1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

copyright

Discussion in 'Law & Ethics Discussions' started by funkcutter, Jun 7, 2003.

  1. funkcutter

    funkcutter punkvert

    i think i'm all alone here...
    but my opinion on copyright as far as being prosecuted is simple.
    i do not copy
    therefore i cannot be done 4 it...

    recently at the plunderdelica night @ the ica in london i filled in a form on the similar subject - a female student was doing her thesis on it... a very interesting research on copyright law and what i as a member of the vj community thought of it...

    i am rather appalled at the amount of sheer theft that is going on... not that i am particularly concerned for the originators of the work, unless they are independant film makers/vjs/directors/animators like most of us - as in using adverts, feature films, instructional videos for hair dryers and the like... i am more concerned about the lack of integrity of the plunderer.. i shoot all my own work... i manipulate all my own work... if i were to show someone elses work at a show, i would consider that a screening... anyone can sit and rip and cut and paste... it's easy. just time consuming.

    manipulation beyond recognition - making a new work out of other persons work - has a value, as does ironic subverting of known icons and messages, but full scale theft and pillage of mainstream work leaves me disgruntled and annoyed.

    guess i'm just a cynic, so shoot me (and use it to it's full effect!!!)

    bang on :)
  2. robotfunk

    robotfunk Feed your Machine

    please provide your coordinates, preferably in ICBM compatible format.

    <advocate'sdevil>
    one of the longest discussions ever on this forum was on this subject, and it turned out to get quite bloody.

    there will be a lot of vj's incapable of making quality content of their own that will sample anything that they can get hold of.
    there will be people that sample the most obscure detail of a movie and make something completely new with it.

    i think these 2 cases should be looked at differently, and that there are justifyable reasons for sampling.

    Consider a vj a visual poet and his dictionary his footage library.
    While its perfectly possible to make fantastic poems with only few words, the size of your dictionary will limit your poetry.
    A lot of things could be filmed yourself, but not everything.

    You cannot go back in time to film past events.
    You cannot go in to space to film anything there (with a few exceptions)
    For most people its impossible to travel to Iraq to gather footage there.

    There are some cases where you just have to sample to make your point. Ideally, these cases would be judged on a per-case basis and things like creative use, added value, etc would be taken into consideration.
    Alas its a legal swamp where the deepest pockets have the best survival chances

    I also think there is a difference between stealing something that has taken an artist ages to pull off with perfect lighting, compositing , animation etc to stealing something that someone happened to capture on film that is very newsworty/makes good content.

    Also VJing has very much a 'collage' element. If you view a paper collage as a valid artform you must accept the same for a video collage.
    </advocate'sdevil>
  3. funkcutter

    funkcutter punkvert

    u got a soul

    need i say more?

    just that respect to ur opinions... this kinda 'ripping' is much more agreeable in my eyes - the minutae are very appealing - it's just the lazy fullscale chunks that get me - u get me?

    funkout
  4. Lara

    Lara alllgood

    Hee hee, no regrets for sampling at PLUNDERDELLICA at the ica- name gives the theme of the night away . . . ;) celebrate that sample culture!
  5. holly

    holly WetCircuit.com

    Agreed. Nice posts all around. Sampling has a definite place, but it's no excuse for being lazy. Bad art is bad art. Look at Warhol:
    [​IMG]
    He "sampled" so much from Hollywood magazines that his art became a parody of itself. Eventually he made a fortune painting these, and he got sued all the time (by people wanting to cash in) but so what? He died stinking rich and forever left his mark on Pop Art.

    How-EH-ver ? Notice how Warhol only uses a single frame. This is why it works! Sampling is not wholesale minutes' worth of video. It's the briefest moment captured and repeated, but with endless variations, like a field of flowers or scales on a reptile. A sample must be stripped down to it's barest essence until it has no meaning or purpose or connection to the original. Case in point: Everyone knows it's Elvis, and it's obviously from a Western, but does anyone remember the name of the movie? The subject is so iconicly bad Hollywood (rockstar in a rediculous film vehicle + Western, the ubiquitous genre that started Hollywood) the modern day equivilant would be "Justin Timberlake starring in This Summer's Action Blockbuster" or "Brittany in The Feel Good Date Movie"..., you know, :rolleyes: bad! Warhol made this sample his own. We know it because he referenced it, not the other way around. I'm not saying that samples must come from obscure sources or always be tongue-in-cheek, but will people walk away associating you with the clip or will people just walk away remembering the clip and where they saw it before?

    Esoteric topic. Blah blah blah....
  6. unjulation

    unjulation Moderator

    sample, rip, use anything you b****y like in any way you want,
    use a whole movie if you want
    what i want to know in one of the most inovative area's of media about at the moment why do people constantaly put constarints on what inderviduals use and how they use it?
    surley thats just like makeing laws, you might as well just carve them in stone now
    if the stuf you are showing is s**t then its s**t wether you spent two weeks creating it or riped it in a few minates (now of corse this can also be a matter of opinion but i dont think we need to go there)
    i just find it a bit sad that people have such a narow veiw of the medium that we are working within, ah well......:sad:
  7. elbows

    elbows PixelRomper

    OK im verging on going off topic here but heres an amusing recent UK court case involving someone not being happy at his music being used with "drugs and violence" lyrics over the top. Case was thrown out as they had legitimately licensed the music, and the complainants case was dodgy. Funny story though...

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/music/2966646.stm

    Shizzle my Nizzle! lol
  8. littlecatalyst

    littlecatalyst Retireded

    thanks Unj.... i was hoping someone would say that... its just too funny already, ok, maybe funkcutter saw someone play an entire dvd of moonshine or something, unedited just like the ld club djs-- no mixing just track to track..... and maybe that really sucked (I could see that) but maybe he was just upset at the amount of pilfering, like the endless responses of "why not shoot it yourself" any time someone asks where they can get footage of something in particular.

    last week i saw a show here with someone using 100% original content and you know what? it totally sucked ass. it was boring, it was mono-themed, it didn'r rok me at all, and even my companion (a bit of a vj groupie, but she knows her stuff) asked if we could leave or something because she felt that here eyes were being taxed unfairly...

    using your own footage is cool (but not if it bores the sh*t out of the crowd) then again, it's not that impressive if its just more Artmatic wanking (as opposed to people who really get down with artmatic) are presets and your own footage better by necesity or are they better when they are of better quality? i think that someone who mines footage for a killer clip is just as valid as someone who toils on their code.... and by the same token, someone who just rips moonshine and prerecorded crap is equally as lame as someone who uses a computer to create boring uninspired images, or who shoots something we have all seen and snored to 1000 times already. and like robotfunk (that crazy glowstick drinker) said:
    here here
  9. Amukidi

    Amukidi New Member

    Originally posted by robotfunk
    VJing has very much a 'collage' element. If you view a paper collage as a valid artform you must accept the same for a video collage.

    Ha ha - gotta laugh! I spent a good 12 years as a collage artist (a succesfull one at that) Trouble is - I made my own paper & textures, so I won't bore you with that =D

    I know I am the most guilty of the "shoot it yourself" comments - All I know is, that I keep getting work (or so my promoters tell me) cos my work is different and original. There are 2 crews that thrill me every time I see them, using found footage (Hexstatic and Eclectic Method) but these guys have succeded where, IMVHO others mostly fail. So of course I know that ripping footage can lead to great work - but only in the hands of someone who has the visual awarenes and experience to pull it off. My biggest worry is the plethora of inexperienced VJs who do it simply cos its easy and they dont have any concrete (or Abstract) ideas of their own. I feel that its a shame that so many folks are prepared to limit their visual vocabulary to images/clips shot through someone else's eyes. And that's all I have to say about that. Sorry.
  10. funkcutter

    funkcutter punkvert

    this is what i'm getting at... and i love warhol! it's whether or not it's any good too.. and of course original work may be dire, but but at least you're showing your own crap, not someone else's...

    since i got a camera, back it the 20th century.... i know there are a great deal of REAL things out there to use... why use a poor vhs-recorded-from-tv kitty litter advert - that you've put on your 'laptop' - fuzzy and morose - guess people think that's chic! just cos u got it 2 come out on a digital signal?

    forgive my rant. it's early :)

    and i'll forgive anything anyone does that is fantastic art regardless of where the source material comes from. guess i should have clarified my initial post with this point....

    jolly hockney sticks!

    funk out now
  11. unjulation

    unjulation Moderator

    ah.......but i dont belive that what we are doing is art and i'm cirtainly not an artist so i dont feel any cumpulshion to define what i do within such a limited veiw point if wat you feel you are is an artist then thats great go for self made stuf but personaly i'll use as meny tools as i can to entertain people within the seting and peramiters that i work within it is all about a mater of perspective, not one of them is right per-say just diferant perceptions of the job that we are doing and involved within, horses for corses and all that
  12. littlecatalyst

    littlecatalyst Retireded

    i have to do a little reversals here (not 180 degrees) as usually i am all up in it about being able to collage and appropriation, art in the age of digital reproduction... and definitley treatment of the objects you're appropriating..... but now i have to take a step back and a bite of my reality sanwhich as i just realized something kinda creepy.... i won't mention where but in a different post someone was all about other footage, and i didn't get the sense of any (sorry unj, for lack of a better work) art-- at all... so i enquired a little more, and it may be a lnaguage thing but from what i understand they were just playing the films from beginning to end. now you can call yourself a cowboy for all i care even if you've never been on a horse, same fo vj, but it seems that there are people out there who are using stuff right outta the videostore without even a mixer..... that's kinda icky.
    while aside from Holly, i don't see anyone else shooting space images, i have been getting really high off sattelite footage in my mixes and in general, view a well treated, found (stolen, whatever) footage as equal with anyone's bluescreen breakdancers... what i heard made me feel real funny... (and not in a ha ha way)
  13. robotfunk

    robotfunk Feed your Machine

    w/o getting into the morality side of things, there is something to be said for the (narrow) definition of VJ as a visual DJ.

    If a DJ can go to a store, buy records and play those on the dancefloor, why can't a VJ buy some DVD's and mix those up?

    I know LEGALLY the venue pays for playing music in there and publically performing video is a bit stickier, but think about it.

    Not saying thats my definition of what a VJ is or does, but you get my point.
  14. Amukidi

    Amukidi New Member

    Yes, point taken - and I suspect that this is what Unj is trying to say on the "loop prices" thread. There are also DJs who make their own music too, and, for my money, they are better DJs for it, Norman Cook, Tom Middleton, Fred Deakin and Lol Hammond spring immediately to mind. Call it "added value" or whatever, you are always going to hear something different when this type of DJ takes to the dex. BUT - Are these VJs going to a store and buying their clips? I rather think not, and what a lot of them are doing can be equated with a DJ stealing his records and not ensuring that the performing rights are paid. But as I've said before, my issues with this are far more to do with the lack of initiative and imagination.
  15. robotfunk

    robotfunk Feed your Machine

    Yes it adds value to produce your own material, in fact it is pretty hard to break into DJing w/o some good records on your name.
    To the extent that if your music is popular and you are a shit DJ , you will still get bookings regardless, just because of your 'big DJ name' Dunno if you ever heard Juan Atkins DJ , I say stick to what your good at. but I digress.

    Buying records does not give you the right to publicly play them, now with MP3/finalscratch/CD jockeys you dont even have to buy the records, so same problem here.

    When you promote a rave, the right to play music there is bought at per square foot of dance floor. Is there a similar rule for visuals?

    While I like using a lot of self made content to stick apart from the rest, I still think its possible to make a wicked VJ set with other people's material, just by playing exactly the right thing at the right time, just like a DJ really.

    I think the value added from playing own content is similar to white labels and dubs that only the big name DJs have ... wether they made it themselves or not, they have something nobody else has heard yet.
  16. Amukidi

    Amukidi New Member

    Totally agree - I'm interested to know how pirating affects you and your product too. There must be loads of folk using cracked copies of Flowmotion (based on the premise that nothing is sacred anymore)?
  17. mondo

    mondo New Member

    robotfunk
    "I still think its possible to make a wicked VJ set with other people's material, just by playing exactly the right thing at the right time, just like a DJ really. "

    you summed it up pretty well for me - totally agree
  18. michaelheap

    michaelheap New Member

    norman cook isnt a great example realy, he samples other peoples work resequences it and then releases it as his tune -- sampaling,

    Lol a great artist and i know he plays the piano, but thats not him singing on the tracks either under his own name or as part of drum club. so in effect he is paying someone else to sing then releasing it as part of his track.

    Devil's advocate: so what is the difference between theese 'musicians' and a vj who uses some one elses clips? the same asthetic and artistic skills are being used to select the clips they want to play and order them.
  19. Amukidi

    Amukidi New Member

    Its a fair cop, but society's to blame.....

    What I meant was that they are musicians.....ie they have a relative understanding of how it all works, which I still believe, gives them an edge over someone who is tone deaf!
    I just find it so hard to understand why someone who is so obviously very interested in the moving image doesn't feel compelled to pick up a camera and take control of their output.
  20. unjulation

    unjulation Moderator

    good points robo :)

    jaffa:-basicly yes thats what i'm kinda geting at, but at this point in time i carnt go into a shop and just buy a dvd/video of loops to do that you have to go to the net which then takes time to get there and the real bummer is that you have to use a credit card and as someone who use's cash for everything becomes dificult, but i'm sure i'm the exception to the rule there

    anyway i'm digresing on this thred about copyright i'll let it get back on track
  21. littlecatalyst

    littlecatalyst Retireded

    ok first about the djs, my 2 favorites are tsuyoshi suzuki (who does make a lot of his own music, in fact last summer 90% f his set i saw was Joujouka, one of his 'bands') and then this guy Neerav who just moved to Germany :sad: now Neerav publishes Trance5000 and probably gets more records sent to him than the good folks at idj... his taste is impeccable and i would be very surprised if anyone in the crowd has heard even 1/4 of the stuff on any given night..... if there isn't a talent there somewhere i dunno, it's kept me on my toes for almost 8 years.... but honestly, T has a set and plays it, it blows my mind but i didn't see him the night before in nyc or the night before that in chicago.... and most likely his set is almost identical... now my man N he never plays teh same set, is accutely tuned into the vibe of teh event, and even when he does play something that he has played before, it's layered with different songs, it has different tweaking and for all intents and purposes its a new song already..... what makes a better dj has to do with so much more than just if they make their own tunes.....

    on top of that, teh argument that jaffa just used
    really seems silly to me. many people interested in the moving image baffle you that they dont feel compelled to shoot their own stuff..... aside from the obvious sillyness i did yesterday in the space images and yes i am totally getting high on those sattelite shots and jaffa if you can shoot that i'm impressed) there's a deeper thing here, Jaff-- you gott a understand that people are interested in moving images for MANY different reasons. me, i started with 35mm then Bolex and Ariflex, then got into the founf footage thing stealing trash from the film processors at work, slipping in to the film houses and bugging film students for their outs. not that i didn't like shooting, but the authenticity i could achieve and the change in discourse style really got me off..... a little while later i discovered that i could do just as much with video and get lots more footage easily....) this was still a little pre avid so the digital revolution had yet to transpire (in fact i got kicked out of film school for doing "scratch videos") sure i am into the moving image, also into the politics of appropriation and also into the diversity.... kenny scharf can make a cutes-y cgi animation, but i can take pieces of it and add context add rhythm, add textures, give it a new or deeper meaning, whatever i like....
    i feel behooved to question your value system where authenticity is on a higher plane than any other aspect of creativity.
    now i just came in here before and said that what i find sad is the kids who play things straight (more like a bar dj does as opposed to a club dj) there's not a whole lot of creativity in there, some dont even mix the images... But to dump people like ME, Craig Baldwin, EBN, Arthur Lipsett (the dude Lucas named THX118 after) (have you ever seen Raphael Montanez Ortiz's work???? its mindmelting!) Peter Forgeacs, and hundreds of others who do amazing work without touching a camera, is kinda trivializing a major element of this 'artform'........ ive said it before and i'll say it again, if you suck you suck and it doesn't matter if you use tsunami, artmatic and a digicam or two vcrs and an mx5..... if you're creative and good, one thing i can tell for sure, you wouldn't be spending half your time telling people that doing something you don't do is not cool..... i understand telling people especially newbies to shoot their own stuff as a good idea I'm glad i spent 6 years shooting my own work (and shooting or ascam other peoples films/videos) its a good education, but more importantly i woudl suggest they get some understanding of teh basics, design, movement, and creative expression (seriously getting 1000 kids out their woith their opwn cameras shooting every hubcap, swewer, flower and tree wont make the images all unique)
    thats it my rant-fuel guage is empty
    -peace

Share This Page