Copyright or Copy-wrong?

Hi Everyone,

This week we were blessed with the opportunity to learn more about copyright and its origins. From the reading we learned that “copyright grants legal protection to the ‘expression of an idea’,” and not to the work as an object or the “idea itself. The fixed expression is deemed to belong uniquely to someone—the photographer, writer, or painter—who created it” and is not transferred when a work is sold (Sturken and Cartwright 204).

Our textbook authors explain, “Copyright, taken literally, it means ‘the right to copy.’ The term refers to not one but a bundle of rights. This bundle includes the rights to distribute, produce, copy, display, perform, create, and control derivative works based on the original” (Sturken and Cartwright 204).

 For this blog assignment I think a great discussion would be the idea of fair use.

 YOUR TASK

 Find an example of a picture or a piece of art that was based on someone else’s original. It doesn’t have to be an exact 1:1 look alike. Then once you find the two try to decide if you think it violates copyright infringement or if it was a harmless recreation (i.e., fair use).

 Fair use is usually the legal basis on which art copyright cases have been argued. “A major factor in determining fair use is the question of whether the copy promotes or adds something new— whether it is transformative rather than simply derivative of the original”(Sturken and Cartwright 208).

 For example, this poster for the Hangover 3 got inspiration from the poster from the Harry Potter movie. I would go on to say that in my opinion I see this as a harmless recreation of the harry potter poster due to fair use. While the two posters look very similar the hangover poster is a parody of the original and very transformative in nature. The theme of the posters is the same, but the representation of the theme is very different.

Movie Poster for Hangover 3

 https://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/tv-movies/short-hangover-part-iii-plays-harry-potter-poster-article-1.1281438

You don’t have to, but it would be nice if you could mention any of the following things in your responses:

Is fair use actually fair? When does inspiration become mimicry?

Stay safe everyone. Stay home, wash your hands, and avoid touching your face. Maybe try to learn a new skill from home or something. We all have an insurmountable amount of free time now. I plan on using it to catch up on anime. Take care everybody,

Who is She, Do You Know Her?: Representations of Women in the Media

For this week’s assigned material students were asked to watch the film Miss Representation. The film is a cultural critique that exposes how the media functions as a patriarchal construct to influence and control women. Through instigating self objectification by women, the media is able to utilize the rhetoric of empowerment (through physical beautification) to completely distract and disempower women resulting in lower political efficacy and oppression. For this prompt we ask that you consider your thoughts and reactions to Miss Representation while making connections between the film itself and the roles that you’ve witnessed the media play in the representation of women.

1. Provide an example of a recent media portrayal of a female and analyze its effect on the character or figure. Be sure to mention if your chosen example reaffirms or resists the cultural critiques offered by the film.
   
2. It has been roughly 9 years since Miss Representation was released. In this time do you believe things have changed or not? Explain.

While writing your responses, keep in mind some of the following terms used in the documentary:

Self-Objectification: when girls/women internalize an observer’s perspective on their physical selves and learn to treat themselves as objects to be looked at and evaluated for their appearance; studies have shown that self-objectification is much more prevalent in girls/women than boys/men 

Symbolic Annihilation: the way cultural production and media representations ignore, exclude, marginalize, or trivialize a particular group

“Fighting Fuck Toy:” Caroline Heldman’s term for the manner in which female superheroes are depicted in the media, which she defines as follows:

 “hyper-sexualized female protagonists who are able to “kick ass” (and kill) with the best of them. The FFT appears empowered, but her very existence serves the pleasure of the heterosexual male viewer. In short, the FFT takes female agency, weds it to normalized male violence, and appropriates it for the male gaze.”

Source: https://drcarolineheldman.com/2012/04/05/the-hunger-games-hollywood-and-fighting-fuck-toys/