Technical Writing at Penn State: Comments

Comment on "Convoluted Copyright and Creative Commons (CC&CC)"

Thu, 01 Mar 2012 15:54:59 -0500

Pertaining to the "Music in Political Campaigns 101" video, I think the copyright law makes sense. If I were in a band or a musical artist, I think it would be pretty cool that presidential candidates are playing my songs at their campaigns. However, I completely understand why artists would not like this. Politics is a very competitive game where people have strong loyalties to a party, and wars are often fought over political ideas. If a large population of people were entirely anti- a certain party and hated everyting about it, and then my song became associated with that party, I would not like it one bit. Artists don't want their music strongly associated with things people don't like because it could drastically hurt their reputation or their ability to profit from their work.

- CHRISTOPHER DANIEL BACHMAN

Comment on "Convoluted Copyright and Creative Commons (CC&CC)"

Thu, 01 Mar 2012 15:51:01 -0500

This issue is one of those difficult-to-wrap-your-head-around, constantly evolving ones that developed nations have been struggling with for ages. Times change, technology changes, culture changes, outlooks change... Trying to find a concrete, inflexible way to regulate the use of intellectual property is futile. I'm not saying that there should be no regulation whatsoever, but rather that regulations should be in a constant flux according to the current setting in which they are needed. New methods of distribution and contribution, of recreating and sharing, need to be found that benefit both the original creators of the property as well as those who make the most use of it. Indeed, the creators would not, or maybe should not, create if they do not want to share their ideas with the world. At the same time, those who receive their ideas should have the respect and understanding of the effort put into the development of those ideas and treat the creator accordingly.

- Caylie Hake

Comment on "Convoluted Copyright and Creative Commons (CC&CC)"

Thu, 01 Mar 2012 15:50:42 -0500

I'm realizing now just how complicated copyright law truly is. Most days I think we tend to take what is available (on the internet, for example) for granted.
During the NPR piece, they talked about music and copyright law. I realized when companies use songs in commercials that they must have to get permission and/or pay some royalties to the owner (artist/record company). However, I didn't know that playing music at public events (such as political rallies) could infringe upon copyright laws as well! There are also several different ways that can get you sued which I found interesting. Where you play can matter as much as what you play, and sometimes even if you don't need permission you can still get sued for brand erosion.

- STEPHANIE ANNE NITOPI

Comment on "Convoluted Copyright and Creative Commons (CC&CC)"

Thu, 01 Mar 2012 15:49:48 -0500

Concerning the discussions about political campaigns using musicians copyrighted songs without permission, the law does seem to make sense. As these campaigns are large enough to almost be their own concert stricter rules should apply. The system works well as even when candidates aren’t legally required to stop playing a certain song, they do so anyway because they do not want to anger or disrespect the artist and their fans.

Lessig makes many valid points are appropriate connections to our past such as common sense prevailing in airplanes considered trespassing. This debate requires intellectual arguments from both perspectives so that a reasonable compromise can be made. Intellectual property issues are just too complicated to have a perfect, simple solution.

- DANIEL ADAM ROSENBAUM

Comment on "Convoluted Copyright and Creative Commons (CC&CC)"

Thu, 01 Mar 2012 15:49:08 -0500

1. The npr piece highlighted an interesting overlap of copyright law and politics. Because of that, I do not think it is the best example to use to assess the importance of copyright. It highlighted issues of copyright that I was never aware of. For example, I would've never thought that playing a song I BOUGHT out loud for other people to hear would be illegal. In this case, it probably had to do with the artists opinion of the politician. That or the musicians might have noticed a way to make a bit more money.
2. Lauren Lessig's talk brought up a lot of interesting parallels between history and the current state of social technology. I found the 'trespassing airplanes' analogy to be quite relevant to people making derivative works. Also, he takes a balanced opinion on the piracy debate. He acknowledges that both sides have their merits but that 'each extreme begets the other'; neither side is the winning side. It would be interesting to see if has voiced his opinion on the recent SOPA debate last month. I'll be sure to search for any of his more recent articles/talks.

- KHALIL B RAMADI

Comment on "Convoluted Copyright and Creative Commons (CC&CC)"

Thu, 01 Mar 2012 15:48:54 -0500

Both segments were very interesting, and I especially enjoyed the second one. I have read quite a bit about today's copyright issues online, and the speaker put together one of the most complete, fair, and convincing arguments I have seen. He initiated his talk by orienting the audience to the issues by using historical examples, and followed by eventually leading back to those same example. In his arguments, he also stayed true to fairness by presenting cases for both sides of the argument, and gave his final, concise, practical solution - one that I wholly agree with. Although the issue is a difficult and complicated one, the speaker captured the essence of the subject elegantly.

- NICHOLAS SCOTT TRESER

Comment on "Convoluted Copyright and Creative Commons (CC&CC)"

Thu, 01 Mar 2012 15:48:25 -0500

I really like the two examples used today in class. The first audio sample about political campaigns and song use made me see how copyright or trademark laws should be used. If my song was being used by someone I did not support, I would hope that there would be a way to stop them from using it. The second source from the TED talk provided a different side of this copyright situation. I really loved how he gave insight that our generation is full of creativity but that there needs to be more clear balance of how to display it.

- PAIGE ELIZABETH STANLEY

Comment on "Convoluted Copyright and Creative Commons (CC&CC)"

Thu, 01 Mar 2012 15:48:07 -0500

I think the biggest issue I have with copyright and trademarking for that matter is the intent of using copyrighted material. I completely understand where producers have an issue when their material is taken for the purposes of making money, because it is something they created and are entitled to some of the profit. However, as is the case for many online videos and music, the use of copyrighted material is used as artistic expression, not for the purposes of making money. It seems a little paradoxical that someone can produce content, release it to the world where everyone has access to it, but then should someone use it in a manner that they do not like, attempt to take their work back. I think it runs contrary to our culture, our reality, and our society.

- ALEXANDER EVAN SCHREFFLER

Comment on "Convoluted Copyright and Creative Commons (CC&CC)"

Thu, 01 Mar 2012 15:47:24 -0500

The reality is that our culture remains fascinated by the internet, movies, music, and all other types of digital media. Just as there is a "black market" for weapons and other justifiably illegal things, there will always be a market for music, movies, and other digital content on the internet. What is the worst that will happen if music is downloaded for free?--that money lost can easily be regained through live performances. I think it is ridiculous that these copyright laws exist and I fully agree with Lessig's ideas.

- DEVIN RICHARD O'CONNOR

Comment on "Convoluted Copyright and Creative Commons (CC&CC)"

Thu, 01 Mar 2012 15:46:35 -0500

I was interested to find out about the "blanket" licenses that venue can have. I didn't know that a venue can get such a license so that everyone who plays a song their will be protected. I also think that the rules about copyright are a little vague. What if I have 30 friends over and we are playing music. Is that considered illegal because I have so many people over?

- TYLOR SCOTT DIPPEL

Comment on "Convoluted Copyright and Creative Commons (CC&CC)"

Thu, 01 Mar 2012 15:46:30 -0500

The NPR's Morning Edition of music in political campaigns had some interesting points that a venue where you play music can matter just as much as what music is played. I didn't know anything about blanket licenses before and it is an interesting concept. It makes me wonder if stores that play music have to have a blanket license?

The TED talk by Larry Lessig presented a a perspective that I agree with. Thinking about how my generation, I definitely think it is the same as the Prohibition Era that instead of alcohol it's downloading movies and music for free. I feel as long as it is available to do so people will continue to do it. Many people enjoy the thrill of risk. They want to take risk and feel that exhilaration of having that chance to be caught. I definitely agree with the idea that we are a new generation and live with technology together. We should be able to use technology to our full advantage.

- CHRISTOPHER P PENCILLE

Comment on "Convoluted Copyright and Creative Commons (CC&CC)"

Thu, 01 Mar 2012 15:45:39 -0500

i find that the law should be enforced only on a level if the music offends someone such as the author without written consent. thus there should be the purpose of an individual asking for permission... but royalties shouldn't be paid.

- DEREK ALLEN FEHNEL

Comment on "Convoluted Copyright and Creative Commons (CC&CC)"

Thu, 01 Mar 2012 15:45:21 -0500

the second video brings forth a recall in history of rebellions. The video talks about how people today are continuing to live life "against the law." For instance the speaker mentioned how people would pirate music off the internet and spread it without any money exchange. i also liked how he stated that usage of music and re-creating pieces of work has been targeted as illegal when, in my opinion atleast, it isnt as the re-creation takes invention on the user themselves: not from the people that did the original creations.

- Christopher Yue

Comment on "Convoluted Copyright and Creative Commons (CC&CC)"

Thu, 01 Mar 2012 15:45:11 -0500

The most interesting point for me in these two videos was that where and why something happens is more important than what the thing is. Even is something is illegal, people's brands and name are more important that using a simple song or video. The TED talk was also very insightful into what we are taking away from society with all of these laws. Common sense is a very outdated and unused aspect of our daily lives, and many instances from the copyright debate show that.

- SPENCER RAY KNOLL

Comment on "Convoluted Copyright and Creative Commons (CC&CC)"

Thu, 01 Mar 2012 15:43:45 -0500

1. It seems a bit over the top to be playing songs like “Eye of the Tiger” at a political rally, so I can see why bands would not support this practice. However, that song can be found on YouTube and a number of different websites fairly easily. I believe that the suing over song use is more a political stance than copyright infringement. The section on branding basically discusses my last point. If the artist supported the candidate, using the song would not be an issue.
2. At first with the invention of the phone and trespass over the air I disagreed with the speaker. He seemed to say that we are losing some culture forever and it is not good for us. But, that is simply evolution. We lost some skills and gained others throughout history. For example, we are not capable of being hunters and gathers anymore. We don’t have the skills or means to do it, but we developed agriculture and civilization to counter this.
However, his final point of the internet reawaking the creativity of culture was well presented. I think that the internet is a great source of information and allows us to create basically anything. But, like any new revolutionizing idea or technology, regulation is difficult. There is simply too much information to regulate and keep track of all this information but allowing everything available for free is not acceptable. I don’t think there is a correct way to regulate copyright laws in the information age. Every case is different and there is no real way to find a correct answer.

- Steven Michael Eckert

Comment on "Convoluted Copyright and Creative Commons (CC&CC)"

Thu, 01 Mar 2012 14:20:11 -0500

1. Current laws are complicated. In listening to this radio broadcast, we were exposed to a few examples of infringements on copyright laws, but there are many more details than were presented. I personally think the TED talk gave great insight into the current problems with these laws. Many are outdated and need changed.

2. I agree strongly with the perspective this TED talk presented. I had never thought about copyright laws from this perspective before this speech, but his historical examples of laws becoming outdated made a lot of sense and were well related to today's issues. Some points in his argument were missing though. An example of this is his lack of discussion on record labels and illegally hosting music via torrent sites and other free download sites. If all music becomes free for private use, artists will likely lose massive profits. This is one point his argument needs to address a bit more closely.

- Trevor Sherts

Comment on "Convoluted Copyright and Creative Commons (CC&CC)"

Thu, 01 Mar 2012 14:18:41 -0500

I thought it was very interesting to learn about the three rules of copyright. The most intersting one was that where you play a song can matter as much as what you play. I never knew about the idea of blanket license and the fact that you have to ask permission of from the artist if they venue you play the song at does not have a license. I think the TED video described best the fact that today's culture is copyrighting for the love of what they do and not for the money. In the end it is ultimately the artist's decision.

- GEORGE MICHAEL SAAD

Comment on "Convoluted Copyright and Creative Commons (CC&CC)"

Thu, 01 Mar 2012 14:18:07 -0500

The whole issue of the rights to using something made me think of this story:
http://money.cnn.com/2011/12/22/technology/louis_ck_million/index.htm
This is about Louis CK and how he sold copies of his comedy sketch online for 5 dollars. He asked people nicely to not steal his material, but that whoever purchased it owns it. Instead of putting it on itunes or selling it to comedy central, he tried this
"experiment" and ended up making $1 million in 10 days.

- ALEXANDER JAMES ORTEGA

Comment on "Convoluted Copyright and Creative Commons (CC&CC)"

Thu, 01 Mar 2012 14:17:11 -0500

The topics we discussed in class about common copyright infringements that we all are guilty of got me thinking. For example, my dance team uses a mix of old and new music by Indian and American artists, remixes the songs, performs the pieces for fairly large audiences, and posts the videos on youtube. Every step along the way is done without attribution or permission, and could fall under copyright law. However, it would be silly to attribute every backbeat in a remix,and I agree with the TED speaker, and believe that the laws are a little outmoded for modern art and society.

- KINNARI RAJESH PATEL

Comment on "Convoluted Copyright and Creative Commons (CC&CC)"

Thu, 01 Mar 2012 14:17:02 -0500

"Can't kill, only criminalize. Can't stop, only drive underground. Can't make passive, only "pirates"." The TED Talk video says that the new generation of kids live life, knowing that they live it against the law...and I completely agree. All of these laws try to protect music, movies, and videos. However, through the internet, basically every type of media can be downloaded...for free.

I agree that remixing is not piracy. It's taking and recreating other people’s contents to say something differently and has essentially become tools of creativity have become tools of speech. But what I'm trying to say is it doesn't matter. The new generation of kids don't care if they're remixing or pirates. They're gonna do what they want and download what they want, no matter what the law states.

- RAMUEL GRANADOS HOLGADO