1

SLIDE 1

Hello,

Today, with the theme of Languages, I will talk about copying and artistic creation,
originality and the defense of copyright. Taking the documentary RIP!: A Manifest
Remix as a starting point. I will also bring you an example of a contemporary remix that
was very successful.

SLIDE 2

The documentary is directed by cyberactivist Brett Gaylor, and has as its main focus
the discussion about copyright, intellectual property, information sharing and the culture
of remix in the days of today.

Documentarian Brett Gaylor was born in 1977, his parents wanted to escape the world.
Teenagers wanted to connect. With the internet, he connected from his island in Canada
to the world. His generation became internet experient, downloaded world culture, and
turned it into something different.

SLIDE 3

But what is REMIX?

Show the video:

This technique turns the computer into an instrument. These are notes that come from
thousands of pop classics, cut and rearranged to create new songs.
This film is about a war, a war faced by independent artists.
A War for Ideas The battleground today is the internet.

SLIDE 4
Marybeth Peters, - U.S. Copyright Officer from 1994 to 2010 says “It's taking
something that was and turning it into something it wasn't.”

Brett Gaylor ask: Can he be sued?

And she: It depends. It depends on who has the rights and how much it bothers them.
2

SLIDE 5

Girl Talk, the first caracther of the documentary, is an American disc jockey who
specializes in mash-ups and digital sampling. He said it was like taking a swing at
untouchable artists. "Put a beat behind him and pour a beer over his head."

For him, in fact, the fight is not with these artists, because the rules of this game do not
depend on who composed it but depend on who controls the copyright.

In the remix movement, the creative process became more important than the product.

Don't ask if I want to hear U2 at the restaurant, why do I need to ask to use their songs
to create something, laugh at them and criticize them?

Consumers became creators of the popular art of the future.

SLIDE 6

But the people who own the culture we remix represent the past.
Ideas are intellectual property locked up for sale. Supermarket of ideas that wants to
make money.

We have the COPYRIGHT, but we have also the COPYLEFT, because sharing ideas is
the future of art and culture.

SLIDE 7
The documentary shows that, in nineteen ninety eight, NAPSTER, emerged to
transform computers into a music sharing network in the P2P (Peer to peer) system.
In eighteen months, the largest collection of human creativity in the world was
assembled and created for free. When it was deactivated, the lights came on and fifty
two million people became pirates.
3

SLIDE 8

Meanwhile, a lawyer started a movement to free them. His name is Lawrence Lesing.
He entered the manifesto that inspired this film.

MANIFEST

1– Culture always build on the past.

2 – The past always tries to control the future.
3 – Our future is becoming less free.
4 – To build free societies, you must limit the control of the past.

SLIDE 9

But how?

The subversion done by remixing is a great example.

“The importance of remixing has nothing to do with the technique that each of the
videos presents. The important thing is that the technique was democratized.”

He also feels that “There is no way to stop this technology.

It can criminalize the use.” “We cannot stop using culture to express ideas differently.”
“We cannot keep our children passive as we were. They are becoming pirates.”

We have OPINIONS DIVERGED AND EVEN ARTISTS DIVIDED:

Chuck D from Public Enemy said “Power returns to the people”.

In contrast, Lars Ulrich from Metalica said “Am I entitled to do it for free because
technology has allowed me to do it?”

And even when Lawrence Lessing was asked by director Brett Gaylor if he would be
sued for making the documentary, the lawyer said: "Respecting intellectual property
rights and obtaining authorization is crucial to avoiding legal problems."

SLIDE 10
Let's see what the Girl Talk`s family has to say about copyright:

SLIDE 11

And the law is clear, according to the article 9 of copyright content in Portugal:

2 –The author has the exclusive right to dispose of his work and to enjoy and use it, or
to authorize its enjoyment or use by a third party, in whole or in part.
4

SLIDE 12

Copyright was born to encourage people to create and guarantee copyright. The first law
appeared in one thousand seven hundred and ten (1710), in the statute of Queen Anne,
in England and, after 14 years, it already entered the public domain in order to have a
balance between copyright and public rights.

Today, in the US, Brazil, Portugal and most democratic states, copyright law defends
the rights of authors for a period of 70 years after their death.

SLIDE 13

I also bring the documentary “Everything is a Remix”, by Canadian filmmaker Kirby

Ferguson, recommended by Professor Carla and his quotes: “Nowadays anyone can
remix anything, you don't even need skills.” And “Remix is almost everything the
entertainment industry produces. “We have stories retold from the origin of mankind.
Everything really seems like a remix when we realize that even Tomas Edison didn't
invent the light bulb, this patent is earlier. He invented the first marketable light bulb.

Ferguson argues that intellectual property laws contradict their own intent to "promote
the progress of the useful arts" by stifling the root of creativity.

The problem, he says, is that we think of creative works as individual property, rather
than content that lives in the public domain. I don't agree, but I'll talk about that later.

It features two types of LEGAL REMIX

COVERS – performances of other people’s material

KNOCK-OFFS – copies that stay within legal boundaries

SLIDE 14

Led Zeppelin made a Knock-off of the verse "I've got my ticket; I've got that load" and
and gave the name “bring it to on home” to one of their songs. Verse with part of the
melody and the title are taken from a Sonny Boy Williamson`song.

When the song “Levee Breaks” was copied many times, the band artists, never sued
anyone.

I found no legal guarantees that Knock off can be performed without permission from
the original artist.
5

SLIDE 15

And when the fight for copyright is between artists?

Andy Warhol made the “Orange Prince” illustration of the singer Prince used on the
cover of Vanity Fair magazine. He was sued accused of having made his work on the
photography of Lynn Goldsmith. The photographer won the lawsuit now in two
thousand twenty three.

The court, Judge Sonia Sotomayor said: "Lynn Goldsmith's original works, like those of
other photographers, are entitled to copyright protection, even against famous artists."

SLIDE 16

It is worth remembering “The basic elements of creativity — Copy, Transform, and

Combine, presented by Fergunson, that distills the process that artists, engineers,
programmers, musicians, and filmmakers throughout history have repeated in order to
learn their craft and eventually new produce products.

SLIDE 17

Back to the remix manifesto, we saw that Lawrence went to Brazil and got to know the
socio-cultural movement that was born to set culture free. With a license that said: "I as
a musician give you the right to sample my work, take and build, create, remix."

SLIDE 18

Another example is the form of protest CULTURE JAMMING, to disrupt or subvert

media culture and its mainstream cultural institutions, including corporate advertising.
The aim is to USE THE CULTURAL MEDIA AGAINST ITSELF to criticize its power
over us, since we are not asked if we want billboards all over the city. Companies want
us to only consume, and we want to react, absorb, multiply and cut culture.

SLIDE 19

Originality today happens when we harvest and recombine the fruits of history in a
unique way.

Creativity is not a copy, creativity is the original part of artistic creation, even if this
creation arises by recombining elements from other works, this rearrangement is
original, becoming something new.
6

SLIDE 20

Many artists make a living from their creations and are not famous or millionaires. Not
all of them sell their music to large corporations like Warner Chappel. They need to
charge for the use of their creations to live.

SLIDE 21

And the future has arrived with digital corporations and new ways of remixing.

SLIDE 22

Tiktok started to offer the possibility of dubbing content and this accelerated its growth,
pleasing a generation that could recreate content instead of creating it.

A different and cool remix that uses the same audio with a different video.

SLIDE 23

But, Who is responsible for copyright on instagram and tiktok posts ?

SLIDE 24

I mixed the song "Cold Heart" by Elton John and DuaLipa with images from the movie
"American Beauty". I didn't mention the authors. Will apps warn me that I violate
copyright?

The answer is no.

7

SLIDE 25

According to the platforms, users are responsible for the content they post on their
account. These platforms are considered intermediaries or internet service providers,
and they usually have terms of use and policies that define guidelines for the proper use
of the platform.

However, the platforms themselves also have responsibilities regarding hosted content.
Under the legislation of some countries, platforms may be required to take steps to
remove or block illegal or harmful content, as well as provide mechanisms for reporting
and moderating content.

If someone believes that their copyright has been infringed on any of the platforms, they
can file a copyright infringement claim by following the platform-specific procedures.

But...

SLIDE 26

In 2019, the Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council requires platforms
measures to prevent illegal content and to obtain licenses for the use of content
protected by copyright.

And…The Law 11/2023 from the "Diário da República"in Portugal said that “Create,
in favor of authors and artists, interpreters or performers, the right to demand and obtain
information on the exploitation of their works and services by licensees, transferees or
third parties….”

SLIDE 27

AI is also challenging traditional notions of authority—the identity of the person or

entity that created a work.

1 - The artificial intelligence should be considered the author, as it was responsible for
generating the image.
2 - The person who created the AI should be considered the creator, as they were
responsible for designing and training the AI to generate the image.
3 - No one can be considered the author and the work should be in the public domain
(and free to use).
8

Conclusion

I leave here a criticism of the documental approach, which seemed a bit Manichean to
me, with regard to the opposition between a repressive past and a tendentiously free
future, since the current internet scenario dominated by today's bigtechs, hinders having
a romantic look about it. The intensification of online connection and monitoring
creates spaces where social life is increasingly susceptible to saturation by corporate
actors motivated by profit and/or by the regulation of human behavior that does not
suggest salvation.
When the music industry refused to evolve, then a generation evolved for it. However,
this same generation is shown to be hostage to the consequences that have become
harmful from the digital transformation.

Finally, I am the son of a woman artist who supported her children by selling stories.
Therefore, respect and defense of the rights and ownership of artists over their ideas.