internet extends RO culture beyond the unavoidable limits of twentieth-century technology. (2) The same technologies that encourage RO culture could also encourage the revival of the RW creativity that Sousa celebrated. (3) The “hybrid”—that will increasingly define the industries of culture and innovation. I will only focus on the first two.
When I began reading the chapters I found myself wondering what Sausa would think of media platforms such as: Youtube. Would he turn over in his grave to see where technology has taken us today? Would he embrace the innovations. Youtube is a website that produces content on a massive scale but it is a platform that is used by regular people. Lessgi defined the Internet as an extension of RO culture but normal people, not necessarily professionals, are allowed to create videos and post them for family, friends, and the world to see; resulting in the emergence of a new culture. Is Youtube any different from the idea of people having freedom to get together and sing in the public? (Sausa was not against that idea.) I would argue that they are one in the same, both promote creativity and the sharing of non-specialist content. In some cases, issues of copy right infringements surfaced but generally people have the freedom take songs (written by professional artist) and revamp them; some were actually embraced by the commercial musicians. For example, pop-artist Beyonce hit song, "Single ladies," became popular because of its featured choreography and catchy lyrics but became even famous as people began to imitate (with a personal touch) the moves on video and posted them on the website. Beyonce appreciating the creativity and embracing of her music launch a contest for the best video remake. I agree with Sausa's idea that protection for peoples creative works are important but I do not agree that new technology advancements cause a distortion between people and their connection to creativity and culture. I agree with Lessgi that new technologies, even if it does not in the beginning, will find away back to RW. The Internet and music CD's (iTunes if you want to be modern about it) are perceived as RO culture but websites like Youtube transitioned it into a platform of RW culture.
No comments:
Post a Comment