Week 5: Forum Questions
Topic 1:
What I found most interesting was how long and often material/songs have been used in the making of other songs. Society using other material for being able to make their own ideas of creativity has been going on for years, it is not a modern thing happening. One thing they mentioned was how Led Zeppelin and Muddy Waters used the same lyrics, just with a different style and beat (14:25). I personally think it was great because it allowed creativity from different talented artists and creators to be able to change up and connect with different people in society in a new way. Freedom of expression is meant to allow people to think outside the box to connect with people in society to change the world for the better. If copyright prohibits creative people taking what was a good idea in the past and changing to connect with more people to change the world, then society is stuck.
Examples I can relate into my own life is when I use to listen to Weird Al Yankovic. Weird Al is a singer who take songs and turns them around into his own style to make them funny. Such songs are changing "Gangsters Paradise" to "Amish Paradise", "Riding Dirty" to "White and Nerdy", and "Complicated" to "Constipated". These are just very few of his songs but they are songs that have beats and tunes from the original song and he just changed up the lyrics and video to his own creativity and style. I think him doing that brought a lot of laughter to kids who would watch his videos.
I don't really have any questions on copyright or limit of creativity from the documentary.
An incident I can think of a person going to far in exercising their freedom of expression is Dan O'Neil at 35:50 in the documentary. Him just continuing pushing to draw Mickey Mouse without any consequences from Disney. However, that was not the case and Disney sued and eventually took Dan O'Neil to the court. Dan should have just given up and accepted the fact that Disney wasn't going to budge on the fact that anyone could use Mickey without their permission. I think it is silly that Disney and other companies have such dramatic copyrights on their material that it prohibits people from being able to use past material to make it better or different for their own purposes to connect with people.
Topic 2:
The actions that Wikileaks have performed I see as very bold, different, and also a good thing. They are trying to give people information of the government that the government wants to hide. The government wants to hide and cover up actions that didn't work out so well or are questionable and because of that, there really isn't much to hold them accountable for what they do. If however though, they know that their questionable actions and information can be released to the public, they are held to much more of a higher standard of accountability for what they do. It is dangerous however for the founder of Wikileaks because of what he shares with the public puts a target on his back. I do appreciate the fact that they, the people who work for Wikileaks, do share information with the public even though it is bringing some unwanted attention and some risk to themselves.
I do not believe that every single person who is involved with the government is corrupt and doing whatever they can to hide every single mistake they make. I just feel like it is just more common to have people like that in the government, instead of having politicians own up to what they did wrong and try and fix it/accept the consequences. I, probably along with everyone else, truly do appreciate and respect those who just flat out apologize to the public for their mistake. It makes them seem more human and even trustworthy rather than a person who always has something to hide.
One such example of a time the government apologized for wrongdoing is is when President Obama apologized to the Afghan President Hamid Karzai. President Obama tried to a defuse a situation in Afghanistan after NATO soldier burned Korans which prompted riots and endangered U.S. troops. (Challeen, The Mic). President Obama wasn't a perfect president and was one in which still made mistakes throughout his presidency even after this incident. I respect the fact they he owned up to what happened even though he may have still gotten much more hate from those who did not have the same point of view.
What I found most interesting was how long and often material/songs have been used in the making of other songs. Society using other material for being able to make their own ideas of creativity has been going on for years, it is not a modern thing happening. One thing they mentioned was how Led Zeppelin and Muddy Waters used the same lyrics, just with a different style and beat (14:25). I personally think it was great because it allowed creativity from different talented artists and creators to be able to change up and connect with different people in society in a new way. Freedom of expression is meant to allow people to think outside the box to connect with people in society to change the world for the better. If copyright prohibits creative people taking what was a good idea in the past and changing to connect with more people to change the world, then society is stuck.
Examples I can relate into my own life is when I use to listen to Weird Al Yankovic. Weird Al is a singer who take songs and turns them around into his own style to make them funny. Such songs are changing "Gangsters Paradise" to "Amish Paradise", "Riding Dirty" to "White and Nerdy", and "Complicated" to "Constipated". These are just very few of his songs but they are songs that have beats and tunes from the original song and he just changed up the lyrics and video to his own creativity and style. I think him doing that brought a lot of laughter to kids who would watch his videos.
I don't really have any questions on copyright or limit of creativity from the documentary.
An incident I can think of a person going to far in exercising their freedom of expression is Dan O'Neil at 35:50 in the documentary. Him just continuing pushing to draw Mickey Mouse without any consequences from Disney. However, that was not the case and Disney sued and eventually took Dan O'Neil to the court. Dan should have just given up and accepted the fact that Disney wasn't going to budge on the fact that anyone could use Mickey without their permission. I think it is silly that Disney and other companies have such dramatic copyrights on their material that it prohibits people from being able to use past material to make it better or different for their own purposes to connect with people.
Topic 2:
The actions that Wikileaks have performed I see as very bold, different, and also a good thing. They are trying to give people information of the government that the government wants to hide. The government wants to hide and cover up actions that didn't work out so well or are questionable and because of that, there really isn't much to hold them accountable for what they do. If however though, they know that their questionable actions and information can be released to the public, they are held to much more of a higher standard of accountability for what they do. It is dangerous however for the founder of Wikileaks because of what he shares with the public puts a target on his back. I do appreciate the fact that they, the people who work for Wikileaks, do share information with the public even though it is bringing some unwanted attention and some risk to themselves.
I do not believe that every single person who is involved with the government is corrupt and doing whatever they can to hide every single mistake they make. I just feel like it is just more common to have people like that in the government, instead of having politicians own up to what they did wrong and try and fix it/accept the consequences. I, probably along with everyone else, truly do appreciate and respect those who just flat out apologize to the public for their mistake. It makes them seem more human and even trustworthy rather than a person who always has something to hide.
One such example of a time the government apologized for wrongdoing is is when President Obama apologized to the Afghan President Hamid Karzai. President Obama tried to a defuse a situation in Afghanistan after NATO soldier burned Korans which prompted riots and endangered U.S. troops. (Challeen, The Mic). President Obama wasn't a perfect president and was one in which still made mistakes throughout his presidency even after this incident. I respect the fact they he owned up to what happened even though he may have still gotten much more hate from those who did not have the same point of view.
Comments
Post a Comment