From: Myron Ort (email suppressed)
Date: Sun Jun 08 2008 - 18:22:21 PDT
Eli,
Thanks for expanding things to a substantive discussion.
I am reminded of a relevant example from the year 1960, exactly
when I transferred from UCLA to UC Berkeley, partly instigated by
this infamous "fire hose incident" and the consequent protests.
The film "Operation Abolition" and the follow up film "Operation
Correction" which corrects this propaganda while utilizing material
from the first film is an early example of "cultural resistance" I
would think.
http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/videodir/asx2/huac.asx
http://sunsite.berkeley.edu/videodir/asx2/correction.asx
I was surprised to find that both films in their entirety were
available on the web. Hope some here will have the patience to view
the history.
The current wave of "comedic" "fake news" programs well uses an
archive of actual clips to reveal widespread lying, hypocrisy , and
media manipulations.
Myron Ort
On Jun 8, 2008, at 12:41 PM, Eli Horwatt wrote:
> Not to veer too far off of the original discussion topic, but I
> think it's worth addressing Myron Ort's comments about using
> materials of the public domain.
>
> To refresh, Ort wrote:
>
> Perhaps "found" footage refers to how the filmmaker "obtained" the
> material rather than anything inherent to the footage, like who
> might actually own the rights. Hopefully a "found footage" or
> "collage" film would be constructed from material in public domain.
> Just because you "found" the footage in a dumpster so to speak
> doesn't mean it is free from copyright restrictions. Generally the
> term "found footage" implies that the filmmaker didn't shoot it,
> not that it is necessarily legal to use. Maybe "stock footage
> film" might be a useful term. Often even "stock footage" is
> credited, having been leased from the so-called "owner".
>
> So what do you do if you happen to see that someone "found" your
> work on a dvd, re-edited it, and presents it perhaps without proper
> credit on Youtube.? Maybe they even say that it is their film.
>
> Myron Ort
>
> My reply: Distinctions should be made between plagiarism and
> appropriation. Attempting to pass off another artist's work as your
> own is a far cry from appropriating components of that work for
> critique or even into a new art work. Much of early found footage
> filmmaking was made from ephemeral materials which (to my
> knowledge) didn't instigate copyright owners to file lawsuits.
> Today however, it is a different case. First, found footage, like
> appropriation (as Hal Foster argues in "Recordings") should be
> understood as a form of cultural resistance. This resistance is
> protected when it falls into the category of parody (according to
> the famous 2 Live Crew Lawsuit
> Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc.)
>
> Also, we should acknowledge appropriation can be a form of
> quotation. It is legal for me to quote brief passages of a textual
> work without owing royalties. Why does this not also apply to
> visual and even auditory media?
>
> To return to the idea of resistance, filmmakers and artists like
> Nam June Paik, Mark Rappaport and Craig Baldwin have voiced
> variations on the idea that found footage (or media appropriation)
> is a powerful tool of resistance against the mainstream media. Nam
> June Paik wrote "Television has been attacking us all our lives,
> now we can attack it back." Rappaport has said that if prosecuted
> for copyright violations, "My excuse in a court of law would be
> that these images have corrupted us and it's our turn at bat." Both
> used appropriation as a tool to critique mainstream media, or as
> Baldwin suggests, use images of the media against itself as a form
> of media jujitsu. The problem with getting the rights to use other
> people's media is that 1) people will attempt to prevent anyone
> from critiquing their work (such as the famous case of "The Wind
> Done Gone" update of "Gone with the Wind" told through the eyes of
> a slave which was brought into court by the estate of Margaret
> Mitchell) 2) the rights to such works are often unfairly high and
> 3) the progress of culture is based on a certain amount of
> recycling, adaptation, parody and appropriation.
>
> In the end, I don't think found footage should necessarily come
> from the public domain-partially because copyright laws right now
> are Draconian but mostly because the most powerful critiques are
> likely to come from contemporary works currently under copyright.
> I'm not advocating that people break the law, just that the law as
> it was intended suggests that parody, quotation, critique and fair
> use are all facets of copyright law.
>
> Sorry for the long rant!
>
> Eli Horwatt
> M.A. Student - York University
> Cinema Studies
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 10:37 PM, Matt Helme <email suppressed>
> wrote:
> Sue them!
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----
> From: Myron Ort <email suppressed>
> To: email suppressed
> Sent: Saturday, June 7, 2008 3:00:58 PM
> Subject: Re: the term found-footage
>
> Perhaps "found" footage refers to how the filmmaker "obtained" the
> material rather than anything inherent to the footage, like who
> might actually own the rights. Hopefully a "found footage" or
> "collage" film would be constructed from material in public domain.
> Just because you "found" the footage in a dumpster so to speak
> doesn't mean it is free from copyright restrictions. Generally the
> term "found footage" implies that the filmmaker didn't shoot it, not
> that it is necessarily legal to use. Maybe "stock footage film"
> might be a useful term. Often even "stock footage" is credited,
> having been leased from the so-called "owner".
>
> So what do you do if you happen to see that someone "found" your
> work on a dvd, re-edited it, and presents it perhaps without proper
> credit on Youtube.? Maybe they even say that it is their film.
>
>
> Myron Ort
>
>
> On Jun 7, 2008, at 9:31 AM, Marcel Schwierin wrote:
>
> > Dear Frameworkers,
> >
> > does anybody knows when, where and by whom the term "found-footage"
> > was invented, replacing the older term "collage" for those films?
> >
> > Thanx in advance for any hint,
> >
> > Marcel
> >
> > Marcel Schwierin ::: curator ::: filmmaker
> > Chausseestr. 11 ::: 10115 Berlin ::: Germany
> > email suppressed
> >
> >
> > __________________________________________________________________
> > For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
> >
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________
> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________
> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
>
> __________________________________________________________________
> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
>
>
__________________________________________________________________
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.