Remix

For this week’s Internet and Society class we were teased on the following questions. This gave me insight to understand what fair-use and copyright actually means.

Original:

Is the remix/reuse a “fair use”? Why or why not? (include a discussion of the four factors that are considered in fair-use cases)

  • Remix/reuse has practically become normal for many of us.  Many videos and songs are remixes. Some are remixed for fun and some are done for profit. The question is whether the remix is fair use. In the remix of Little Sister originally done by Elvis Presley I would have to say that the remix is not fair-use based on the four factors of fair-use cases in the “Reproduction of Copyrighted Works by Educators and Librarians”. Fair-use is not necessarily a right. The song was a remix done for a club and not for educational purposes. The remix of the whole song was used for entertainment by a club which cannot be considered a non-profit organization. There is a possibility that there may be an economic loss that the copyright holder is entitled to. The remix of this song may compete with the original. People may tend to purchase the remix over the original.

Who benefits from the remix/reuse? The original creator? The remixer/reuser? The audience? Why?

  • The club and the audience would tend to benefit more from the remix. The remixer could sell the remix and make a profit. Also the audience has the option to purchase and enjoy the music. The remix was done to suit a certain crowd. The environment in which the song is being played satisfies the audience and the remixer.

In “Walking on Eggshells,” Jordan Roseman said, “there’s no question that at some point using other people’s recordings is 100% your creativity and then at some point it is 0% your creativity.” What do you think he meant by this statement and how does it apply to your example?

  • In “Walking on Eggshells”, when Jordan Roseman says “at some point using other people’s recording is 100% your creativity”, I believe he meant that one is able to take something and make it into anything they want to. One can be creative and use someone else’s recording for a different purpose than what it was originally created for. At some point it is 0% their creativity because they were not the ones who produced or created the original recording. For example in the remix of Little Sister, the beat that was added, and the music in the background is the creativity of the remixer DJ Ethan. It was created to satisfy his audience.  The remix can be considered 100% his. However the original song was done by Elvis Presley so it is 0% DJ Ethan’s.

Do you agree or disagree with the artists’ viewpoints as expressed in “Walking on Eggshells”?  Why?

  • I do agree with the artists viewpoints as expressed in “Walking on Eggshells”. Something has to come from somewhere. People get inspired by things that they either hear or see. Someone can create something, then another person can make something completely different from that same original creation. Some of the greatest artist reproduced songs that were not originally theirs and became famous as result. The songs may not have originally been theirs but because of their creativity in reproducing the songs they benefited.

Freedom of speech: Freedom of the internet?

There is a popular belief that net-neutrality encourages an anti-government mentality. Several tweets that I came across this week made reference to Mitt Romney’s rejection of net-neutrality. With the introduction of net-neutrality there is no control over what one puts on the internet. Many people use social networks as a medium to express themselves freely. Will there be any form of protectrion for the youth and the rest of society?

Network neutrality basically allows for free use of the internet. Without net- neutrality would there still be internet? How much control is too much or too little? Without net-neutrality the internet will become less entertaining for some people which could cause a fewer number of people to join the social networks. As a result owners of these networks would operate at a loss. This would result in these sites having to shut down.

When Elihu Katz came up with the Uses and Gratification Approach he indicated that people use the media to their benefit. One of the five basic assumptions is that, “in the mass communication process much initiative in linking need gratification and media choice lies with the audience member.” This assumption highlights the fact that individuals’ opinions are very powerful as compared to the media.  Many people use the internet to their benefit  more than the internet uses them.

Should Social Networks be censored: protect our youth!

Should Language be censored?  Do we believe that personal information should not be accessed by others? Social networking sites are frequently used as a medium for freedom of expression. Very often people use and abuse social networks to express their views. They sometimes go over the limit.

People malign others through social networks and are comfortable because they could falsify their identity. Young people frequent the social networks and as a result should be protected from abuse by censoring these networks.

Social networks can be accessed by many. As a result false rumors can spread quickly and have serious repercussions.  For example; there were recently tweets about gunmen attacking schools in Mexico which led to at least 26 car crashes. Countries such as India are now undergoing their social renaissance. After a court ruling, Google and Facebook were forced to remove information that was offensive to Hindus, Muslims and Christians.

The young people in our society should be protected from fear, panic, pornography, obscenity, and emotional stress. As a result social networking sites should be censored in order to prevent harm. Social networks should be proactive rather than reactive.

http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/09/08/tweets-of-false-shootouts-cause-panic-in-mexico/

Are social networks taking over the lives of the youth

Social networks continually evolve, and attract more young people around the globe. As these social networks evolve people continue to use them because they now have more to explore. These social networks become somewhat more addictive. The young people in particular begin to explore and experiment.

What used to be done by young people in the privacy of their rooms is now being done on social networks. For example; instead of posting pictures of their favorite actors or actress on the walls in their bedrooms they are now posting them on their facebook walls.

Many different identities can be created through the social networks. This can increase the likelihood of bullying, and also can cause one to engage in harmful contact.

There can also be advantages such as building a wide circle of friendship. For example I have a friend who met his wife through facebook.  Social networks also give the youth a greater avenue to express their views on current issues.

Social networks are now being viewed as the new “hangout spots”. The youth now hang out with each other through social network sites rather than chilling together at the mall. This can cause them to become more impersonal. However, are social networks totally taking over the lives of our young people?

http://www.joe.org/joe/2009october/a6.php

Social networks and the youth of society

It is so funny that Facebook and other social networks are called “social” networks because I think they cause young people to be less social. Young people in particular, become so engrossed when they visit the sites that they barley have time to look up for one second. How ironic; it’s called social network and the kids hardly have anytime to socialize or interact face to face with each other. Young people now have a hard time letting go of their phones.”Blackberry Messenger” and “Whatsapp” have now become the latest addiction.

Professors are frustrated because of the distraction that cell phones cause in the classroom. Some professors have banned the use of laptops in classrooms because the students pay more attention to “facebook” than their professors. Someone introduced me to this link and I think you should take a look at it to see the extent of addition to social media http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/08/students-tech-use-stats_n_846568.html. Some young people even claim that “they can’t live without it”. How do we solve this problem? Or should I say, “Can this problem be solved?”  Is it the responsibility of parents or the responsibility of the people who introduced the social networks to control how the youth use these social networks?

Stay tuned for information next week on “Social Networks and the Affects on Youth in Society”……

Hi there

It’s 10:23pm and I am tired. Been working on this blog all day. Hope I’m done very soon. Never leave assignments for the last day.