Movie Feedback
1. The film focuses on copyright and the fight between the creative minority and corporate majority.
RIP delivers a fiercely persuasive message to its audience. Copyright law is enabling the ongoing privatization of contemporary culture to the detriment of society; and that the open exchange of creative content is pivotal for continued community growth in the digital era.What do you think about current law of Copyright?
Personally, I agree with the film's statement, Copyright law is enabling the ongoing privatization of contemporary culture to the detriment of society, and that the open exchange of creative content is pivotal for continued community growth in the digital era. A healthy public domain does a great deal to support creativity and science. Copyright is a government-granted monopoly, without limitations, this monopoly can consume everything, making it so that hardly anything, no matter how seemingly unique, is not an infringement.
2. Remember the Gaylor's manifesto? 1. Culture always builds on the past, 2. The past always tried to control the future. 3. Our future is becoming less free, 4. To build free societies, you must limit the control of the past. He uses these to shape and create a compelling argument for the reconsideration of Copyright and the reclaiming of contemporary digital culture. What are your thoughts on this? Do you agree with Gaylor?
Yes, I do agree with Gaylor's manifesto. Not only culture builds on the past, the future always builds on the past. Culture: the integrated pattern of human knowledge, belief, and behavior that depends upon the capacity for learning and transmitting knowledge to succeeding generations. Which means, it is meaningless without past. Further more, the past always tried to control the future. For example, people from the past always creates a lot of 'rules' trying to regulate succeeding generations.
3. The film unfortunately does not address this question.
If no one pays for the use of artists' work, then how could artist survive? How do you claim your work that is worth anything? This film is distributed with the the business model of selling the documentary at no fixed price. Although it has been successfully adopted across a wide variety of online content providers, what do you think about the advantages and disadvantages of this model?
Personally, I don't think this it will be a perfect business model to balance the pay to artists and sharing culture. I think the problem is -- Not all people have conscious to pay enough. artists and company might not get enough pay, it might drop artists' passion or company's passion to create new/interesting work.
4. Your general thoughts on the film?
Overall, I think this is an amazing movie talk about copyright, and the way that people react. But it is a little extreme to me. Actually, the copyright law in China is not as strict as the U.S. I should say there're not many people aware of there's copyright law exists. I download free movie and music from internet since I know how to use computer, but I never thought there's anything wrong with it. I think there's no one solution for all problems. It all depends upon the specific situation. And i think 'fairly use' should be more clearly defined world wide.
RIP delivers a fiercely persuasive message to its audience. Copyright law is enabling the ongoing privatization of contemporary culture to the detriment of society; and that the open exchange of creative content is pivotal for continued community growth in the digital era.What do you think about current law of Copyright?
Personally, I agree with the film's statement, Copyright law is enabling the ongoing privatization of contemporary culture to the detriment of society, and that the open exchange of creative content is pivotal for continued community growth in the digital era. A healthy public domain does a great deal to support creativity and science. Copyright is a government-granted monopoly, without limitations, this monopoly can consume everything, making it so that hardly anything, no matter how seemingly unique, is not an infringement.
2. Remember the Gaylor's manifesto? 1. Culture always builds on the past, 2. The past always tried to control the future. 3. Our future is becoming less free, 4. To build free societies, you must limit the control of the past. He uses these to shape and create a compelling argument for the reconsideration of Copyright and the reclaiming of contemporary digital culture. What are your thoughts on this? Do you agree with Gaylor?
Yes, I do agree with Gaylor's manifesto. Not only culture builds on the past, the future always builds on the past. Culture: the integrated pattern of human knowledge, belief, and behavior that depends upon the capacity for learning and transmitting knowledge to succeeding generations. Which means, it is meaningless without past. Further more, the past always tried to control the future. For example, people from the past always creates a lot of 'rules' trying to regulate succeeding generations.
3. The film unfortunately does not address this question.
If no one pays for the use of artists' work, then how could artist survive? How do you claim your work that is worth anything? This film is distributed with the the business model of selling the documentary at no fixed price. Although it has been successfully adopted across a wide variety of online content providers, what do you think about the advantages and disadvantages of this model?
Personally, I don't think this it will be a perfect business model to balance the pay to artists and sharing culture. I think the problem is -- Not all people have conscious to pay enough. artists and company might not get enough pay, it might drop artists' passion or company's passion to create new/interesting work.
4. Your general thoughts on the film?
Overall, I think this is an amazing movie talk about copyright, and the way that people react. But it is a little extreme to me. Actually, the copyright law in China is not as strict as the U.S. I should say there're not many people aware of there's copyright law exists. I download free movie and music from internet since I know how to use computer, but I never thought there's anything wrong with it. I think there's no one solution for all problems. It all depends upon the specific situation. And i think 'fairly use' should be more clearly defined world wide.
Comments
Post a Comment