With the newest reading assignment, I was surprised to find out how far back the subject of piracy on media content went. With all the legal wranglings in the ten to fifteen years in regards to the illegal sharing of music and movies, one would think that pirating of creative property was something that came to be only recently, with the rise of access to the internet. In fact, these issues date back nearly a century, with the creation of the media types themselves: films, recorded music, radio, and cable TV.
As Lessig states early on, "Every important sector of 'big media' today... was born of a kind of piracy so defined". The history of the media types described above is interesting, as it is really a story of those with the creative property (or patents controlling such things as technologies necessary for producing these creative works) and their struggle to maintain control of their content / abilities for content creation. In many cases, those that went against these established powers helped to shape the world we have today, at least in regards to how we access and consume media content. Many of those at the top of their respective industries have gotten where they are through the use of "piracy" in their own time, yet are now going on the offensive against acts of "piracy" that they determine to affect their own goals. This is interesting, as it makes these groups seem to be quite hypocritical. The debate over how content creators are best able to protect their creations and retain their right to make a profit through their works is still an ongoing discussion, although the many laws passed in the twentieth century have helped shaped them in their current form.
I think Lessig phrased it best as he finished the chapter with, "Every generation welcomes the pirates from the last. Every generation - until now".
Friday, September 26, 2014
Sunday, September 21, 2014
POL reading 49-62
Tonight's reading was over how meaning is achieved through the interpretation of image.
Production of meaning involves at least three elements besides the image itself and the procedure:
1) The codes and conventions that structure the image and can't be separated from the context of the image.
2) The viewers and how they interpret or experience the image.
3) The contexts in which an image is exhibited and viewed.
Most images have a meaning that is preferred by their producers, as their creation is intended to be interpreted a certain way. As an audience of the image, we have no way to know for certain what meaning the producers intended for their creation. With analysis of the image, we can get a feeling for what we believe was intended, but without hearing directly from the creator, we won't know for sure.
I found the discussion of "The Most Wanted Painting on the Web" to be an interesting look at the different preferences for aesthetics in regards to paintings as grouped by country. The evidence found by Pierre Bourdieu's survey showed that generally people prefer soft landscapes and pictorial realism over abstract minimal compositions. I wonder if the reasoning for this is that to the general population, it is easier to interpret an image of something they can relate to, as it is a representation of something in the real world. This would make sense as the average individual may not have an educated or proper understanding of what constitutes "good" taste and aesthetics as far as current culture suggests.
Production of meaning involves at least three elements besides the image itself and the procedure:
1) The codes and conventions that structure the image and can't be separated from the context of the image.
2) The viewers and how they interpret or experience the image.
3) The contexts in which an image is exhibited and viewed.
Most images have a meaning that is preferred by their producers, as their creation is intended to be interpreted a certain way. As an audience of the image, we have no way to know for certain what meaning the producers intended for their creation. With analysis of the image, we can get a feeling for what we believe was intended, but without hearing directly from the creator, we won't know for sure.
I found the discussion of "The Most Wanted Painting on the Web" to be an interesting look at the different preferences for aesthetics in regards to paintings as grouped by country. The evidence found by Pierre Bourdieu's survey showed that generally people prefer soft landscapes and pictorial realism over abstract minimal compositions. I wonder if the reasoning for this is that to the general population, it is easier to interpret an image of something they can relate to, as it is a representation of something in the real world. This would make sense as the average individual may not have an educated or proper understanding of what constitutes "good" taste and aesthetics as far as current culture suggests.
Monday, September 15, 2014
Reading from Free Culture (1-30)
Finished more of my reading from "Free Culture" earlier today, and gotta say "wow". I actually got interested in the subject matter pretty early on and read further than I meant to as I found this discussion on intellectual property and creativity interesting.
Lessig does a good job of examining the forces at play in the war against piracy. He discusses how Walter Disney's big breakout success "Steamboat Willie" was a creation that parodied Buster Keaton's "Steamboat Bill, Jr." as a cartoon. This source material wasn't the only thing that Disney "borrowed" as he also utilized the idea of synchronized sound from Keaton as well, since Keaton had pioneered this concept with the movie "The Jazz Singer" a year prior. The success of Disney's "Steamboat Willie" helped create the grand company that exists today.
The question is, how was this okay for Disney to "borrow" these ideas and source material and end up profiting from them? The answer is that Disney didn't simply copy Keaton's material and try to ship it out for a profit, he applied his own ideas to the mix to make it something unique. In this case, it was creating a cartoon that was heavily inspired by "Steamboat Bill, Jr." and capitalized on adding the synchronized sound element as well, which was an industry first. This was Disney's contribution to the source or the material that he drew his creation from.
Fast forward to today, and you have a different kind of picture when it comes to creation and intellectual property. With the widespread adoption of the internet as a means of communicating, sharing ideas, and sharing creations, there is a new front that the heavy hitters of several industries such as movies (The Motion Picture Association of America) and music (The Recording Industry Association of America) are having to fight in the name of defending their intellectual property.
This means that if you make your own creation, yet were influenced by the works of something that you saw or heard, you might risk receiving your very own cease and desist letter or worse. At least, if the thing that you drew that inspiration from was being actively protected by powers like those described above.
The problem with the law is that in many cases it is declared that you must get the creator's permission if you want to do something using that created piece. As Lessig states, "scientists build upon the work of other scientists without asking or paying for the privileged". Progress in the fields of science would stagnate right into the ground if this were the case.
Lessig then goes on to discuss the differences between the United State and Japan in regards to how copyright infringement is viewed. That although the written law is very similar between the two countries, how they are implemented differs in many areas.He looks at the thriving manga industry as an example. In Japan, manga is commercially successful and a part of that countries culture. Yet, there exists special kinds of comics that function as copycats of other manga comics, these copycats are known as Doujinshi. These comics may appear to be pure copies at first glance, but actually contain contributions on the part of the comic creators. This is what separates Doujinshi from being straight copies of their source material. This contribution to the original is much like how Disney made his creation with the source material of Keaton's movie and concept of synchronized sound.
Lessig makes the argument that Doujinshi comics are good for the manga industry as a whole, which he discovered after his own investigation while living in Japan for four months.
His argument is an interesting one to consider when brought out of just the manga industry and instead if applied at a greater scope across all forms of media. If one takes a source material and makes his own contributions to it to make it his own, is that different than "stealing"? Lessig thinks so, and so do I.
Lessig does a good job of examining the forces at play in the war against piracy. He discusses how Walter Disney's big breakout success "Steamboat Willie" was a creation that parodied Buster Keaton's "Steamboat Bill, Jr." as a cartoon. This source material wasn't the only thing that Disney "borrowed" as he also utilized the idea of synchronized sound from Keaton as well, since Keaton had pioneered this concept with the movie "The Jazz Singer" a year prior. The success of Disney's "Steamboat Willie" helped create the grand company that exists today.
The question is, how was this okay for Disney to "borrow" these ideas and source material and end up profiting from them? The answer is that Disney didn't simply copy Keaton's material and try to ship it out for a profit, he applied his own ideas to the mix to make it something unique. In this case, it was creating a cartoon that was heavily inspired by "Steamboat Bill, Jr." and capitalized on adding the synchronized sound element as well, which was an industry first. This was Disney's contribution to the source or the material that he drew his creation from.
Fast forward to today, and you have a different kind of picture when it comes to creation and intellectual property. With the widespread adoption of the internet as a means of communicating, sharing ideas, and sharing creations, there is a new front that the heavy hitters of several industries such as movies (The Motion Picture Association of America) and music (The Recording Industry Association of America) are having to fight in the name of defending their intellectual property.
This means that if you make your own creation, yet were influenced by the works of something that you saw or heard, you might risk receiving your very own cease and desist letter or worse. At least, if the thing that you drew that inspiration from was being actively protected by powers like those described above.
The problem with the law is that in many cases it is declared that you must get the creator's permission if you want to do something using that created piece. As Lessig states, "scientists build upon the work of other scientists without asking or paying for the privileged". Progress in the fields of science would stagnate right into the ground if this were the case.
Lessig then goes on to discuss the differences between the United State and Japan in regards to how copyright infringement is viewed. That although the written law is very similar between the two countries, how they are implemented differs in many areas.He looks at the thriving manga industry as an example. In Japan, manga is commercially successful and a part of that countries culture. Yet, there exists special kinds of comics that function as copycats of other manga comics, these copycats are known as Doujinshi. These comics may appear to be pure copies at first glance, but actually contain contributions on the part of the comic creators. This is what separates Doujinshi from being straight copies of their source material. This contribution to the original is much like how Disney made his creation with the source material of Keaton's movie and concept of synchronized sound.
Lessig makes the argument that Doujinshi comics are good for the manga industry as a whole, which he discovered after his own investigation while living in Japan for four months.
His argument is an interesting one to consider when brought out of just the manga industry and instead if applied at a greater scope across all forms of media. If one takes a source material and makes his own contributions to it to make it his own, is that different than "stealing"? Lessig thinks so, and so do I.
Thursday, September 11, 2014
Finished chapter 1
I'm a bit behind on my reading, so I am trying to get caught up. Just finished chapter 1 on the assigned reading, and there is a lot to talk about.
Learned a bit about ideology, and after parsing over the section I now have a bit better understanding of it. Ideologies are systems of belief that exist within all cultures. Images are an important means through which ideologies are produces and onto which ideologies are projected. Ideology has come to be understood as a much more mundane process, in which we all engage and about which we are all for the most part aware in some way or another. Our ideologies are diverse and inform our everyday lives in often subtle or barely noticeable forms. One of the most important aspects of ideology in the modernist period was that they appeared to be natural or given.
An example of this would be the way that what constitutes beauty in a person's body is a thin, athletic shape, with clear and soft toned skin. It is so ingrained into most Westerners' understanding that this is what makes a body beautiful that it appears to be natural. However, when considered, a person realizes that this is nothing but a cultural construct, there is nothing "naturally" beautiful about a person with this ideal body type.
Whenever we interpret an image around us, consciously or not, we are using tools of semiotics to understand its meaning.
When looking at the principles of semiotics, there are two figures that have influenced how it is understood and applied: Ferdinand de Saussure and Charles Sanders Pierce.
Saussure's writing have had the most influence on theories of structuralism that informs the ways of analyzing visual culture. Saussure claimed that "language is a game of chess", and suggested that language depends on conventions and codes for meanings. He argued that a relationship between a word and things in the world are arbitrary and relative, not fixed. For example, how the word "dog" in English and "hund" in German both refer to the same kind of animal. Therefore he states, that the relationship between the words and animal itself are dictated by conventions of language rather then some natural connection..
To Pierce, language and thought are processes of sign interpretation. He believed that meaning resides not in the initial perception of a sign or representation of an object but in the interpretations of the perception and subsequent action based off that perception. Piece argued that every though is a sign without meaning until a subsequent thought (interpretation) allow for its interpretation.
A quick word on Barthes's model of semiotics. In addition to the two levels of meaning of denotation and connotation, there is the sign, which is composed of the signifier - a sound, written word, or image, and to the signified, which is the concept evoked by the word or image.
For example, the 1960s inspired smiley face icon. In this case, the smile is the signifier, and happiness is the signified. The image (or word) and its meaning together (the signifier and the signified together) form the sign.
Learned a bit about ideology, and after parsing over the section I now have a bit better understanding of it. Ideologies are systems of belief that exist within all cultures. Images are an important means through which ideologies are produces and onto which ideologies are projected. Ideology has come to be understood as a much more mundane process, in which we all engage and about which we are all for the most part aware in some way or another. Our ideologies are diverse and inform our everyday lives in often subtle or barely noticeable forms. One of the most important aspects of ideology in the modernist period was that they appeared to be natural or given.
An example of this would be the way that what constitutes beauty in a person's body is a thin, athletic shape, with clear and soft toned skin. It is so ingrained into most Westerners' understanding that this is what makes a body beautiful that it appears to be natural. However, when considered, a person realizes that this is nothing but a cultural construct, there is nothing "naturally" beautiful about a person with this ideal body type.
Whenever we interpret an image around us, consciously or not, we are using tools of semiotics to understand its meaning.
When looking at the principles of semiotics, there are two figures that have influenced how it is understood and applied: Ferdinand de Saussure and Charles Sanders Pierce.
Saussure's writing have had the most influence on theories of structuralism that informs the ways of analyzing visual culture. Saussure claimed that "language is a game of chess", and suggested that language depends on conventions and codes for meanings. He argued that a relationship between a word and things in the world are arbitrary and relative, not fixed. For example, how the word "dog" in English and "hund" in German both refer to the same kind of animal. Therefore he states, that the relationship between the words and animal itself are dictated by conventions of language rather then some natural connection..
To Pierce, language and thought are processes of sign interpretation. He believed that meaning resides not in the initial perception of a sign or representation of an object but in the interpretations of the perception and subsequent action based off that perception. Piece argued that every though is a sign without meaning until a subsequent thought (interpretation) allow for its interpretation.
A quick word on Barthes's model of semiotics. In addition to the two levels of meaning of denotation and connotation, there is the sign, which is composed of the signifier - a sound, written word, or image, and to the signified, which is the concept evoked by the word or image.
For example, the 1960s inspired smiley face icon. In this case, the smile is the signifier, and happiness is the signified. The image (or word) and its meaning together (the signifier and the signified together) form the sign.
Tuesday, September 9, 2014
Trip to the art gallery
Last Thursday we took a stroll over to the art gallery in the CIC building at WSU TC. The gallery was filled up with local works of all sorts made with a variety of different wood crafting techniques. After perusing the gallery for a while, we were asked to select one of the pieces and explain the story behind it as we understood it.
The piece that I chose was a construction of a tiered wedding cake made of stone, with a wooden bride and groom at the top. There is also many wooden ladders ringed around each layer of the cake.
I understood the piece to show that marriages are ongoing works that require cooperation towards a shared goal to be successful. This also meaning that a marriage can be a struggle that takes a combined effort to work through. I reached this conclusion by associating the ladders with workers constructing the different tiers of the cake. The solemn looking faces on the bride and groom figures at the top also seemed to support this, implying that this wasn't a continually blissful marriage but one based in the reality that marriage isn't always a joyful arrangement.
Being at the gallery and doing this activity made me more aware at how difficult it is for me to understand art, or at least at anything beyond the explicit understanding that comes by taking the subject at face value.
The piece that I chose was a construction of a tiered wedding cake made of stone, with a wooden bride and groom at the top. There is also many wooden ladders ringed around each layer of the cake.
I understood the piece to show that marriages are ongoing works that require cooperation towards a shared goal to be successful. This also meaning that a marriage can be a struggle that takes a combined effort to work through. I reached this conclusion by associating the ladders with workers constructing the different tiers of the cake. The solemn looking faces on the bride and groom figures at the top also seemed to support this, implying that this wasn't a continually blissful marriage but one based in the reality that marriage isn't always a joyful arrangement.
Being at the gallery and doing this activity made me more aware at how difficult it is for me to understand art, or at least at anything beyond the explicit understanding that comes by taking the subject at face value.
Friday, September 5, 2014
First entry during chapter 1 reading
Making progress over the first chapter regarding images, and feel as though I am learning bits that I never thought about or even realized were there I was a bit fascinated when reading about Roland Barthes' ideas about photographic images and the whole idea of the "myth" of the truth that they convey or are expected to convey. Very interesting to think that the photographer's bias helps shape how the photo is taken, the lighting or setting, overall mood, etc. and can be used to influence how an audience will view and understand it. The possibility that the physical camera itself can have a bias of it's own, with regard to the settings and how it captures the image, were things that had never been brought to my attention when looking at a photo or taking a picture myself. Fun stuff indeed!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)