Kids these days: The changing landscape of creative commons and the remix generation (Part 1 of 2)
By NADIA NASCIMENTO and GRACE CARTER
Ever since the invention of the Gutenberg printing press, the issue of information ownership has bred countless challenges. Almost overnight, the printing press took the production of written communication out of the hands of an elite group of scribes and democratized information ownership. At the time, the rapid change elicited anxiety and confusion. Personalized narratives became intertwined with accepted wisdom, and immortalized in print.
As the new forms of newsprint, radio and television emerged, along with various transcription, recording and broadcasting devices, debates about information ownership continued. None has rocked the paradigm so vigorously as the emergence of the web and its accompanying suite of digital media tools. Never before has it been so easy to share, borrow from, and combine intellectual property. As a result, the always-hot topic of information ownership is currently scalding. But to fear the possibilities at our fingertips today ignores the lessons of the past, and could impede our artistic and collaborative progress.
As it stands, standardized international copyright law means that creative content producers (both artistic and commercial) retain the rights to their work for between fifty to a hundred years after death. Produce any creative work or expressible form of an idea known as intellectual property, and you maintain the rights to your material; it becomes off-limits for the public to re-use your work without permission.
In the digital age, we have entered into an unprecedented global economy of ideas. As technology increasingly encourages collaborative works, restrictive copyright laws could leave us with an anemic public domain.
Consider the plight of Shepard Fairey, the artist behind the popular image of Obama pictured here. Fairey based his now famous artwork on a photo taken by Mannie Garcia, a photographer for the Associated Press, which is why that organization, on March 9th, filed a lawsuit against him for copyright infringement. The AP claims Fairey generated $400,000 from sales of the image, which has appeared on websites, posters, stickers, shirts and buttons. Meanwhile, Fairey believes that his artwork transformed the photo into a “stunning, abstracted and idealized visual image that creates powerful new meaning and conveys a radically different message.” (We feel Fairey’s reasoning is sound. He took a publicly displayed photo, and made it his own.)
Fairey’s is a new kind of battle, one based on technology morals; it’s something the public will continue to debate as citizens of a decentralized and democratic Internet environment.
On March 11th, the Creative Commons Foundation (CCF) made a bold move to further the development of culture collaboration with a new legal tool. The CCF first gained renown for developing an intensive tool kit for content producers to release the reins on their works. This new addition, called CC0 (CC Zero), is an “air-tight” legal process allowing content creators to take back the right to allow their works to be re-used and repurposed for collaborative ends. Creative Commons CEO Joi Ito has called it a universal waiver.
The mandate of the Creative Commons, as noted on their site, is guided by a very clear principle: “to increase the amount of creativity (cultural, educational, and scientific) in “the commons” — the body of work that is available to the public for free and legal sharing, use, repurposing, and remixing.” (Source)
We support the validity of a remix culture. A fiery public desire for collaboration has emerged alongside new media tools, one which empowers ideas and art as methods of enriching conversation and evolving culture. CC0 opens the door for legally unencumbered collaboration—and if Linux, Andy Warhol, and the wisdom of crowds have taught us anything, this is a very good thing.
Related material:
