NotesforworkshopLiang

From XPUB & Lens-Based wiki
Revision as of 21:15, 27 March 2014 by Δεριζαματζορπρομπλεμιναυστραλια (talk | contribs) (Created page with "guide to open conent licenses y not copyright most authors are not owners of their material, the company is(record comp, publishers etc) most musicians make their money from...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

guide to open conent licenses

y not copyright

most authors are not owners of their material, the company is(record comp, publishers etc) most musicians make their money from live not from royalties (they sell services) money not the only reason to be in cultural production

copyright begun as a system to force creativity and ensure works in public domain and f.e. allowed public libraries to exist as non commercial distribution channels for cultural production.

COPYRIGHT

origins in western society of 18ct, during Ressainance printers would print copies of books without permissions, emergence of artistic genius, copyright embedded in the cultural understanding of authorship

globalised capitalism- copyright centered in big media instead of authors and artists

changes in the law tried to cope with the blurring of boundaries of original and copies within digital media

authorship , originality and copyright was of a litle relevance to cultural and artistic production. see folktales,folk songs, as collective anonymous creations in the pub. domain.Variations are encouraged as part of the tradition

DISNEY founded much of its wealth in folktales like snowwhite, taked them out of the public domain and made them proprietary by copyrighting material.

Homers epics and 1001 nights narrated versions allover with no original written version existed

Until 20 th century and music industry copyright didnt play a role to music./ Bachs Concerto in D major Bwv 1972 is a re-orchestration of Vivaldis ninth movement of L' estro armonika.

not in visual arts, rennaisance collective workshop paintings, rembrant and rubens artists internet, risk of copyright infreegment. kurt schwitters bank logo appropriation but Kieron Dwyer..starbucks

Internet and pcs closed the gaps for media consumers to be media producers, copyright against this creativity

COPYLEFT

roots in free sofware Linux, GNU, now approaches all kind of media

open content model

copyright now= increase years, extend to other media like software, put more rights

FLOSS

COPYrights= reproduction, adaption, distribution, performance, display

notion of originality in the labour process different

even if im ok with my file beeing downloaded and used , the one whos doing it is infreeging my copyrights, rule of exclusion


licere-license-permission, should only allow more

software restrictions are harder

copyleft licences work within the legal framework , they dont circumvent the copyr.law you would be sewed again

GPU GPL freedoms= users should be allowed to run the software foranyreason, be able to examine the sofware, freely modify it,give copies, freely distribute (*ensure public domain status. derivative works creation)

free refers not to pricing but to freedom

heart of free software a radical reworking of the very idea of the USer, from passive consumer to user producer User producer speaks in the digital experience and the idea of people to become artists and producers.

colaborative production than isolated producxtion

history of cultural production = history of collaborative cp