PDA

View Full Version : re: original content


wellREDman
20th November 2002, 02:54 PM
not sure this really belongs in "legal issues" but there isnt a "moral issues" section and x said he wanted all the replies to the original content thread in here so here goes...

first a disclaimer ...

all views stated in this post are solely (although not entirely original <nods to proudhon et al>) the views of the individual entity known as wellREDman and in no way include or reflect on vjcentral, vjforums, APTvisuals, GreenPeace or any other organisation wellREDman belongs to or is asscociated with...

the following is an updated post from eyecandy on 16/12/01 on this issue

I lurked a while on this issue before inputing my two groats worth because I am a confirmed video bandit and am therefore expecting a lot of flack for my views.
as an anarchist I reject all laws pertaining to copywright and choose to follow my own moral feelings in each particular case:
broadly,whilst I feel free to use anything I find in broadcast media,
I will not knowingly play out the work of another visual(performance) artist without their express consent
I will not play out the work of any performance artist without namechecking them at the end in the credits I always end with.
I will only use Hollywood movies in circumstances that are appropriate ie I will only play my 2001 set if the DJ plays a tune with Holst samples.
I will always inform curious punters where the documentary samples I use come from.

Now that I have alienated half of the group I would like to share a few thoughts I have on the subject...
1.Once an artistic endeavour has been released into the public domain it becomes what a sociobiologist calls a meme, which is kinda like a unit of cultural evolution. a meme can be many things,words, songs,inventions,techniques,images, patterns catchphrases and even swear words.a few good examples are
crop rotation,
That photo of Che Guevara
drinking boiled(sterilised?) water with flavourings in
like a gene, the stongest, most useful and most dominant fill their niche very quickly and like a gene get passed from generation to generation being mutated as it goes. And most importantly, the main factor in their success is their suitability for their environment, which means there is little one can do to control it's spread if it is successful or prolong it's existence if weak.
This translates to VJ's and content producers(and indeed all artist) as "IF YOU DO GOOD WORK IT WILL SPREAD", and theres nothing you can do about it.... There will always be newbie performers groping towards artistic self sufficiency who will get a break before they have enough equipment/material to fill a whole nights visuals at a free party(which is what i would guess is most of our first VJ experiences)
2.Imitation really is the sincerest form of flattery,even the aforementioned newbie will only play stuff that he likes or thinks the crowd will like.
3.(to borrow a meme from the capitalists) All publicity is good publicity
4.the use of existing memes as archetypes, stereotypes and cliches is an important part of communication, as it is tapping into a pre-existing lexicon of association and has always been an integral part of artistic expression.For example the reaction to an image of a gorilla will have different instinctual reactions depending on whether it is the iconic version of King Kong, Diane Fossie's Troop or Jamie Hewletts Cartoon and as an artist from the same meme pool(culture) as my audience I can be reasonably sure of broadly predicting those reactions based on my own and therefore work with them as a deeper mode of communication.
5. all artists to justify the title must first follow their muse rather than the laws of the local money men. It is generally the outsiders who kick against the traces who history comes to regard as great. if all artists chose to stay within their local legal boundraries we would have no bowie/nirvana/Sex Pistols to use some examples from my heritage , and im sure anyone who paid more attention than me in art history class can fill in equivalents from the art world. There is a fundamental hypocrisy in lauding the writer in a third world country who is imprisoned for following his creative urges yet deploring a media pirate in the west for doing essentially the same thing.

the whole copyright/sampling/mp3 issue is ultimately futile as information, once provided with the means to replicate itself will do so, and any attempts to control this thru legislation will have as much chance of prevailing as a law to prevent you from whistling the tune you heard on the radio. And ultimately i think this is a good thing for art because although a few creatives may starve in the transition period hopefully it will result in the ca$h incentive being removed from the creative feilds leaving just those who create from the heart, and those who just wanna make a buck will look elsewhere to fulfil their mammon lust.

all laws are local and arbitrary and therefore in a global,moral sense meaningless. culture cannot advance until everyone grows up and stops following the dictates of their local men in blue uniforms and decides to volountarily choose their own set of moral guidelines to live by

Just my two arbitrary units of exchange worth

P.s. a word of warning to other video bandits, try and be as aware of the context of your sources as possible, I just had a nasty experience with what I thought was a nice colorised old B&W segment of children playing, only to find out it was Gypsy kids in a Nazi sterilisation camp...

P.P.S. the example stated on eyecandy which initially triggered this manifesto was whether a Tribe Called Quest should owe money to Lou Reed for the sampled bassline on "can i kick it?" this is a really good example of how fucked up the system is because although those two are the contenders for the dosh, there was no chance of any of it ever going to Herbie Flowers, yet he was the session bass player who actually came up with the idea of the simultaneous ascending and descending basslines in the same key.

InsideUsAll
20th November 2002, 03:13 PM
tumbleweed...

don't think any ones gonna argue with that one.

nice one red, you have managed to articulate my feelings on this subject in a way I would probably have never been able to do.

Primebase3
20th November 2002, 03:44 PM
a wise man for from china had blossoming flowers in his garden the scent was once told could emulate the heavens. the neighbouring man from the wise loved the smell so much he decided to steal some seeds from the flowers to grow his own.

however as the man kept trying and trying the smell came closer to rotten eggs then his favourite smell. after many years the man gave up.

Defeated as he was he went to the wise man end explained his deed. The wise men smiled and gave the seeds.. .try again he says. the man goes home confused but tries again He woke up a few months later from the smell of the heaven. Excited he went to the wise man and thanked him immensly. but why he asked didn't it work? The wise man looked at him and said. The sweat of the fear and evil of your stealing hand gave the smell to the seeds you stole. rather then the joy and excitement sweat that you had when I gave it to you.



peace.

wellREDman
20th November 2002, 04:02 PM
prime you are a wise man/crew i regret not having had time to chew the fat and shoot the wind with you when we shared our rig with you at avit

sleepytom
20th November 2002, 04:25 PM
wise words primebase

please remember that all of Hollywood and most broadcast media's ideas and concepts for programing have been stolen from people that will never see the benefits - thus all of Hollywood and TV stinks of shit

sampling is now an accepted aesthetic - we do not need to revert the world back to the early eightys - it is acceptable to use "stolen" samples - sometimes you get caught and have to pay the "owner" but really there should be no argument as to wether sampling can be a creative and useful technique - this was answered years ago (in the audio world) by steinski, coldcut marrs etc etc and has been equally answered in the video world by stienski, coldcut , EBN etc etc (if ebn can go on a world tour with U2 and play a show that is almost entirely "stolen" then nobody here has anything to worry about)

really we come back round once again to skill and judgment - i can point to shows put on by people using almost entirely sampled material that are far more creative and better than shows made out of home shot footage - that doesn't mean that someone who plays an hour of tron is creative but it equally doesn't make someone who shoots all there own footage better or more creative than a sample user (much in the same way that owning a fast computer or a big barco doesn't make you a good vj - where you get your materiel has very little to do with how "good" you are)

once again i should state that the views presented in this and all my other posts are solely the views of me, sleepytom and are in no way connected with vjcentral, vjforums, headpspace, brightonART, vjs.net or any of there friends, relatives, pets or associates nor do they represent the view of any other group, organisation or individual that i'm am or ever have been associated with.

Primebase3
20th November 2002, 05:46 PM
I totally agree with the sampling part. but if you open up an audio album sleeve it says with 9 out of ten: "courtesy of....(fill in jazz/funk/whatever)" I love sampling! especially from a wise man that "gave" it to me. It doesn't matter however if you stole it from a wise man or an evil samurai : if it's not the fear and evil then it will be just the fear.

can you show your "flowers" and share it with the world as a vj intented to without looking behind your back all the time?

I admit : I started out grabbing any nice visual I could grab but later on I felt more at ease because with the knowledge I built I could move on and evolve. if I sample now (audio/video) I also know that if the orginal maker doesn't what it I won't do it and move on...it's not worth the "smell"


PS: red indeed I also wished to discuss more with vj's on Avit maybe next time? your pretty wise yourself man..thanks for the props.


peace..gonna watch soprano's again and render some. l8ter

hyperdimensional
20th November 2002, 06:25 PM
:nod:

At last a properly structured arguement. I was getting fed up with the banter that was happening in the other post.

thanks red, prime et al.

BrainStove
21st November 2002, 05:55 AM
How many/much truths together...

Don?t miss the next episode of the "The most truths fullfilled thread around"

P.S. God, how crappy my english could be... :p

Mattbot
21st November 2002, 08:17 AM
I think the context of the event dictates the ratio of original content to found content for me. When VJing for a club/party event, the majority of my loops are not my own. And no, I don't purchase clearence rights. Unless it's a live PA (or a raving egomanic :rolleyes: ) the DJ isn't playing all original content either. I don't feel like it's my job in that case and I don't think I've ever run across a promoter who has expected me to either. Everything is mixed and not in it's orginal form. (Otherwise, I could be replaced with a VCR.) I never claim sole authorship and I don't think I'm too interested at going 100% original when I'm really just glorifed wallpaper at a party. Considering that 100% of my paid gigs have been underground events in venues without the proper licenses, often in gross violation of the fire code, and never paying the RIAA a cent, it never occurred to me that my uncleared clips might be damaging the reputation of VJing at large. I apologize.

I do have some shame. I'm in San Francisco so I'd feel a bit awkward using clips by C-trl or Scott Pageno or other locals but otherwise you're fair game. Hey, at least I think your clips are cool. It's for fun, not high art and riches. You might not think so but believe me, I'm not depreiving you of your dime. I am filmmaker too and if anyone ever played loops from something I shot, I'd be ecstatic. Even if you did it out of spite after reading this. ;)

If asked to accompany a musician in a non-party setting as background eye candy, I feel like the majority of the content must be mine. The performers are doing their own thing so I should probably follow suit. The audience's expectations for mostly original content on the performer part seems to spill over to the VJ as well. Still the focus isn't on me so no 100% original content yet. Let's say at least 75ish%?

For a gallery showing of my work or being co-billed with another performer (musician, dancer, another VJ, etc) everything is going to be mine unless I'm commenting specifically about the clip or clips I use. If people came to see my work/collaboration they will assume whatever they see is what I did. I feel like I have a responsibility to present only my own creations. I can't imagine why I wouldn't want to anyway.

If I create a tape or DVD for commerial distrubution everything on it is mine or I have permission to use it. Giving a demo tape of non-original stuff to a party promoter to show them what they are getting doesn't even sound like a good idea. (But more for my own selfish reasons; they might just book their VCR ;) )

I have no illusions about the legality of using stuff I didn't create. Unless you're using solely public domain video or you are VJ Dr.Education! remixing Conjuction Juction for a bunch elementary school kids you can throw the fair use exception out the window. Even these rights are currently threatened in the US. The law clearly states that these are criminal actions. (FBI Warning! Blah, blah, blah...) But I strongly suspect the immediate thrill of recontextualizing media and taking control of your own television is what attracted the majority of the people on this forum to VJing rather than solely traditional film or video making. Using the existing media language to say something NOW and FAST. This sort of power (affordable computing plus access to pervasive digital distribution networks) didn't exist before and the structure of business and society didn't do a very good job anticipating it. Distribution and contextual integrity have become so fluid that content holders can't contain or control it. Does this make it right? Unless you can unring the bell, the point may be moot. Personally, I'm excited.

Mattbot
http://mattbot.morpheus.net

P.S. This was originally written for the other post; I feel like I'm somewhat preaching choir on this newer chilled out thread. But I spent the time writing it, so here it is. Like I said it's hard to control context in the wild...

Primebase3
27th November 2002, 08:14 AM
it's a very powerful sweat that seems to penetrate through everyything..... (add chinese mysticism sound) :p

MoRpH
29th November 2002, 03:29 AM
SO nice to see a good well thought out thread on this topic :)