Open Source Cinema
Posted in Language - Sound, Lifestyle Evolution, Music, Technology, Video by wayne.porter on April 7th, 2007 Open Source Cinema…ok perhaps we were before our times (the first actually) with Nothing So Strange…I know Flemming has been pushing for Open Source Film for some time and know he ponders what everyone is pondering- how will film makers make money this go around? Will they still go searching for someone to fund their film, or perhaps cultivate the fan base on the Net (ala Blair Witch Style) and prove it out? If they did, if they could, they might retain rights to some lucrative aspects of the film like merchandising, or comics, etc. Film makers, like many web marketers, really haven’t mastered marketing online yet- I know Hollywood surely misses the mark.
The Manifesto (From the OSC site):
1) Copyright Is Theft!
Every time we copyright a work, we are robbing from the Public Domain. We are denying others the freedom to share the ideas we have given life to. We are denying others the freedom to build on our ideas.
Yes, Copyright in some sense is necessary. It is an incentive to create, to encourage “the progress of science and useful arts” . But when it is the life of the author, plus 75 years? That’s a theft of our collective heritage.
My Response: OK so is it theft or not? Again I liked NSS’s model where we owned the original copyright to the film, but others can get raw footage and make their own original works. Amazing how it took YouTube/Google for that to gel…
2) Music Wants To Be Free!
On the advice of my lawyer, I must qualify the above statement. Of course artists need to profit from their work. But as my lawyer explains, over the years copyright has mutated from something that was supposed to encourage art by guaranteeing a limited profit for artists, into something that corporations use to control the supply of art, music and ideas—long after the artists have passed away. It used to be that art would fall into the public domain after its creators had made money from it for a few years - but nowadays, the public domain is an antique concept.
Corporations have much longer life spans than individuals, so from their point of view, their copyrights should never expire. As Sonny Bono put it (congressman Sonny Bono, that is), “copyright should last forever minus a day.”
As a result, artists are having a harder time building on art from the past. Culture—which needs to live and breathe and evolve—is being stored in vaults, released at the discretion of corporate interests. So this film project is about more than just music, it’s about the future of all creativity. As John Oswald once said: “If creativity is a field, then copyright is a fence.”
My Response: Music wants to be free? Music i I suppose that is possible, software wantes to be free too- and while we have many worthy free software (note free software and open source are different). It is all about the distribution, that “Long Tail” thing, and realizing we are moving away from a hit-driven culture to a niche, choice-driven culture.
3) Film is Fascism!
The traditional approach to creating films, especially documentary films, is flawed. A single perspective cannot hope to capture the nuance of an evolving cultural debate. Sure, Point of View is important. But “The Ecstasy of Influence”, the participatory nature of digital creativity, begs us to create media that invites input from its audience.
My Response: I hardly think that makes it fascism or even flawed. If you apply that thinking, a hundred different POVs is still fascism- fascism ad infinitum. I am all for mixing it up- within the limits of the creator’s permission- that is courtesy. Afterall- they did the work. They may not want input from the audience, a shame really, but I will respect their wishes. Of course we are moving into the “attention economy” and the easiest way to “strike back” is not to give it your attention- ignore the market long enough and it will, it must- react.
4) Film is Pollution!
Travelling the globe, running hours of tape, wasting resources - these are a fact of life for documentary filmmakers. This no longer needs to be the case - with digital tools and transmission, we can crowd-source our ideas with silicon instead of carbon.
My Response: Just by existing we pollute. Digital tools and transmission- heat is released, energy is used, I mean something has to power those boxes!
5) Open Source Cinema!
I am hereby opening this film to the masses. My entire plan, warts and all, can be viewed at the WikiFilm.
Your contributions can be made at the Create section of the site. I invite your participation.
I’m using an innovative open-source filmmaking technique because I believe that this film can’t be a closed argument, it has to be opened up to the community at large. The argument will continue to grow with our culture. This is not dogma. This is evolution.
My Response: Great. I like it. Yes. It is a start. Feels kind of fuzzy…and looks like a new generation doesn’t like the RIAA…and I think eventually it will crumble as we move along. But hey kids- stop going to see lousy films, and listening to lousy bands…oh I guess they have started to do that already. Hey grown-ups stop listening to lousy music and going to see lousy films…
Popularity: 6% [?]
