Manny Miranda's post stated:
After viewing the slew of videos from this week’s assignment, I feel overwhelmed. Copyright, Fair use, Creative Commons, all these policies and regulations are seemingly endless in the discussion on the protection or use of someone’s idea or concept. I understand that a person who originates their ideas and concepts needs them to be protected from users passing them off as their ideas and that the originators be compensated or at least credited when used. But I also believe that an end user should have access to these works to be informed and inspired and be able to use these ideas for their work as well. But the areas are so gray and overlap into each other. Now throw in the myths and misconceptions, like in the Templeton video, and you have a hodgepodge of misinformation that increases the likelihood of actually infringing on another persons copyright and not even knowing that you did.
In the end it is about educating oneself on the issue of copyrights and asking the right questions. The Mayer & Bettle video that explains Creative Commons is helpful. The comic strips on the Creative Commons website are amusing and insightful (Miranda and her coffee table book) on the explanation of the 4 options in Creative Commons licenses. I also enjoyed the video collage of Disney animations to show Fair use in its purest form. Educating oneself on the above concepts are the keys to avoiding any legal problems when it comes to using any portions of someone’s else idea, concept or work.
My response was:
Very well said Manny! Education is the key to avoiding problems and keeping your own ideas safe as well. Thanks for sharing your ideas.
My favorite line, " But I also believe that an end user should have access to these works to be informed and inspired and be able to use these ideas for their work as well. "
I think we all learn from each other, and like you said, find inspiration from each other. The key is to do this legally and respectfully.
Thursday, June 30, 2011
Week1_Comment2
Mike Skocko's blog stated:
And say not thou my copy right or wrong, nor shed thy blood for an unhallowed cause.
Like that remix of John Quincy Adams’ warning not to blindly follow one’s country? Well, like it or not, both versions lead me into temptation and ambivalent feelings, just as Part I of our Copyright Issues reading did. For instance, consider Good Copy Bad Copy. The creatorsinvite downloads but send readers to The Pirate Bay.There’s no way I’m going to use a torrent site. I don’t care that it’s legal in Sweden. As a teacher, I’m supposed to lead by example, right? So instead, I opened Safari’s Activity Window and Option+Double-Clicked the video feed to snag a copy for myself.
My comment was:
Sure enjoyed the video. It was very informative.
Wondering what your thoughts are on copyright and piracy issues while using online file conversion sites. If you use these borrowed items for personal use only is that okay? Or are there legal ramifications to converting urls, videos, etc?
Week1_Comment1
Sonni Jackson's blog stated:
"In high school, I wrote a piece of music and I remember my teacher telling me it sounds like a song he’d heard before. However, I’d never heard the song or of the author. With the amount of music and other creatively created art in the world, it stands to reason that innocent creators will create something that is either the same or extremely similar to something that already exists. How do you overcome this issue while not stifling the creative community?"
My response is:
For some reason I can not post a comment here. This is now my third attempt. I keep getting a word verification thing, but there is no spot to type it in to verify.
I concur with the last paragraph. The pure mass of information that we are bombarded with daily somehow is processed and filed in our brains. When this process happens, there is bound to be mash-ups and remixes as brain files like information together.
So are there really any original ideas? Or are they all just one complex mash-up?
I concur with the last paragraph. The pure mass of information that we are bombarded with daily somehow is processed and filed in our brains. When this process happens, there is bound to be mash-ups and remixes as brain files like information together.
So are there really any original ideas? Or are they all just one complex mash-up?
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Week1_Wimba
OH Wimba how I love thee! Thank goodness for archive!
My FAVORITE part was the literature discussion. Why?! Because I needed the most clarification on this (long long story), but this has been a HUGE frustration for me. So I'm SUPER thankful for this clarification FINALLY!
"lit rev is a survey [overview] of a lot of literature..."
"what did the world say about what I want to do?"
Broad spectrum - no list - not research paper
A dialogue that covers the spectrum of what you're researching.
Jen Geiger said during a conversation, "What would Diane Sawyer say about the literature?" which went along with the professor's analogy of a good talk show host!!! Where was this analogy eight months ago?! Super thankful for a fresh viewpoint to this process. Think the curtain is finally pulling away from the window. I can see daylight. Oh wait, those are street lights!
Professor Bustillo said, "hmm I had this question and I'm wondering what all these people said." So does that mean we can state the question in the introduction?
Second portion of very needed information: CBR!
I need to update the site and consistently throughout all pages. Update all pictures and videos. Basically fill in all pages that we have started thus far.
On the plan page I need to add how many participants were added. Update LR references page and the notes with the mind mapping.
Data data data...gotta put the data together and make a few statistics. Did you know that 86% of all statistics are made up on the spot!
Abstract: 120 words or less! Descriptive...Haiku -- initial questions, lit review, methodology, results, conclusion...don't defend, not why i did it, but how.
(insert record scratch here) WHAT?! We are going to apply to present or be published?! I'm wondering who the collective "we" is in the "we weren't getting as big of a payoff as we could get or should get given the amount of work that you guys have already done." Because the "we" if that includes me would mean that my payoff of a raise, job advancement, etc could be sufficient for me and therfore my choice to then go into retirement would be my choice if I chose not to get published. I'm really caught off guard by this even though a peer mentioned it in a conversation last night after class (I watched archive today). In month 1 (and 2) it was stressed that we could if we wanted to, but we wouldn't be forced to publish even though we'd be fully prepared to publish if we so chose. The analogy that has become forefront for this process is "It's all fluid"(always changing) in this Alice in Wonderland world.
I guess I now know what a fish feels like when I'm fishing. Oh this pretty lady is providing me with food, how nice is that?! "Swim little fishies over to my line." *gulp* Oh no! There's a hook! Swim away! Swim away! Nope, I'm snagged.
I was looking into getting published or presenting at some point in the future, but not necessarily with this project. The lit review is turning into a community written plan and not necessarily something that I would put my name on as a finished product. However, I am reworking it this week to see if I can salvage my voice.
As I'm listening to the archive, this song started running through my head.
The chorus keeps running through my head, "whatya want from me?" However, as I actually listened to the lyrics it fits this process pretty well.
"Just don't give up I'm workin it out
Please don't give in, I won't let you down
It messed me up, need a second to breathe
Just keep coming around
Hey, whataya want from me
Whataya want from me
Whataya want from me"
"Just don't give up on me
(uuuuuuh) I won't let you down
No, I won't let you down"
written by: Pink, Max Martin, and Shellback and released on Adam Lambert's November 2009 album "For your Entertainment".
My FAVORITE part was the literature discussion. Why?! Because I needed the most clarification on this (long long story), but this has been a HUGE frustration for me. So I'm SUPER thankful for this clarification FINALLY!
"lit rev is a survey [overview] of a lot of literature..."
"what did the world say about what I want to do?"
Broad spectrum - no list - not research paper
A dialogue that covers the spectrum of what you're researching.
Jen Geiger said during a conversation, "What would Diane Sawyer say about the literature?" which went along with the professor's analogy of a good talk show host!!! Where was this analogy eight months ago?! Super thankful for a fresh viewpoint to this process. Think the curtain is finally pulling away from the window. I can see daylight. Oh wait, those are street lights!
Professor Bustillo said, "hmm I had this question and I'm wondering what all these people said." So does that mean we can state the question in the introduction?
Second portion of very needed information: CBR!
I need to update the site and consistently throughout all pages. Update all pictures and videos. Basically fill in all pages that we have started thus far.
On the plan page I need to add how many participants were added. Update LR references page and the notes with the mind mapping.
Data data data...gotta put the data together and make a few statistics. Did you know that 86% of all statistics are made up on the spot!
Abstract: 120 words or less! Descriptive...Haiku -- initial questions, lit review, methodology, results, conclusion...don't defend, not why i did it, but how.
(insert record scratch here) WHAT?! We are going to apply to present or be published?! I'm wondering who the collective "we" is in the "we weren't getting as big of a payoff as we could get or should get given the amount of work that you guys have already done." Because the "we" if that includes me would mean that my payoff of a raise, job advancement, etc could be sufficient for me and therfore my choice to then go into retirement would be my choice if I chose not to get published. I'm really caught off guard by this even though a peer mentioned it in a conversation last night after class (I watched archive today). In month 1 (and 2) it was stressed that we could if we wanted to, but we wouldn't be forced to publish even though we'd be fully prepared to publish if we so chose. The analogy that has become forefront for this process is "It's all fluid"(always changing) in this Alice in Wonderland world.
I guess I now know what a fish feels like when I'm fishing. Oh this pretty lady is providing me with food, how nice is that?! "Swim little fishies over to my line." *gulp* Oh no! There's a hook! Swim away! Swim away! Nope, I'm snagged.
I was looking into getting published or presenting at some point in the future, but not necessarily with this project. The lit review is turning into a community written plan and not necessarily something that I would put my name on as a finished product. However, I am reworking it this week to see if I can salvage my voice.
As I'm listening to the archive, this song started running through my head.
The chorus keeps running through my head, "whatya want from me?" However, as I actually listened to the lyrics it fits this process pretty well.
"Just don't give up I'm workin it out
Please don't give in, I won't let you down
It messed me up, need a second to breathe
Just keep coming around
Hey, whataya want from me
Whataya want from me
Whataya want from me"
"Just don't give up on me
(uuuuuuh) I won't let you down
No, I won't let you down"
written by: Pink, Max Martin, and Shellback and released on Adam Lambert's November 2009 album "For your Entertainment".
Week1_FairUse
Thoughts before I read this section:
1. I use songs that students know and re-word them in Spanish vocabulary.
2. some I create, some are pilfered from...you guessed it...online.
3. I had students create their own songs in Spanish using already existing music...often the hit pop song of the day.
So am I illegal by doing this? How can I protect myself and my students from legal action, but still be able to use this fun activity?
So let me read the assignments and I'll get back to you.
Well according to the Fair(y) Use Tale fair use is a small snippet of copyright intellectual property that you can use for:
1. teach
2. news reporting
3. parody
4. critical comment
Rules for use under the Fair Use policy
1. nature of the work
2. the amount you borrowed
3. commercial impact
4. doesn't change the works value
The ReMix culture video states that it is all about "balance". Finding the delicate balance to keep everyone happy, to keep the authors and remixers teetering on the thin line between fair use and copyright infringement.
Use the Code of Best Practices!!! Give credit to creators!!!
So maybe my youth pastor's view of "better to do it and ask forgiveness than to risk the slow process of asking for permission."
1. I use songs that students know and re-word them in Spanish vocabulary.
2. some I create, some are pilfered from...you guessed it...online.
3. I had students create their own songs in Spanish using already existing music...often the hit pop song of the day.
So am I illegal by doing this? How can I protect myself and my students from legal action, but still be able to use this fun activity?
So let me read the assignments and I'll get back to you.
Well according to the Fair(y) Use Tale fair use is a small snippet of copyright intellectual property that you can use for:
1. teach
2. news reporting
3. parody
4. critical comment
Rules for use under the Fair Use policy
1. nature of the work
2. the amount you borrowed
3. commercial impact
4. doesn't change the works value
The ReMix culture video states that it is all about "balance". Finding the delicate balance to keep everyone happy, to keep the authors and remixers teetering on the thin line between fair use and copyright infringement.
Use the Code of Best Practices!!! Give credit to creators!!!
So maybe my youth pastor's view of "better to do it and ask forgiveness than to risk the slow process of asking for permission."
Week1_CopyrightIssues
Okay, well, hmmm. I fully believe pieces of work need to be copyrighted. However, there is a point where there is a thin line between a person's creativity and knowledge and realizing it was someone else's work after the fact (ignorance of a work's existence).
For instance, every time I hear the start of this song....
I think of this song....
So if I were to hear these on the radio...I would say the Queen song copied Vanilla Ice (wait...let me explain).
For instance, every time I hear the start of this song....
I think of this song....
So if I were to hear these on the radio...I would say the Queen song copied Vanilla Ice (wait...let me explain).
Because I grew up hearing V.I.'s song all the time. It wasn't until recently that I started hearing the Q's. So on the radio...it makes sense that I would think the latter copied the former. HOWEVER...I know the is not the case once I knew the musician's involved as the latter was around before the former.
Further more, during a previous month, my student's created this song:
Only after the fact did someone mention that the beginning lyrics sounded like this song...which I had never heard. Granted we said "we wear..." and it was in Spanish. However, under what we learned this week, I would be or could be found guilty of copyright infringement.
So, I'm left with the old addage that "ignorance is bliss" vs. Ignorantia juris non excusat or ignorantia legis neminem excusat (in English means "ignorance of the law does not excuse" or "ignorance of the law excuses no one")
For instance,
there was probably HUGE agreement, permission, legal issues things that happened before Weird Al was able to create this because it is created after this...
And likewise,
is taken from Faith Hill (apologies, the video embed code was disabled).
I can completely understand how confusion can set in when you see professionals appear to "rip off" other artists work. The general public does not see the behind the scenes work with copyright and legalizing their use of a copyrighted work.
I know when I saw the mashup episode of Glee, I wondered what other songs could be smooshed together into one. YouTube is full of wannabe Gleeks and mashers. The other thing filling up the bandwidth on YouTube are people creating their own videos, pictures to music, etc. Similar to things we created in MTA.
How do cover bands work? Are they all obtaining permission to perform and book gigs (often paying gigs)? And all the Elvi in Vegas, who do they get permission from to copy the King?
Where does this leave us? Do we need to change our summer reading to include copyright laws? As a teacher I see a LOT of plagiarism and a collective knowledge process of thought among my students. With the use of internet and having information at his fingertips, I had one student tell me that it was all "free for the taking." While I internally went ballistic, I tried to think of where he was coming from. It is my opinion that all the copyright issues were dealt with behind the scenes; therefore, creating a "I didn't know that happened" mentality among the students (general public). At the heart of the copyright issues, IMHO, is this "knowledge of the collective" or "all for one; one for all".
I'm hoping that I have confused the poo out of you, because this issue is SO complicated and SO extensive, that the is a fabulously large grey area where the balance between creative expression and legal rights need to be weighed out, challenged, questioned, thrown out, etc etc etc.
All the legal mumbo jumbo needs to be in plain English and brought to the public instead of fear and intimidation by legal action...education before prosecution.
Looking forward to the comments...
Further more, during a previous month, my student's created this song:
Only after the fact did someone mention that the beginning lyrics sounded like this song...which I had never heard. Granted we said "we wear..." and it was in Spanish. However, under what we learned this week, I would be or could be found guilty of copyright infringement.
So, I'm left with the old addage that "ignorance is bliss" vs. Ignorantia juris non excusat or ignorantia legis neminem excusat (in English means "ignorance of the law does not excuse" or "ignorance of the law excuses no one")
For instance,
there was probably HUGE agreement, permission, legal issues things that happened before Weird Al was able to create this because it is created after this...
And likewise,
is taken from Faith Hill (apologies, the video embed code was disabled).
I can completely understand how confusion can set in when you see professionals appear to "rip off" other artists work. The general public does not see the behind the scenes work with copyright and legalizing their use of a copyrighted work.
I know when I saw the mashup episode of Glee, I wondered what other songs could be smooshed together into one. YouTube is full of wannabe Gleeks and mashers. The other thing filling up the bandwidth on YouTube are people creating their own videos, pictures to music, etc. Similar to things we created in MTA.
How do cover bands work? Are they all obtaining permission to perform and book gigs (often paying gigs)? And all the Elvi in Vegas, who do they get permission from to copy the King?
Where does this leave us? Do we need to change our summer reading to include copyright laws? As a teacher I see a LOT of plagiarism and a collective knowledge process of thought among my students. With the use of internet and having information at his fingertips, I had one student tell me that it was all "free for the taking." While I internally went ballistic, I tried to think of where he was coming from. It is my opinion that all the copyright issues were dealt with behind the scenes; therefore, creating a "I didn't know that happened" mentality among the students (general public). At the heart of the copyright issues, IMHO, is this "knowledge of the collective" or "all for one; one for all".
I'm hoping that I have confused the poo out of you, because this issue is SO complicated and SO extensive, that the is a fabulously large grey area where the balance between creative expression and legal rights need to be weighed out, challenged, questioned, thrown out, etc etc etc.
All the legal mumbo jumbo needs to be in plain English and brought to the public instead of fear and intimidation by legal action...education before prosecution.
Looking forward to the comments...
Monday, June 27, 2011
Welcome
Welcome to my blog for the course Media Asset Creation for Month 11 in the Education Media Design and Technology program at Full Sail University in Winter Park, Florida.
Come back soon to see my comments.
Come back soon to see my comments.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)