I've moved to WordPress

The posts remaining on this blog are remnants of a class project. The New Media program at IUPUI first introduced me to blogging with this project. To read my new blog please 'click here' to read my new blog "new MEdia, in EDucation" at Wordpress.com
.

FRAUD! Mickey is really Steamboat Bill, Jr.

“Free Culture is about the troubles the Internet causes even after the modem is turned off.” The current lawsuit YouTube is in against production companies demonstrates this problem. The invention of the internet and the development of YouTube and video smashing is causing grief in the copyright/legal community long after you’ve finished looking at your daily videos.

YouTube’s source of intellectual property is not all that different from Disney’s. “There has never been a time in our history when more of our culture was owned as it is now.” (12) This quote from Free Culture is important because it is true. In Disney’s day this was not really an issue. From a legal perspective I would agree with Lessig’s opinion that creators like Disney are appropriate in their inventions.

In Disney’s day copyrights only last about 30 years which meant there was a large body of free information and ideas that could be further developed without permission. In that body of information was the Jazz Singer, Steamboat Bill, Jr. and the Brothers’ Grimm Fairy Tales. Disney had every right in the world to combine these great ideas into a then new form of media, which today is one of the most valuable in the world. Silent films would never have achieved that success.

Now as to the issue of whether Disney stole the intellectual property of these individuals’ creations, is the quote: “The source of confusion in protecting intellectual property is, ‘the distinction between republishing someone’s work on the one hand and building upon or transforming that work on the other.” (19) Clearly Disney wasn’t attempting to steal work because in each case he simply built upon older works and transformed them into an entirely new and unique product. Clearly, once again, Disney was not a thief, just a great story teller who understood what made a story more entertaining.

A free culture is something this country has attempted to maintain through the years of development and complication. “A successful free culture protects the rights of add-on inventors and developers, to make sure they are free as possible in their accumulation of intellectual property.” In Walt Disney’s case the free culture protected his rights in every way. Although today I imagine it would be near impossible to make an adaptation of a Disney movie and release it to the public, without being sued. This brings us to…

Rochelle Dryefuss theory of creative property rights, “if there is value, then someone must have a right to that value.” Steamboat Bill, Jr. could be considered incredibly valuable today because it was one of the original inspirations for Walt Disney’s success. So if that is true and it has value, then why is Keaton not entitled to rights within the Disney company. The constant question is whether the value added on by Disney should be credited to Keaton’s intellectual property. I would agree with Lessig that it is Disney’s intellectual property.

“Under both Japanese and American law, that “taking without permission” of the original copyright owner is illegal.” However, in Disney’s case as well as the Japanese art of Doujinshi it seems it is okay to copy if; the end result is not the same and/or the economic power of the ‘taking’ in question is great. Japan won’t get rid of Doujinshi, because it might actually negatively affect the Magna industry that copyright laws were created protect. It is the same with Disney.

Scientists often shares research to further advance their science, acting companies do different adaptations of plays, and even our founding fathers based their democracy off of former democratic systems. As Lessig says, “some things remain free for the taking within a free culture, and that freedom is good.”

YouTube, iTube, we ALL tube for YouTube

Today’s political environment resembles a mildly well organized circus. The citizen-generated content Jenkins credits with this circus, I believe, is really offering a unique opportunity to further develop political participation and understanding.

At the end of his essay Jenkins does mention, maybe this new content can move us toward “deeper political engagement”. The article gives me the sense that Jenkins thinks the ability of non-serious news and/or amateurs to reach a large political audience could spell doom for our political system. However, in the history of our political system, technology has always effected voter turn out and campaign process.

At one point a good train and loud voice were desirable of a candidate.. Later it was a firm radio voice, and then JFK and his pretty face. The point is, our political system is designed to change with the times and in the words of Dylan, ‘these times are a changin’.

Jenkins cited statistics regarding TV’s efforts to educate voters. The networks are still the largest provider of political information; however, comedy news is slowly catching ground. Shows, like Jon Stewart’s ‘Daily Show’, are providing political news and information to a growing number of people. In the past four years this number of people has grown 9 percent to 21 percent overall. I don’t think young adults, like me, are watching these shows simply for their humor, and as Jenkins mentions, they offer more live coverage than ABC, CBS and NBC.

My largest critique of Jenkins’ position in that he has concentrated on the wrong medium of information. Most young eligible voters would just as easily watch the Daily Show from Comedy Central’s website and simultaneously have a live web feed from a political convention, going at the same time.

If politicians want to get their voices heard and give some more stability to the political process; they need to embrace change in their political process and campaign strategies to utilize the new technology. YouTube is an example of bettering the political process through technology. Earlier this year CNN hosted a debate in which the Democratic Presidential candidates were given video questions from YouTube members across the country; YouTube is free for its members. I think using YouTube for those types of processes is exactly the kind of effective, advanced, grassroots technique that Donald Green would approve of.

Green had an different opinion about citizen-generated content. He felt that the comedy shows and MTV “vote parties” have little effect on voters. I would agree that those TV shows aren’t as opinion forming as the numbers show. However, the accessibility of online forms, videos, graphics, etc. can shift the opinions of a vast numbers of voters, in a short amount of time, with little too no cost. That can ROCK the VOTE.

Also, as any newspaper savvy person will tell you, the average reading ability of an American is rather low. This does not mix well with complicated politics. Our new media provides a great deal of information, some complicated and some simple. This allows someone to gain a political understanding without feeling overwhelmed or stupid and in response, simply not voting. I’ve always thought this illustration explain a very complex justice system in very simple terms, JUSTICE

Wow, I found this video after that last paragraph about simplification and I think its perfect, Hilary vs. Obama. The video covered nearly every issue in the campaign between Hilary and Obama, along with all the negative issues. Mixed together it all sounds like the mess it really is. I think showing this race as the name calling battle it is, is useful for voters. We need fresh perspectives on politics and a fresh method of storytelling. This video does an excellent job of telling the campaign’s story to young voters.

Snibbe's Interactive REsearch

I though Snibbe’s art was very creative, immersive artwork. He went through a large screen saver of art work. The first thing I noticed was that his actually presentation of his presentation was interactive. The linked windows he had to guide him through his art work seemed to be a message about interactivity in their own right.

Some of my favorite pieces covered by Snibbe were Cab Spotting, Fear, Boundary Functions, the Dynamic System Series, and the Duck in a Bottle.

The first artwork Snibbe covered was his Boundary Functions display. When I was reviewing my notes I remembered the section I read out of the Multi-Media Reader about Char Daives. In that reading Char Davies’ developed a virtual reality program named Osmose, the program was designed to create ultimate immersion. It used techniques in virtual reality that were similar to the ones Snibbe used in Boundary Functions.

In the VR project, breath and balance were used to control movement and the scenes were designed to be unfamiliar and trigger “deep thinking”. Snibbe used the same principles in his art. “Boundary Functions” used the body as an interface just like Osmose. Also both Davies and Snibbe used their work, not only as a form of self-expression, but to study people. Snibbe called his observations proximatics.

Proximatics is, I believe, the study of people and their movements. Boundary Funtions, “immersively” expressed the idea that, “personal space is only defined by your relationship to others”. This expressive thought is similar to the kind of thought Daives wanted to provoke through Osmose.

He explained that his intent for the experiment and the true purpose of his interactive art is to study/observe human interaction.

I love the interactivity of Snibbe’s artwork. I was especially interested in 2-D artwork made for the computer screen. He called these programs the “Dynamic System Series” I thought it was creative artwork. I like the idea that it will always exist on the internet as a piece of art work but it will never be the same for any one user. The series consisted of the Double Rock, the Bubble Heart, and the Ant Trail. The hand was the interface for this program. The program was used to visually present the natural movement of the hand. I though the natural patterns of the hands motion were very unique and pleasing to the eye.

I thought Snibbe himself gave a very fun, interactive presentation. He covered a wide-range of subjects in his speech.

The Verbal Paradox, “Duck in the bottle” piece was a great visual metaphor for understanding the unanswerable question. The unanswerable question is used by Buddhists to un-do the tradition ways of thinking to gain enlightenment. This idea is also very similar to the effect that Davies’ Osmose created in its users.

Moments like that in his speech reminded me of a lot of the lessons we have covered in class: ways to engage original thinking, employing the used of technical production with creativity, and understanding how people communicate with each other.

Finally, I wanted to make a quick comment on the “Cab-spotting” piece. I though this presented a glimpse into the future of marketing research. With the technology to accurately track the flow of traffic daily valuable marketing information can be gained.

UnScramble My creATIVe JUICES!

WHILE there were many guidelines and principles in the first four lectures; I feel the "Types of Design Processes" in Lecture 4 was most interesting. This class is doing a great job of teaching us to express our passion, curiosity, and how to establish a fresh perspective on life and design.

MANY of the classes in the New Media program have that, “get completely out of the box and never get back in,” feel to them. I love that about this program; I actually used to attend Ball State until I discovered New Media. Along with the great technology we work with, the instructors’ emphasis upon increasing our passion for discovery and our curiosity of design and convention, is going to give the New Media students an incredible advantage in today’s “Global Village”

BRAINSTORMING is another valuable process. When you get those fresh ideas they need to be recorded somewhere. Brainstorming is an excellent way of getting down all the crazy ideas. As your ideas build up, it makes any challenge seem far less daunting. Also, it is something you can return to when you are struggling with new ideas and feel uninspired.

I HAVE never done much of the paper prototyping process; however, I think it may be a good exercise in creative design. The cut up paper seems like a good way of instigating some abstract thinking.

STORYBOARDING is a good form of brainstorming. It is especially useful for those who are more visual learners. Storyboarding is a simple, efficient way of visualizing a presentation or product.