From: Lundgren (email suppressed)
Date: Wed Jun 11 2008 - 13:51:48 PDT
First: There are many different copyright ideals. The US ideal is all about
money. It sees films as products, and it's never about protecting the
integrity of the artworks, it's about protecting the vallet. You don't sue
because your artwork is being missused in a bad way, i.e. re-edited, has
commerical breaks or if it has been adapted to
what-is-suitble-to-screen-on-a-particulare-tv-channel, all this is common
chow in the US and nobody cares - because it is _all_ about the money.
Therefore I am very surprised at reading posts arguing about copyright with
those ideals in mind. For me copyright is all about protecting the right to
the work and the integrity of the artwork itself.
Second: Now, when it comes to copies or bootlegs etc., I'm used to a system
were private use is private use (if I buy a film I was able to not only show
it to friends but to make a copy) and of no concern to nobody (this has
change where I'm from - Sweden - and I think everyone would agree that it's
not only moving towards the US ideals but the change itself has a lot to do
with the US filmindustry et al).
What was, and should be, enough is that the artist holds the right to create
copies for "official" and "widespread" releases. (You can't release an
artist's work i.e. online to everyone because the artist holds the right to
make the work generally available.)
I think when it comes to the experimental scene we have mayor problems with
works not being properly released, and so that creates the bootleg
situation... copies of sometimes 3rd generation vhs-film-of-the-wall-copies
of a degenerated filmcopy.
So even if I feel that the artist has the right to his or her work, I also
feel that the artist has a responsibility once the work exits the private
locker and is shown in the cinemas or in a museum or some sort of open
screening - then the artist is responsible to make it possible for all to
see it. And sure, in theory we can all rent from canyoncinema or the coop or
whatver, but in reality this isn't an possible for all. Maybe everyone can
rent one, two or three works someone might be able to rent ten, yet another
has not limits, but for most it's too much cash.
As an artist you or I can chose to make a work avaible or not. But once it's
avaible in one form, I feel we're all responsible to make it somewhat
aviable in "most" forms (that also meing: we can't be medium purists... not
today when there are _good_ digital options).
First decide if you're an artist or a producer. Then decide if you want to
be a part of the problem, or leviate the situation. If you release your
films in a more economically viable way then surely it won't stop the
"pirates", but I believe most interested people tend to want to support the
artists and the artworks that they appretiate and the copies that even so
are created are atleast not insulting to your artwork.
Take resonisibility; don't be like the common thugs of the Industry itself -
the viewers are your friends, not the enemy!
Ps. I was surprised to see some repeating the Industry propaganda here at
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.