Have you ever watched an illegal movie online? Or downloaded Illegal music? In this day in age, almost 70 percent of people can say they have illegally downloaded some sort of media. In some cases, people have been notified by copyright, and been sued for the misuse of the material. For example, in the documentary RIP Remix The Movie, we learn about Girl Talk who is a famous artist that uses his computer to mash up other artists songs to create a whole new song. Are his sample-based songs that people all over the world enjoy illegal? Or do the embrace the collaboration and personal creativeness? The biggest question is do they in fact violate copyright? Through this movie we learn all about copyright and its legal aspects. There are two types of people categorized in this movie and it’s the “copy right” people and “copy left” people. “Copy Right” people believe that support copyright laws. “Copy Left” supports the laws, but is less harsh in sharing and charging. “Under copy left, the author claims a copyright on the work and makes a statement in the form of a license that other people have the right to use, modify, and share the work so long as their modified versions are put under that same license and that anyone receiving a copy of the work — whether modified or not — must also be given these same rights. If someone does not follow the terms set by the copyright holder it becomes copyright infringement, which is subject to the full penalties of the legal system.”[1] Through these copyright laws, we learn about fair use. Fair use is another main point made in this documentary. Bitlaw states “The doctrine of fair use developed over the years as courts tried to balance the rights of copyright owners with society's interest in allowing copying in certain, limited circumstances. This doctrine has at its core a fundamental belief that not all copying should be banned, particularly in socially important endeavors such as criticism, news reporting, teaching, and research.”[2] Another big argument that people make about copyright is where the money from the fines really goes. People go to court and lose large sums of money due to this issue, for example the Capital V. Thomas case. “…The defendant, Jammie Thomas-Rasset, was initially required to pay $9,250 for each of the 24 songs that she shared on the file-sharing program Kazaa. However, there was an error in the original trial, and the second trial ended with Thomas-Rasset having to pay $80,000 for each of the 24 songs she infringed upon, totaling $1.9 million.”[3] These 1.9 million dollars in this case did not even go to the artists that had their music shared. So what is copyright protecting if its not the artists work? Its hard to find information on where lawsuit money goes, but when you buy an artists CD, only 13 percent of what you spent actually goes to the artists hard work. [4] Copyright is a huge issue today due to the growth in technology, but is it a system being taken to far?
[1] What is Copy Left? http://jxself.org/what-is-copyleft.shtml (April 15th 2015) [2] BITLAW http://www.bitlaw.com/copyright/fair_use.html (April 15th 2015) [3] New Media Rights http://www.newmediarights.org/business_models/artist/what_legal_consequences_can_there_be_illegally_downloading_movies_or_music (April 15th 2015) [4] BBC News http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-23840744 (April 15th 2015) Judith Miller was a past journalist for the New York Times Washington Bureau. She ended up in a career ending controversy after she revealed faulty information on Iraq’s WMD, Weapons of Mass Destruction. She did this before and after the invasion in 2003 was determined false information, causing troops to go to Baghdad and investigate a program that was never there.[1] Miller was then involved in the Plame Affair, where the status of Valerie Plame became more greatly known. When Miller was asked to name her sources in the CIA leak, she refused. When refusing to release where her information came from, she became even more known as an unreliable journalist. After her second scandal, she retired in 2005. After all the controversies she caused in the past, a common question is, where is she now? On April 4th 2015, an article was posted on her recent defense on Iraq writings. She stated that Hans Blix bears more responsibility for the Iraq war than she does. Everything she stated as a defense was backed up in this article with sources from Hans Blix. Quoted in this article are her words in her book that will be released on Tuesday, April 7th 2015. [2] Miller tries to blame Blix for all her faults. For example, the inspections taking place in Iraq. Miller claims that Blix was against war, but all of Blix’s information on the matter was correct. The bombing that occurred after was not his fault. The article states “Blix made clear that the process required more time. He wasn't going to get more time, however. The bombing started less than a week later. It wasn't his idea. It wasn't his fault.”[3] Since Miller has left the New York Times, she is currently a member of The Council of Foreign relations, and still is convinced that her myths caused did not cause the invasion of Baghdad to occur. She states “But the “stubborn myths” that remain about the Iraq war, she concludes, are not the ones that lured the US to invade. They are the ones that continue to hang over her reputation.”[4]
[1] The Guardian, http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/apr/03/judith-miller-essay-wmd-saddam-hussein-iraq-war, (April 7th 2015) [2] Crooks and Liars, http://crooksandliars.com/2015/04/judy-miller-hans-blix-bears-more, (April 6th 2015) [3] Crooks and Liars, http://crooksandliars.com/2015/04/judy-miller-hans-blix-bears-more, (April 6th 2015) [4] The Guardian, http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/apr/03/judith-miller-essay-wmd-saddam-hussein-iraq-war, (April 7th 2015) |
Haily ReatherfordMy opinions and reviews Archives
April 2015
Categories |