Copyfight, Fair Use, Remix
Having been so incredibly frustrated with macro economic policy I have been focusing my leisure studies on another issue that I have great interest in and that will also (most likely) lead to incredible frustration. *sigh*
For those interested in the effects of copy right laws on culture I would highly recommend reading “Remix” by Lawrence Lessig (his blog here).
Copy right law has had a very difficult time adjusting to remix and sampling culture in audio and visual production. Lessig makes a very good point about how sampling is treated with regard to the written word. It is perfectly acceptable to quote other people’s work as long as it is attributed and it is not used as a substitute for the original work. There is no licensing process or complex legal negotiation. You just quote. However, reproduction of parts of audio or visual works is incredibly complex.
The (copyright) war too has an important objective. Copyright is, in my view at least, critically important to healthy culture. Properly balanced., it is essential to inspiring certain forms of creativity. Without it, we would have a much poorer culture. With it, at least properly balanced, we create the incentives to produces great new works that otherwise would not be produced.
But, like all metaphoric wars, the copyright wars are not actual conflicts of survival. Or at least, they are not conflicts of survival of a people or a society, even if they are wars of survival for certain businesses or, more accurately, business models. Thus we must keep in mind the other values or objectives that might also be affected by this war. We must make sure this war doesn’t cost more than it is worth. (Remix by Lawrence Lessig, page xvi)
He is talking about one of my favorite activities right there… Externality analysis. Yay!!!
Lets do a fun and quick (not thorough) externality analysis of copyright laws regarding audio and visual creativity.
Positive Externalities:
It acts as an incentive for creating original work by protecting creative works from being used commercially by non-rights holders which allows for large investment in creative works.
Negative Externalities:
Huge legal and administrative overhead.
Non-commercial use is outlawed by default.
Remix and sampling is not allowed, derivative cultural output is stymied.
The flow of culture is significantly decreased.
If there were no copyright laws then nobody in their right mind would put up money to undertake expensive productions. Hollywood blockbusters, mega-hit albums and blue-chip video games would never get made because there would be no ability to recoup investment.
However, the system as it is currently implemented comes with a huge price. Especially when the goods being regulated are non-rival. It is absurd. And it does no one any good to regulate in ways that we know people will not obey. (Remix, xx)
Here is a great video from American University School of Communication:
Remix and sampling culture have an incredible unrealised potential for cultural advancement. Unfortunately, there are lobbyist organizations (especially the RIAA, the AP and the MPAA) that stand in the way. Ironically, right on the RIAA website they claim to protect… the first amendment rights of artists.
Anyways, read the book. There is loads more of interesting stuff about culture and media production. Hopefully, public policy will change (through reform and simplification) to allow both commercial and amateur culture to co-exist.
One of the biggest strains on the economy right now is negative economic friction in the form of lobbies and lawyers. Not only are huge amounts of resources being diverted to them but they also are keeping inefficient business models alive. Economic vampires suck!!!!
Shoot, I am getting back into macro econ… I can’t help myself sometimes.
