FINAL PROJECT REMIX - THE LAST ETHICBENDER

For my project I decided to tackle the issue of ethical issues of fair use. The way in which I am portraying this issue is by looking at the work that director M. Night Shyamalan did in his remake of popular cartoon series, Avatar the Last Airbender. When looking at the original cartoon series, the show is a representation of an Asian influenced world where the creators of the series hired a cultural consultant and calligrapher to get the aspects of the culture correct. The components of the series derives elements of Chinese characters, martial arts and religions, mixed with the anime style animation and prominent Asian influences allowed the show to earn a spot on the Top 100 Animated TV Shows list at number 35. Where the creators of the series did everything right, Shyamalan did everything wrong, from the martial arts used to the casting of the characters. Shyamalan caused an uproar from fans, critics and the Asian community alike receiving awards for the Worst Film of 2010.

In class, we discussed examples of ethically mistreatment in the entertainment industry. For example, Lego’s toy and television series, Bionicle is derived the Maori culture. However, Lego was not considerate when it came to portraying their culture correctly. The Maori people tried to battle the misuse and representation of their culture but were overruled by the copyright laws that Lego had over the Bionicle brand (Lecture 4/3/2014). Another instance that we learned about in class was hip-hop group Outkast’s 2004 Navajo indian themed grammy performance, which included feathers and war painted and turned out to be a big misrepresentation of the indian culture (Lecture 4/10/2014). Both instances of unethical fair use has triggered negative responses in the communities. The same is true for M. Night Shyamalan’s film, The Last Airbender, where he casted actors of Caucasian and Middle Eastern descent to portray the Asian characters in the original series. Shyamalan’s defense for doing so included him stating he wanted to create the world’s most diverse film with an array of multicultural actors. However, the series itself was diverse in which no changes to how the culture should have been portrayed should have changed. 

One of the points Jane Anderson makes in her lecture at The Library of Congress concerning indigenous cultures and their anxiety of the recreation of their culture, was that given the mass of collections of archived material is not how the people of the culture from which it was derived may have not wanted it to be portrayed. “The second anxiety rises precisely in poignantly because these enormous collections that had been amassed are not how indigenous people would have chosen to represent themselves.  Indigenous peoples were not informed that this material was produced and used to fit them into a very specific vision of the world that reduced their cultural practices and justified the dispossession of their lands, resources and cultures” (Anderson). The corporations or individuals that turn the intangible aspects of ones culture into something tangible have the copyrights to that creation, notes Anderson, meaning the original authors of the intangible do have any authority of the created materials (Anderson). The casting of characters from a non-Asian descent proved Anderson’s point because the critical response of the Asian community made it clear the sheer dislike of the casting of the films characters, however they had no control and could not gain control to change the casting or other aspects of the movie to their liking. Shyamalan, having rights to recreate the series into a movie, did whatever he saw fit for his vision for both the series and the movie; the personalities of the characters, the martial arts, names of the characters and much more were changed to fit his vision.

For the basis of my project, I decided to create different movie/comparison posters featuring the original cartoon character, the casted movie character and a custom poster to more accurately portray the cartoon character. In doing so, I wanted to emphasize that corporations, directors, and other individuals will gain copyrights to creations such as the film The Last Airbender and do with as they please without any ethical consideration for not only the fans of the content but the community of where culture was the inspiration for the creation. The creators of the cartoon series provided a framework of a proper ethical use of culture. However, when the movie was created the director took the framework and remediated a project of his own vision rather than being considerate of the fans of the series, the community of which the series was derived from and the handwork of the original creators as well. In other words, I remixed the movie posters to replicate the drastic changes Shyamalan did in his rendition of The Last Airbender to show how copyright laws and ethical issues can stir up controversy but also show not much can be done about it.


Link to full paper with citations page:

https://www.icloud.com/iw/#pages/BALUI18Wu6zDz0AnuTqB4YP0wp5YQOAjyE2F/DTC_356_FINAL_PROJECT_JUSTIFICATION_PAPER

Apple v Samsung Patent Case; Similar to Copyright Unit

Recently Apple Inc. is suing Samsung Electronics for a sum of $2.2 billion, arguing that 9 of Samsung's smartphones infringe on 5 of its patents. In turn, Samsung is countersuing Apple for a sum of $6 million as they argue that Apple infringed on 2 of their patents when the first iPhone was created. This premise of each company infringing on each others patents ties somewhat into the unit of copyright that we discussed in class. Where one individual or corporation has rights to something and work to prevent others from using it without paying some kind of royalties or prevent use altogether. In the example, where Stephanie Lenz posted a video of her son dancing to "Lets Go Crazy" by Prince, she was soon threatened to be sued for copyright. Lenz apparently did not have permission or the rights to use said content in the video that she posted on YouTube. The trial between these two smartphone giants is quite similar, whatever patents that Samsung infringed they were obviously something that Apple had the rights to and did not grant Samsung permissions to use, and vice versa. This shows that copyright goes beyond into an issue that individuals and corporations are keeping all ideas and creations to themselves without allowing anyone to use them for inspiration to create. Our world is selfish and money hungry to say the least but hopefully things will change to inspire even greater creations.

Unit Three Wrap up

In unit 3, we focused on many aspects of copyright laws, ethical usage of others content, intellectual property and more. We explored how companies like Disney have previously used content from other sources to influence their own works and then have strict copyright laws to prevent others from doing the same. We also looked at how the ethical copyright was being abused. For example the Maori culture was wrongly portrayed in the Bionicle Lego series. Sunder talked about how corporations are using things from the past in the ways that they want to. This is one of this ethical issues or fair use, which is not willing to accurately depicted others cultures and people. Nothing could really be done because Lego had the ideas and aspects of the series copyrighted. In the movie, RIP Manifesto, we seen how the two largest corporations Warner Chapel and the recording industry association of America controlled and enforced the copyright laws even when it could be deemed inappropriate.  The entirety of the movie was illegal since permissions were not granted for the author to use the songs and clips in his movie. The lawyer in the movie Lawrence Lessig even states that when writing a paper you give the author credit for using their work, the same should be for music and video. How absurd would it be to have to ask permission to use another authors paper to cite in your paper and possibly have to pay them royalties? We discussed the ideas of free and fair culture and as a class the consensus became that our cultures content should be free to the extent that the original creators are fairly receiving credit and/or royalties for their works being samples or remixed. We would like to live in a culture where we are ethically responsible when using aspects of other cultures, works, and more. 

WHO SAMPLED?!?

The song that I chose is entitled, "The Birds Part II" by The Weeknd. The song uses a sample from Martina Topley-Bird called "Sandpaper Kisses." The Weeknd uses the bridge from the sampled song:
"Sandpaper kisses, paper cut bliss
Don't know what this is, but it all leads to this
You're gonna leave her
You have deceived her
You're just a bird"

The way in which The Weeknd uses this sampling is quite creative when you understand the context of the song. The original sampling is remixed with a higher pitch and tempo. I would not consider this stealing personally, I would categorize it as a creative remediation of an existing creative work. Even so The Weeknd notes on his record that the sampling was 'used by permission.'

If fair use can be categorized as being a portion of another person's content and then giving credit to the original creator then I would say that this song would be covered by fair use. However, if The Weeknd didn't have permissions, then there would be other limitations and exceptions that may or may not fall into the clause of fair use. Since The Weeknd did get permissions to use the sample, he dodged a potential suit from the original creators corporation, similar to the case of Universal Music Group against Stephanie Lenz for copyright infringement when she recorded her 18-month old son dancing to a Prince track and put it up on YouTube.

In the case of this song, The Weeknd uses most of his own creativity for this record and uses a remediated creative work from another creator as the bridge to enhance and even influence greater creativity throughout the current song or future song. The Weeknd as an artist uses a lot of samples in his music and at the same time, his own original music is sampled and remixed as well. When it comes to originality and authorship, in order to create new creative works we must be able to work off of one another but at the same time giving credit where credit is due for the original work that influenced the creative piece. That seems like one of the important and ethical ways for free culture and fair culture to be one.

A link to the sampling can be viewed and listened to at the following address:

[  http://www.whosampled.com/sample/111603/The-Weeknd-The-Birds-(Pt.-2)-Martina-Topley-Bird-Sandpaper-Kisses/  ]

Ownership, Privacy, Public Domain and the Eye of Horus

In collaboration with: Danielle Clement

In this unit we have begun exploring how the ownership of a content creator often times shifts to ownership of the people of the online world. We have also explored the subject of privacy on online and determining whether or not there is such thing as privacy online. 

With the concern of privacy, we discovered that almost no one can be completely private on the internet. Social Networks, search engines, other websites and services all track and keep an archive of the information we look at and post on the web. They do this to better tailor the internet for us and just because they are allowed to. The users of the internet sign over posts, pictures and other information that they would believe to be private but is in fact is accessible and property of the organization, i.e Facebook, because they frame the agreement in their terms and conditions of the website. This transitions to the next point that although we may be the content creators, by sharing the content on the internet other users have access to it and can remediate or use how they please unless we have a copyright. So overall, you have rights to your own creation…so does everyone else. Because of factors such as terms and conditions, the openness of the internet, low-scale privacy nothing you put on the internet is necessarily yours anymore.

This applies to relics such as The Eye of Horus Amulet. This amulet is a precious relic of ancient Egyptian history from the Third Intermediate Period (1068-661 BC), and the symbol itself can also be referred to as the Faience Wedjet Eye Amulet. Currently, the amulet is located in the British Museum. This ancient Egyptian artifact is a symbol of protection, royal power, and good health. The ancient Egyptians created this artifact to represent Horus, the ancient Egyptian sky god, who is usually depicted as a falcon or a falcon-headed man, which is a predatory bird. Horus’ right eye is said to be associated with the sun (sun god, Ra) and left eye associated with the moon (god Thoth). 

Ancient myths describe a battle between Horus and Set fighting for the throne after Osiris’ death (Horus’ father) which led to the gouging out of Horus’ left eye. The god Thoth restored the lost eye of Horus, a symbol of good health. It is said that the retrieved eye is seen as the moon, and the other is associated with the sun. In this myth specifically, the Eye of Horus is related to the waxing and waning of the moon, illustrating the parts of the moon that have been ‘torn out of the sky’ during the lunar cycle. Thus, Horus has a sizeable amount of influence over these powerful forces of nature. Horus then presented this eye to his father, Osiris, to represent the restoration of royal power. Because of the loss and triumph Horus had experienced, the eye is a very powerful symbol for ancient Egyptian culture. The Eye of Horus is worn and displayed as a protective amulet. Horus is a well respected god and one of the oldest, and he stands as an important figure in ancient Egyptian history. A depiction of both eyes is very uncommon because one represents the daytime and one represents the nighttime. Therefore, one eye rests while the other is looking over mankind. 

The Eye of Horus can be correlated to other parts of ancient Egyptian culture as well. The eye represents six different parts, corresponding to the six senses: sight, smell, thought, hearing, touch, and taste. The eye is the receptor and it has six doors to receive data. The Eye of Horus is mathematically measured out into different sections, in the measurement of a ‘heqat’. These measurements were utilized in everyday ancient Egyptian life, such as measuring ingredients in medicines and pigments. 

The Eye of Horus is commonly found in artwork, jewelry, tattoos, apparel screen-printing, and even used in makeup. This ancient Egyptian symbol has been referenced in the movie, The Mummy returns (2001) in the form of a tattoo on Brendan Fraser. The all-seeing eye can be found on the American dollar bill. It has also just recently been used by American recording artist, Katy Perry, in her hit music video Dark Horse ft. Juicy  J (2014). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KSOMA3QBU0&feature=kp

In the past decade, the Eye of Horus has been tied to ‘the all-seeing eye’ and ‘the illuminati’ that is said to control the world through influential icons of society, such as pop and rap artists and politicians. The Eye of Horus, or the all-seeing eye is also found in the new 2013 movie, Now You See Me. This movie is about a group of magicians serving as puppets to an organization called “The Eye”. This movie is a representation of the media and entertainment industry which dominates control over its audience (the world). This movie supports the theory of “The Illuminati” and the “all-seeing eye”. 

Although these are only a few examples, there are hundreds of more representations of the Eye of Horus and the all-seeing eye used in media today. It is interesting to look at the transformation of a symbol and myth from centuries ago to society today, yet the essence of it and connotation remain almost intact from its origin. This transformation and usage of a historical ancient Egyptian artifact into an iconic symbol of control and power embodies the lessons we have learned in unit 3. Media and internet usage have allowed for and encouraged manipulation and modification of another culture’s work to use in different cultural and social contexts in both the 21st century and past centuries. 

Social in Social Media

Some of the main takeaways from the second unit are about social media, ways in which it keeps up connected, ways in which activist groups utilize it, and the overall effects of social media. In Danah Boyd's article she talks about the different elements of social media and how networked publics and invisible audiences play a role in how we share content on these social media platforms. Four of the structural affordances of networked publics she focuses on are, persistence, replicability, scalability, searchability. In class we were divided into groups and picked a social media site and explored the affordances that Pinterest uses. We discovered that one of the main premises of the network is to foster relationships among its users and creates away for a participant to reach an 'intended audience' by way of 'unintended audience.' The way social media sites are set up to create, share, duplicate, store and emphasize content to the masses is a way for individuals to express and connect on the internet in ways that was never possible before.

PETA and animals versus the world

The organization that my group and I are researching is PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals). PETA uses a variety of different social media outlets such as Twitter, Facebook, Youtube, Instagram, Pinterest and more. The way in which PETA uses social media is by updating their followers and supporters about the latest information about animal cruelty instances, adoptions, rescues and more. In addition to these updates, PETA uses memes and other graphic pictures and videos to try and persuade their audience to join their movement to protect and help animals. Many of PETA's networks allow for their supporters and followers to report to the organization with protests, opinions, outreach, vegan recipes and other information that is worthy to PETA's cause.

After exploring PETA's use of social media and the articles written by Gladwell and Mirani, I would have to agree with Gladwell that, "the revolution may well be tweeted." In many instances on Twitter and Facebook, many of PETA's followers and supporters tend to respond to the post/tweets that PETA publishes and the content is primarily about the real world activism these individuals are doing and is  being shared through social media. One of the many responses to a post by PETA was as such: "I have stopped eating PORK AND BEEF for almost a year..... and limit my intake of chicken.... GOAL - to be eating a plant based diet.... I do not want to be part of this misery, I want to be part of the SOLUTION!!!" This is just one of the many examples of post that a follower of PETA's has posted to the organization.

Online Activism is essential as it is a way for individuals to know about an issue that they wouldn't normally have a way to know about. Although the act of 'liking' or 'retweeting' doesn't necessarily help the cause itself, being able to spread the information increases the possibility that the information will be spread to someone that could indeed do something to help the cause if they deem it worthy enough to assist.