“Picture some scenes from an Internet video: shots from the movies Batman Begins (ChristopherNolan, 2005), Pirates of the Caribbean (GoreVerbinski, 2003), and V for Vendetta (JamesMcTeigue, 2005) captured fromDVD, edited in a graphics program, and set to a Regina Spektor song.It’s a fair bet to assume that license holders would consider such unsanctioned use of image and music to be theft of their property and profit. But in the age of YouTube parody and viral reproduction, few amateur media makers would consider that a reason to stop.” Alex Lothian
In this digital era and the young generation, it is all about downloading. If you can download for free it is free. There is no consideration for artists or production companies profits. Does this mean that the media produced will die out because it is being downloaded? probably not. Alex Lothian explores copyright and the acts of digital reproduction.
This video is the video that Lothian discusses in his paper, but is this copy right?
The film maker has reproduced some of the videos from popular films and used a song by Regina Spektor. However, he has changed the style by recreating the video and giving it a cartoon effect. Is this copy right, or could it be argued to be postmodern?
Personally, i disagree with Alex Lothian, I think that when things are used for a different purpose and used as a bricolage, it gives all of the texts a new message completely. Therefore making the piece postmodern.
“Moment reminds us that mashups, vids, and similar arts of juxtaposition challenge the idea that creative legitimacy relies on original ideas that belong only to those who initiate them. Will transformation be the new originality? Further, defenses on the grounds
of transformation disconnect vidders from the other culture thieves on whom
they rely: file sharers, for example, cannot declare their works transformative, and many
of these are not only closely linked to, but may be the same people as, vidders. What
does appropriative art imply if we don’t try to justify it within the terms of existing legal systems,but rather use its potential illegality to imaginatively liberate music and images from structures of corporate ownership?” Alex Lothian.
Basically, lothian says that postermodernism is a good thing, making a new originality by recycling is an interesting way of conveying new media. However, file sharing is copyright because people are not paying for artists works, nor are they asking the artist for re-use of work. Therefore i guess that file sharing and postermoderism if effectively stealing. Unless you seek permission to do so from the appropriate source.