Focal Point - Criminalizing Creativity

Well, I skipped out on another week of editorializing, but that’s because of the kick-off of the summer season, which included Omni’s Summer Preview, as well as several anime conventions, one of which I attended. Thus, with how busy things were, Omni and I decided to not publish a Focal Point last week. However, that gave me time to stew on a particular debate that seems to be coming back into the spotlight, especially with the convention season heating up. Obviously, with such a complicated issue, an editorial written on it will be tremendously long. Thus, it was fortuitous that a recent news item allowed me to secede some of my ideas into THIS editorial. Stay tuned for next week’s article…it’s gonna be a doozy…


Yes, it’s another video you must watch before reading this article, but this one is only 20 minutes (instead of 30 minutes), and it’s NOT made by some pretentious British snob (who DID make some good points, despite sounding one-sided and arrogant) but rather a relatively famous law professor. PLUS, there’s a clip of an AMV in there. So, WATCH IT!

I personally have rarely visited Nico Nico Douga. Frankly, having incomprehensible Japanese comments flying across the screen while trying to watch a video sounds about as appealing to me as waiting in line inside a poorly ventilated hallway for an hour-delayed Masquerade Contest amidst a bunch of impatient anime fans who haven’t showered or brushed their teeth in two days at an anime convention (yes, I know you can turn the comments off, but still…) Hell, I wouldn’t even want English comments flying across the screen while trying to watch a video, which would be analogous to the same waiting-in-line scenario described above except now it’s a line for an AMV contest. Nevertheless, I have appreciated the many fruits of creativity harvested from Nico Nico Douga (usually filtered without the comments to YouTube). In particular, I enjoy watching the many MADs or AMVs that parody anime or showcase variations of anime openings.

Thus, I was very sad when a crackdown was announced

However, I wasn’t sad for the same reason many other people were upset: many FANS (and even some fans) were unhappy because they feel they have now lost a source of free entertainment. This is rather ridiculous, because YouTube is still around, and something as small as this will not stop the Japanese from making MADs (although it might stifle some of the motivation to do so, because the Japanese seem to be closet attention whores who want comments written all over their amateur-made videos).

No, I was sad, because this was definitely taking a step back in the progress of the internet being the next distribution platform for content, as well as a prolongation of the current digital battle between professional creators and amateur creator-users.



I’m sure you know of (and dislike) fights that drag on and on and on…

Hoping that you have completely watched Professor Larry Lessig’s 20-minute talk, I do not want to rehash what he so eloquently stated and argued, but I do feel I need to touch upon some points I believe he assumed people already knew or understood (since the majority of his audience were older adults while I feel the majority of Random Curiosity’s readership is of a younger persuasion).

The spirit of copyright is meant to protect creativity. If you have a creator who is creating something useful to society (be it in technology, entertainment, or whatever), then said creator needs to be rewarded in hopes that he or she will continue to create more beneficial things for society. On the flip side, if said creator’s works and rights are not protected, such that anyone could copy and sell them, said creator would at the very best not be motivated to make more creations and at the very worst not be able to make enough of a living to continue being creative. Either way, society suffers a loss in creativity, and thus, society institutes copyright laws to protect itself from such a loss. I think we can all agree that “wholesale copying and distributing,” as Professor Lessig put it, is stealing and criminal (even if it’s done for free, like people who upload bittorrents of anime DVD rips with all the extras, language tracks, etc.).

It follows, then, that if a creator does not want to have his or her works reproduced and manipulated or altered in a particular manner, viewers of said content should respect and abide by that. I’m now talking about remixing and recreating, with AMVs and doujin works being classic examples. It’s not too hard to imagine a manga artist being appalled at seeing the underage sibling characters he or she drew in a benign shoujo story having sex with each other or being raped (even if by tentacle monsters that do not really exist in their manga). Thus, it is perfectly within the rights of creator to ask people to stop or, as the saying go, cease and desist. After all, it is also the creator’s right to grant permission to users to alter their works, as well.

There are, of course, exceptions (is there anything in life without some exception?), including but not limited to parody, satire, critiques, and fair use. After all, the screen shots I capture and display here on this publicly-viewable website were done so without permission. However, I don’t want to turn this into a Law 101 lecture (I mean, what EXACTLY is entailed in fair use?), so I’ll just quickly justify what I do by saying 1) I am not making any money off of this, and 2) if the creator himself or herself asked me to take down the pictures I captured, I would.

ON THE SOAPBOX (even more so than normal)

By the way, I personally find the “free advertisement” justification faulty. Some people feel they can use works however way they want as long as they’re promoting the work. For example, some would say an AMV can generate interest and cause people to buy an anime series and/or a song they never heard of before. And while the effects of the work may be true, if a particular type of promotion is not agreeable to its creator, one cannot use this justification anymore. There are plenty of advertisements that had the best of intentions of promoting and helping to sell a product, but they ended up painting a bad picture of said product. Thus, if a particular band felt their song’s lyrics meant one thing and did not want the song associated with particular images (like blood and gore or even puppies and flowers), then they have every right to be upset that their work is being manipulated in that way, even if it DOES boost sales. I absolutely cannot stand FANS who feel that the creator owes THEM something for promoting their work by altering it in a way that the creator does not desire, which is exactly what FANS feel (no matter how much they might deny it) when they get all pouty when a creator asks for a fan work to be removed. Again, though, if the creator grants permission, is fine with it, or doesn’t care, then the issue is moot.

OFF THE SOAPBOX

The problem really comes when corporations and entities larger than the individual creator (such as associations, conglomerates, and cartels) hold or try to enforce the copyrights. Granted, some works can only be created by a group (like a studio for anime), but many times it’s the big publisher or record company that makes the big bucks and enforces a copyright to the ignorance and/or chagrin of the original creator. Keep in mind that such groups are a product of capitalism, which is fueled by an economic survival-of-the-fittest, so they will try to do everything in their power to be at the top of the business food chain and stay there – even if that means playing unfairly within the rules (and sometimes, outside of them). Ultimately, everything a corporate group does is driven by the goal of making more money, which isn’t necessarily evil or bad – it’s just how they operate. And unless you want to advocate socialism or communism (which work oh-so-well) then there’s really no use in criticizing businesses for pursuing money…



100 Whose Line Is It Anyway points to those who can identify the anime pictured above where corporations rule.

…until the pursuit of money comes at the cost of something greater, like the environment or creativity.

The fact is that various entities are pushing to extend how long a copyright lasts or how much a copyright encompasses in order to milk their cash cow of creativity as much as possible. Now to be honest, “milking” is perfectly understandable (and somewhat reasonable) – can you honestly say you would NOT do it if you were in their position? In the end, there’s really no reason to criticize the act of milking in and of itself, even if the product of milking was poor, because if said product was REALLY bad, then people wouldn’t buy it and it would soon cease to be made. That’s how capitalism works. Additionally, it should also not be hard to see how businesses will want to protect the source of the milk. If corporations allowed their intellectual properties to be manipulated and altered without any repercussions, they will suffer two financial “set backs” that could completely undermine them as a business:

1) The distribution of derived works provides the consumer an alternate means to enjoy the original, such that the original work does not need to be purchased. I know many people (including myself) who heard an awesome song in an AMV and just let the AMV play on repeat to hear the song over and over again, instead of buying the song itself on CD or mp3. Some people will even go so far as to rip the audio from the AMV to have their own mp3, which is pretty much tantamount to stealing. This is why the main opponents to AMVs are record companies as opposed to anime studios.

2) A derived work can now potentially and effectively act as competition in the industry. When specifically talking about entertainment, there is only so much time you can allot to it. With an original work and a recreated work both vying for your limited attention on the same level, it’s quite understandable for creators of the original work to not want to have to compete with works derived from them. As a personal example, I love Weird Al Yankovic’sWhite and Nerdy,” and while I have heard the original song it parodies enough to enjoy the Weird Al song, I couldn’t even tell you the original song’s title or artist, because I don’t particularly like rap and I don’t plan on purchasing that original song ever.



Competition can be a good thing, forcing us to continually innovate and improve ourselves.

Again, I understand the reasons why businesses will want to protect themselves from these issues mentioned above, but while #1 is decently legitimate, #2 is problematic, because it circumvents the original purpose of copyright: the promotion of creativity. If a company clamps down on derived works, like MADs and AMVs, mostly because they do not want to compete with said derived work, then they are being lazy, selfish, and ignorant. To continue the cow analogy above, it’s okay to protect your cash cow but not by killing all the other cows on the pasture so that all the grass can only be eaten by your cow. The very competition that drives corporations to take such a cut-throat stance at economic survival is the same one they actually try to diminish once they are at the top (or at least in a comfortable financial situation). Nevertheless, it is this very competition that can help promote more creativity, or more importantly, BETTER creativity, especially when you look at the constant rehashing of stories in television (anime) and film from books and manga. This is why the law and how copyrights are handled need to be restructured, especially in lieu of current technology that is facilitating this read-write culture that Lessig talked about. Don’t lie to yourselves: many activities that the anime fan community participates in are illegal somewhere or another, but being illegal doesn’t necessarily mean it’s wrong. And when the spirit of the law and the letter of the law are too far out of synch, that’s when the letter of the law needs to be rewritten.

The worst part of about this conglomerate of associations cracking down on Nico Nico Douga is that it’s exacerbating the fight between the two extremisms that Professor Lessig discussed towards the end of his talk. I have witnessed first hand, with my own students, how young people start to feel entitled to free entertainment, because they believe the corporate big wigs of America are merely stuffing their pockets and squeezing every penny out of the common working person.

During one anime club meeting, I got into a discussion with some students about how awesome the game Portal is. Through the conversation, I discovered that a few of them pirated a version of the game, instead of buying it. I heard the typical excuses: “I don’t have the money,” to which I replied, “But you have the money to buy those $50 sneakers?” However, one particularly academically-bright student mentioned how he did not like Valve, and he was purposefully not giving them his money due to some of their corporate decisions as a game developer – basically, he was pseudo-boycotting, but instead of shunning the entire company and its products, he would simply steal the product. I asked about whether or not he thought the actual creators of the Portal (who were hired right out of college by Valve upon seeing their prototype Portal game) should be paid, to which he responded that they should. I concluded, then, that Valve took a chance with hiring them and that if more big companies like Valve hired on small-time game developers with great ideas like the Portal team, then we’d get a lot more cool games, and thus, said companies should be financially supported in such a practice. His flustered rebuttal: “Well, I’m just one kid – me breaking a dumb law isn’t really going to make them go bankrupt.”



Doesn’t anime teach us that even one (whiny, whimpy, little) person can still make a big enough difference to change the world?

The current youth are beginning to learn that laws can (and maybe even should) be ignored, trifled with, and belittled, because they’re engaging in activities that are technically illegal but are not really wrong. One of first things I learned when I decided to be a teacher was that I should never make a rule that I was not willing to enforce. If you do that, then you undermine your own authority. And the last thing we need in society is a generation of youths thinking that laws mean nothing. Again, this doesn’t mean laws are perfect and are never to be subject to revision – there just simply needs to be a balance. Currently, there’s just a blanket copyright law that deems many creative products of fans (and FANS) as illegal, such that the law becomes a joke, and that’s a big problem not only for fandom but for society as a whole. Professor Lessig is proposing a new system to govern the use of creative works and intellectual properties at various levels of control, which you can read more about here. I think this is a step in the right direction to helping anime fandom flourish, as well as providing many other benefits to society.

In a perfect world, in my opinion, the line between creator and user is blurred beyond recognition, such that people who make something would have no problem with someone else taking what they have made and remaking it in a new and interesting way for profit or otherwise. Ideally, the original creator would then be motivated to create something even MORE interesting in order to compete, but sadly, humanity is typically too selfish and lazy to do this. Thus, we have to go with the best system we got, with its laws and copyrights, but that does not preclude us from revising and improving said system, with many arguments and debates going back and forth on how best to accomplish this. Such a difficult and tedious struggle is really the only practical way to stop criminalizing creativity…

…but that’s what makes it all the more worthwhile, right?

Natron-e?
who takes, uses, and alters a lot of content without permission for the sake of education…

like this:



Believe it or not, I actually photoshopped a comic together using scans from the manga Love Hina in order to provide alternative education for special ed kids who had low reading skills …


 

51 comments»

Pages: [1] 2 3 » Show All

  1. TheRep at 9:10 pm on July 5th, 2008

    Nice article. 1000 points to Natron-e, for including a Whose Line is it Anyways reference. :D

    I’m one of the people who support the industry by buying their products but man is it tough on the wallet.

  2. Andy at 9:13 pm on July 5th, 2008

    This is long… Well I do find that crimializing AMVs to be quite upsetting. Since they are doing this, this just creates more people that want to revolt against what they have set up. I actually agree with the video.

  3. EdZ at 9:13 pm on July 5th, 2008

    I’ll take the 100 points for the Ghost in the Shell background image.

  4. water hooo at 9:15 pm on July 5th, 2008

    ……………………good……hmmm….nice 1…I am in aaaw..

  5. Anon at 9:22 pm on July 5th, 2008

    Very good article. Hohoho. A very enlightening article indeed. The balance between protecting creativity of others and promoting it, the problem with the current system, and its effects on the newer generation. Very deep stuff there, very deep stuff indeed. :)

  6. dxanato at 9:36 pm on July 5th, 2008

    It was very interesting presentation that he made. I totally agree with his point about allowing the use of material for the purpose of creative and not resell.

  7. Natrone at 9:36 pm on July 5th, 2008

    @EdZ
    Congratulations! You get 100 points that don’t matter! Yes, the points don’t matter - like deodorant to an otaku at an anime convention - they just don’t matter….

  8. BROOKLYN otaku at 9:54 pm on July 5th, 2008

    “deodorant at an otaku convention” FUCKING FUNNY!!!!!!! HAHAHA,,,but about that british dude being pretentious, yeah…the accent will doo dat!! “i aint knocking it”….
    P.S= BETTER luck next time Takeru Kobayashi “if anybody knows what I’m talking bout” ..hell..eating less, to me makes u the winner ,,yuck!….TRUE DAT FOR THE ARTICLE. interesting

  9. lelangir at 10:04 pm on July 5th, 2008

    I liked the video: however, my one quip is how he homogenizes youth when he says “our kids.” Perhaps he was “catering” to the white-collar audience, but I couldn’t help at wince to his phrase “anyone that can get a $1500 computer [or something like that.” Anyone, you say? I think that is quite a bit of money, and simplifying “the youth” to an entity that can afford the technologies that insert them into our homogenized notion of “culture” disregards “our” socio-economic counterpart - both our the other end of our financial binaries, but also of those that provide the ying to “our” yang of an “unprivileged” mindset. Regarding an entire generation as digitally-savvy (it presumes that very economic capacity) does a grave injustice to the Other, unknown, undigital, “in the dark” culture, the “read-only” culture - perhaps - and so this brings me to a more conclusive question: can this “dissent through creativity” be endowed upon only those who are privileged enough to (1) know such a “subculture” exists, (2) be inserted within that echelon, (3) be knowledgeable of and about that, and (4) care enough to contribute to it? Is “contribution” the key here? In Lessig’s quest to inform about the wonders of the internet and digital technologies, does he first take into consideration the disparate socio-economic basis from which these technologies spawn and evolve? Their binary inducing and insinuating repercussions? Access. This time I don’t think we can have our cake and eat it.

  10. Plaid_Knight at 10:39 pm on July 5th, 2008

    I was glad to see you making your own educational materials. Many of the ones out there for kids are just too badly made to be of much use.

  11. crimsonrageeeee at 10:44 pm on July 5th, 2008

    wow

  12. blind_assassin at 10:50 pm on July 5th, 2008

    That’s some grade A quasi-intellectual rambling right there. When you’re trying to make an educated point it works a lot better if you pour the effort into what you’re actually saying rather than just bloating it with rampant and unnecessary circumlocution.

    I agree entirely with your contention that cracking down on something that was made with effort as an attempt to parody an existing work/person shouldn’t be subject to the money grubbing of companies. Like, if I wanted to make a South Park Canadian flappy-headed cut out of Arnold Schwarzenegger from a Terminator film to have him saying “I’m the Governator. Now GET TO DA CHOPPA!” there is no way that anyone would consider it an abuse of his likeness or thieving to do so. But once someone uses a clip from Death Note and edits his voice over Light saying “didn’t you realise that Yagami backwards spells ‘I’m a gay’?” it’s suddenly a grievous breach of the law that is single-handedly destroying an entire industry?

    But then if you discount the YouTube poop (the ones that aren’t “Luigi crying for 4 minutes” at least) style of creativity you’re left largely with people that are “expressing” themselves by mashing 5 minutes of Naruto clips together and playing Linking Park in the background. I think that the majority of AMVs and whatnot are within the bounds of copyright infringement as they’re this type of creation. This pretty much represents the problem with protecting legitimate creativity. Most people are lazy and stupid (or at the very least very ignorant of the value of what they and every other emotionally frustrated 14 year-old is spewing into YouTube) and just make the same thing over and over again. If creativity could properly be separated from the repetitious drek then I think everyone on both sides of the equation could be satisfied.

  13. reggie at 10:57 pm on July 5th, 2008

    i was all for the video, but u don’t need a 1500 dollar computer to make user generated content, $300 basic pc will do the trick

  14. Samurai Pumpkin at 11:06 pm on July 5th, 2008

    You are a kick ass teacher.

  15. Readarmon at 11:13 pm on July 5th, 2008

    Oh, thank god, I thought I was the only one who stays up ’till 11:00 to watch Whose Line Is It Anyway. Thanks a lot, Natrone!

  16. Sayna at 11:16 pm on July 5th, 2008

    Ah Copyright….
    An awesome (and dark) topic to address Natron-e. Have you seen the documentary ‘The Future of Food’ by anychance? It addresses the same idea except in a food context- how the copyrighting of DNA or genetically modified organisms are choking out strains of food that could save our lives in the future. It’s incredibly fascinating and frightening.
    But I digress, the topic of media copyright is the one at discussion. I believe many fans recognize that using anime to make personal cash is not only illegal, but morally incorrect. It is companies like Gonzo, who are beginning to recognize the internets resources and embrace our generations way of culture. I fully support this type of outreach. I do not support (manga websites, for example)that make a profit of people’s volunteer work. When I watch AMV’s, I consider it a way to experience new music and shows that I may not have seen before. It is, as the Prof said, amateur creativity; they aren’t making a profit, they are simply creating and wanting to share their creation with others.
    People are becoming more and more aware of how laws should be -changed-, not erased, but it will take some major democratic movements of the current generations to make that occur.

  17. Dm at 11:21 pm on July 5th, 2008

    If people have all this time and technology to edit from videos, is it so difficult to make an original animated video, even if it’s 1 minute long? (Even 20 seconds of material would be acceptable).

  18. miden at 11:40 pm on July 5th, 2008

    hah yeah 1500dollar pc XD~ anyways a great point being made here. very interesting read and hoep to see many more great articles/editorials like these!

  19. lelangir at 11:43 pm on July 5th, 2008

    reggie: I think free time is also a “first-wordly” thing (it’s also a primary thing lacking amongst workaholics) - free time that allows for this kind of creativity.

  20. Pan2 at 12:08 am on July 6th, 2008

    Great find, I thought the lecture was really insightful and fast paced. I love how he used a really avant-garde “rant” from John Phillip Sousa as one of the bases for his thesis.

    One thing I wish he had addressed, however, is how the original content in his examples where acquired in the first place, i.e. was it legitimately bought as a DVD/CD and ripped, or was it obtained illegal through, for example, a file sharing program or as a torrent? I want to assume that when Prof. Lessig talked about the “revival of our vocal chords” he means doing so by using original content, such as songs and videos, that where obtained through legal means, but I wish he would have been more specific. Maybe he just didn’t want to deal directly with things like file sharing and stealing original content, as it wasn’t the point of his lecture, which I don’t think anyone could really blame him for.

    This also stuck out at me when he was making the social commentary about how the “instinct” created by new technology can only be criminalized, driven underground, and a form of piracy, etc. Illegal downloads of music, movies and video games are already in this state, but these are obviously not forms of creativity.

    Also, I thought his point about achieving balance through competition was just brilliant. I’ve never been in the music industry, but it seems that the music industry, especially record labels and the RIAA, feel threatened by the internet and file sharing as much due to the fact that it gives artists the ability to distribute content without their vast distribution infrastructure as due to the fact that it is a medium that facilitates piracy. If artists could eliminate the “middleman”, as they say and as Lessig seems to hint at, the amount of income going to the artists themselves would increase dramatically, possibly to the point that they will not have to try to squeeze every cent they possibly can from end users, viewers, and listeners. This applies very much to the television and movie industries as well, with the prevalence of internet TV and such.

    Response to Natrone:
    “it’s okay to protect your cash cow but not by killing all the other cows on the pasture so that all the grass can only be eaten by your cow.”
    Lol and bravo.

    I haven’t the slightest idea what that Nico Nico thing is, but I did read the article about the take-down. I’ll agree that it’s pretty ridiculous given the nature of what they wanted taken down, but I really don’t understand why they where threatened by this content in the first place. Then again, I’ve never seen the content so I can’t really say much about it. As far as fans complaining about the loss of a source of this free entertainment, the users who made the videos are technically doing it for free, so the issue of entitlement would probably depend on 1.) whether or not said users bought the original content through legal means and 2.) if the viewers themselves have or will have contributed in some way to the creators of the ORIGINAL content portrayed in the user created content. That gets really really muddy, in a legal sense.

    The scope of copyright law seems to get really sticky when it comes to reinterpreting content and distributing it. I honestly think for now that artists should try to embrace new technology as a means to distribute their work, start cutting out record companies from the equation, and just crossing their fingers in hopes that user generated content will bring them more good then bad. Maybe in the future purchased content will come with some sort of key that is required to view user created content containing the original content? *shudder*

    Response to Lelanger:
    The lecture did seem a little bit elitist, maybe he was referring to the “kids” of the audience members, who would most likely come from a middle to upper socio-economic class? Still, I think that the realm of being “creative” and “contributing” does and will always correlate very closely to socio-economic class, but if that where to change or if the real and scope where to expand, their would have to be social change, not change in the copyright laws. I don’t think that was one of his points, though.

    Response to blind_assassin:
    Judging the quality and creativity of things like this is very subjective, and I think thing will rarely be quiet as black and white as the examples you give. But yeah, I’d like it as well if everything user generated was intelligent, well thought out, and unique, and I’m getting pretty sick of hearing “In the End” to every death scene in every Anime ever while looking for AMVs. Still, wouldn’t the more creative content simply be more popular and get more attention than the mashing of “5 minutes of Naruto clips and…Linkin Park”? It seems like competition could do this area good as well.

    Sorry for the long ass comment

Pages: [1] 2 3 » Show All



Leave a reply

Please DO NOT ask or give links to raws/subs/PVs. Instead, please check the Community section on the sidebar for useful links. HTML tags are enabled for comments, NOT forum-style tags. Please use <spoiler></spoiler> around any major spoilers.