Remix & Tragedy of the Commons

I'm going to focus more on the remix culture that Lessig talks about. Also going to bring up the Tragedy of the Commons. Also have this little video from Howard Rheingold that I watched right before I wrote this.



From Manovich:

In the last few years people started to apply the term “remix” to other media: visual productions, software, literary texts. With electronic music and software serving as the two key reservoirs of new metaphors for the rest of culture today, this expansion of the term is inevitable; one can only wonder why it did no happen earlier. Yet we are left with an interesting paradox: while in the realm of commercial music remixing is officially accepted7, in other cultural areas it is seen as violating the copyright and therefore as stealing. So while filmmakers, visual artists, photographers, architects and Web designers routinely remix already existing works, this is not openly admitted, and no proper terms equivalent to remixing in music exist to describe these practices. [Emphasis mine.]

What I don't get is why is it stealing. The remix culture does not, as far as the "Tragedy of the Commons" is concerned, take away from the larger group. There is nothing deducted by remixing, either physical (the method is digital), or idea-wise; the idea still exists, right?

I know I've been a little outspoken of my support of fan-fiction, but it's along those lines that I am following here: I, nor any reasonable human being, would feel that remixing dilutes the value of the original. I, and other reasonable human beings, am able to differentiate between original composition and off-shoots. In written fiction, we have these heavy things called books that generally are the source material. The offshoots, well, those are badly written ones that are found on Usenet.

The goal is not to steal the books, but the goal is to show that other ideas can spring from them.

Those who use these technologies to violate the copyrights of others are doing something that is both wrong and illegal but also extraordinarily destructive to the potential of this technology because it inspires insanity on the other side.

That is from Lessig's talk, starting about 24:18

Again, what I am not looking at here is the massive and industrial piracy of, say, for example, China (Harry Potter has a few more sequels there), or sale-for-profit of direct copies. What I am looking at here is the ability of people to take things that inspire them and create new things from them.

Unfortunately, I couldn't find a video of Lessig's CCCC talk (his presentation style is interesting), but here is the "Endless Love" video Lessig showed:



Regarding authorship: Quoth Lev Manovich:

Of course, collaborative authorship is not unique to new media: think of medieval cathedrals, traditional painting studios which consisted from a master and assistants, music orchestras, or contemporary film productions which, like medieval cathedrals, involve thousands of people collaborating over a substantial period of time. In fact, in we think about this historically, we will see collaborative authorship represents a norm rather than exception.

Acknowledged, then. These are art forms which require larger groups; but they all require leadership.


And, because I like remixing and parody:

Original, about Obama:



Parody, about McCain: