"Lessig talks about how changes in technologies brought about changes in the ways people exercised what he characterizes, using Felten's words, as their "right to tinker." Gleick talks about how those technologies evolved. Lessig talks about Disney and doujinshi and Einstein as instances of how people might exercise that "right to tinker." What are some other good examples have you seen in the DTC major of you and your peers exercising that "right to tinker"? How much has that right been constrained or opened up by the technological tools you use?"
--------------------
I remember my first two DTC courses, Digital Media Authoring and Digital Storytelling. It came as a surprise to some classmates (and most likely as a hard lesson for others), that they could not use their favorite popular music in their videos. I had used some copyrighted music in videos before, back in high school (before Youtube even warned you about that sort of thing), but I never made them available to the public. Towards the end of my high school career, I was using Creative Commons material for my Youtube videos, as the re-use of copyrighted material was being strictly defined and strictly banned.
So, I still use Creative Commons music today. I have no skill or experience in writing music, and likely never will. Yes, copyright restriction force me to be more self-reliant in my creative endeavors but more and more, it seems like the vast repository of media out there in the world is becoming more and more inaccessible. This may change, as it appears that "indie" bands are becoming more popular. If you want to use an indie band's music in your video, at least your chances of talking with a real person on the other end of the phone line, rather than a computer, are higher.
For a time, it wasn't hard to create your own media. Anyone could write a book. If you could sing well, maybe you'd get asked to make a record by the local radio station. Then we started leaving media production to the "professionals", and now most American media is owned by corporations. Perhaps that will change if more people who create media allow other people to re-use and re-mix their creations. Basic tools for creating and sharing media are becoming more and more available to common user. The consumer has become creator.
Now, I create media. I shoot photos and make videos. I post them online for others to see. Admittedly, I have never released any of my work as "Creative Commons", though I have considered it. Still, I have taken pictures at events and museums, and have allowed anyone who really wants "a copy of my photo" to use that photo for whatever they want to use it for, as long as it isn't for commercial gain (and to be honest, if a small museum wants to sell a photo I took as a postcard in their giftshop, I have no problem with that).
I think it all comes down to what the owner of the media thinks the purpose for the media's creation was. Record companies make records to make money. I take photos to show other what I see, and because I have the knowledge and ability to make a good photograph. I share my photos with museums so people can see them and so the museum can have good advertising on their website or Facebook page. I'm fine with allowing other people to tinker with my work, to remix it, and to share it.
At this point in time, I rarely tinker with media that I did not create. I prefer my work to be original, and "fair use" is currently to much of a hassle to be feasible (which, perhaps, is the government's exact intention). I figure that, rather than remixing, I can just create something similar, but better, on my own.
--Drew Black
