There has been much conversation, especially as of late about copyright, and the breaking of copyright laws by not only people stealing products of the artists, but by the artists themselves. In The Ecstasy of Influence, many references are made to popular artists misusing, stealing, and/or breaking the laws that pertain to copyrighting. When mentioning many of Bob Dylan’s work, they continue on to site the primary source of a line, or phrase that he “cleans up a little”, or “manipulates” to then convey his own interpretation of the message. Many call this plagiarism, or copyright infringement, but there are also those who believe this is the truest most naked form of inspiration. How were cavemen inspired to paint on walls? There were no trademarks on the landmarks around them, stating that one must pay royalties if ever hoping to capture the image on paper. And though it may seem like a stretch, I believe we are facing a similar situation today.
With the invention of remix culture, we face a new set of arguments about whether or not the use of a preexisting work, manipulated and re-mixed into a similar, but completely different work of art is stealing. As Roger Meyers Jr., animator for the hit TV show The Simpsons said, “You take away our right to steal ideas, where are they going to come from?”
This obscure idea of intellectual property is what the law takes into account when settling these matters. But how can one have intellectual property? I am not saying that every idea should be free for the public to rip off, steal, and turn for profit at their own hand, because how would the originators continue their creativity? What I’m saying, is that a line needs to be drawn somewhere.
The goal of the argument is to preserve raw creation, but it sometimes appears that we are stifling it in the fight to preserve it. The truth is that this is a delicate spectrum. If we regard to little as free use, then we smother the very inspiration that drives artists to begin their work in the first place. And if we regard too much as free use material, then the artists themselves lose all that in which they work for. It appears that or country is working too hasty at the subject. This issue needs deep and well thought out ideas before a legislative bill can be passed.