Creative Commons

8 03 2012

Creative Commons project allows individuals to share their pieces of work with others over the web easily, legally and fairly. While others have trouble with keeping their credit for work, this site allows works to be shared so that one can gain recognition through the web. With the rights reserved, the creator allows his work to be appropriated through different uses. The license allows for creators to essentially “give away” their work with copyright. The article I reviewed and thought was the most interesting was about Jonathan Coulton, who allowed for his work to be downloaded so that he would be able to gain recognition and thus be able to have his name be out in the public. Even though Coulton would not gain financial compensation for all the music he gives out online, he will ultimately benefit when he gets his name out to big corporations and makes it big, he will then make money off his work. He did not give away all of his rights away, Creative Commons protects about half of his work so that he is able to make money after he becomes successful and compensation from the appropriations by others.

This could be applied to a similar situation in which video makers post their movies, films, clips on the internet for entertainment purposes in order to gain recognition. The video and the success of the video is solely the creators, if of course a form of copy right is applied. From personal experience, my cousin puts up videos on YouTube just for entertainment purposes and recently was contacted by YouTube in order for him to receive compensation. The legal aspects were involved before any contract was signed of course, for had it not been, my cousin would lose his right to his films and YouTube would receive everything.

Gone with the Wind and the works for Sherrie Levine and Michael Mandenberg have completely different situations for the fact that Levine and Mandenberg have free copy right on their works so that others may alter, download and copy their works. Gone with the Wind has stricter copy right infringement laws for their works cannot be distributed for commercial use and purposes.

I believe it is extremely important for Creative Commons to give leeway  toward copy right and ownership, however, one must not be oblivious to the legal obligations Creative Commons, the artist and the viewers who are taking from the artist. In the case of Bela Lugosi, his family had stated that they had not wanted Lugosi’s image to be used for commercial gain without there permission. The reason being that if the production company used Lugosi’s images and gained profit, the family would not have received anything. Unfortunately, the Lugosi family did not win this battle for Bela Lugosi had not converted his image into a property to be used for commercial gain only allowed to his family. Since he was a worker for Universal Pictures, they (Universal) was able to indeed profit off Lugosi’s image even after his death. Had Creative Commons taken over and been a resource for the family, Lugosi could have made it that his image and stardom be available to his family usage only.





Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: