first it was a confusing two minute long
video with a misleading title and no
script next it was an only halfway
related singular section in a much
longer video about a different topic
entirely now I'd like to compile all my
arguments for the abolition of copyright
law into one convenient package so I can
make a final push for getting copyright
abolitionism into the mainstream in this
video I will be parroting many points
originally made by Nina Paley the face
of copyright abolition as well as some
of my own points now Nina's a genius
filmmaker her film Sita sings the blues'
is a pretty good case for abolishing
copyright law just on its own but she's
also a turf which is disappointing so
I'll be the face of copyright abolition
instead also the points I make pertain
to our current economy like when
capitalism is abolished copyrights gonna
be really useless but it's also useless
now but first what is copyright because
apparently I still have to explain this
to some people copyright law was enacted
in the United States in the year 1795
unch of evil masterminds with the intent
to kill art I mean they say on Wikipedia
that it tries to encourage the creation
of art and culture by rewarding authors
and artists with a set of exclusive
rights but I think that's another way of
saying they were trying to kill art I
think it's the dialect anyway the idea
was that for a period of 28 years all
artistic works would be completely
controlled by the artist who made them
unable to be distributed in any way by
anyone else without the author's
permission it also protects works from
having derivative works made out of them
a derivative work would be like a cover
of a song or an adaptation of a novel
but apparently 28 years wasn't long
enough somehow so since then copyright
law has applied for longer and longer
and now as of 1978 I believe works
entered the public domain seventy years
after the date of the author's death I'm
not even being that controversial when I
say this is kind of overkill so that's
where we are now every creative work is
now only sellable by the Creator for a
round twice as long as they'll be alive
yay
fair use is a goddamn honeypot I'll get
to it later but I'm mentioning it here
because I know some people watching this
still think it's the bastion of freedom
of artistic expression it's not lay off
the comments section okay now we can get
into why copyright law was an awful
awful idea and why it needs to be
abolished right away honestly this is
the simplest and strongest argument here
it's obvious when you think about it and
everyone is going to find a different
degree of newness and a work remember
all that debate over whether vaporwave
music was plagiarism or not for some
people 4/20 is just slow down Diana Ross
but to other people it's an original
piece of music and as it is with all
artistic discussion both sides are valid
a bunch of idiots who don't know music
theory seem to think one direction
ripped off the who I think they're full
of [ __ ] but that's my opinion but you
know who can't say whether a piece of
art is original a [ __ ] judge yeah
let's just take that actually
interesting discussion and have a
pigeon-holed through a courtroom no
thought for no artistic involvement just
let the gavel hit the desk and erase
anything that doesn't meet the checklist
all creative work is derivative that's
the title of this nice little animation
on Nina Paley's question copyright
YouTube channel where a bunch of statues
dance around to attune the very
amusingly samples royalty-free music I
don't believe the ultra cynical view
that nothing is original period but I do
believe that it is impossible for a work
to be without influence Nina Paley
describes it like a family tree Sita
sings the blues' is the artistic
daughter of Annette Hanshaw and the
Ramayana Annette Hanshaw is the artistic
daughter of early jazz and blues the
Ramayana comes from ancient Hindu art
and culture it's a huge beautiful web of
influences everyone adds their own grain
of originality to the forward momentum
of art and if nothing is original
everything is original and if everything
is original copyright law is just
another form of censorship now this is
where I'd like to get all the classical
liberals on my side or really anyone who
stands for freedom of artistic
expression derivative art is constantly
restricted from being used for
commercial purposes just because a judge
said it wasn't original enough there are
a billion remixes adaptations covers all
sorts of derivative works that haven't
even been considered because of the
absolute nightmare that it is to gain
rights to that stuff you can't see this
as anything but censorship a lot of
people were disappointed with the Harry
Potter films why aren't we letting
anyone with a budget take a crack at it
themselves
everyone thinks that passengers would
have been better from Jennifer
Lawrence's point of view so why can't we
see it I thought that a minimal cover of
Beauty and the Beast would fit really
well in my moody pop album about queer
sexual awakening and now I have to be
fearful of being smited by the kingdom
of copyright itself I'd love to sell all
my albums and EPS fiscally but right now
I can only sell these you might call me
a fool for infringing on copyright but I
don't think I should be punished for
making my records as good as I could
make them capiche
so there's my case that's why we got to
get rid of copyright or at least
severely shorten its length but I've
heard a couple arguments against this
idea
[Music]
[Applause]
[Music]
this is the biggest concern I see from a
lot of people how would an artist be
able to make a profit if anyone can just
redistribute their work for free
well my hero Miz Bailey has a very
informative talk on the subject but if
you don't have an hour then I'll
summarize it here so how do you make
money off your art in a copyright free
utopia well how do you do it now you
spread it to as many eyes as possible
Nina is very clear that more than half
of her respectable profits she's made
off her film is from donations and she
credits her profits to Sita sings the
blues' being a free film not as in free
beer but as in free speech Sita sings
the blues' was allowed to flourish
through the internet like a moss in ways
that wouldn't be possible if there was a
price tag on it she treats selling DVDs
like selling bottled water the water is
free but the plastic is not when you buy
Sita sings the blues' on DVD you're
buying the convenience the pretty
packaging the opportunity to put it on
your shelf it's an alternative to just
printing it yourself she also has this
idea of putting a special official
sticker on copies of the work that
directly support the artist so fans can
know where their money is going and
support their favorite people although
she doesn't mention that most of her
success is probably due to her just
being a genius Sita sings the blues' is
just so unique funny and oddly emotional
that it would have spread even if it
wasn't liberated by creative commons
maybe she's just humbled but I think she
knows and to contribute a point of my
own I think that artists will still be
paid for commissioned work in the future
in that case you're directly paying for
a musicians time and creativity instead
of just copying something they've
already made it's labor like any other
labor
[Music]
butterfly oh the why wait this argument
is used to discredit sampling but we've
already discussed this they say that
when you sample something you're
piggybacking off of someone else's work
well yeah I didn't sample joanna newsom
on blush to make people think I'm a good
heart player I did it because I thought
it would sound good and just to be clear
that EP is a piece of crap but it's at
least a little bit better for having
that heart part in there deciding to
include it in the first place was my
idea and I should be credited for it
along with Johanna but this is also used
as an argument against piracy and to
that I'd like to show everyone a song an
animation by my girl Nina
[Music]
stealing a thing leaves one less left
copy it makes one thing more
that's what copies for copying is not
there if I copy yours you have it blue
one for me and one for you
that's what copies can do
to take
I just copy it there's one for each of
us we're making more up a thing that is
what we call copy sharing ideas with
everyone
that's why copying is
[Music]
wasn't it great that I could just let
the song play instead of awkwardly
parroting the exact same points anyway
if the subtlety and nuance of that short
film was lost of you somehow nina is
essentially saying that you can't steal
an inexhaustible resource again and
again I see people saying piracy is
analogous to taking a Mustang right out
of someone's garage but that simply is
not the case when someone illegally
downloads your music you still have it I
don't know why this is so hard for
people to understand it isn't even
necessarily a lost sale these metrics of
lost profits don't account for people
who wouldn't have ever gotten to see the
work at hand if it was behind a paywall
people who wouldn't have bothered if
they had to pay up front and instead
choose to donate afterwards people who
can't afford the work but spread it to
people who can people who wouldn't have
even heard of the work if they hadn't
come across it on their torrenting
software copying is not theft
[Laughter]
well technically nothing one day
someone's going to rip your work off
wholesale and sell it under their own
name after you find it however it's
easier than ever to prove you were the
original author and soon the plagiarize
er will face widespread ridicule and you
will have gained a thousand new fans
your mileage may vary wait doesn't that
go against everything I've said well no
it doesn't to copy and to plagiarize are
two very different things at oriented
copy of an album will contain the
artists name the uploader will be under
no pretense that the work is theirs but
also the way it works now doesn't stop
[ __ ] in fact copyright law
disincentivizes the attribution of
sampled works by more daringly
infringing albums don't credit their
samples because it would be a red flag
anyone could just show them to the
artists I sampled and it would be done
I'd love to show you the sources for the
more obscure stuff but it's really not
in my best interest although I
acknowledge that sampling deadmau5
wasn't the best way to avoid being sued
I honestly don't know what the [ __ ] I
was thinking when I made that album I
was 16 give me a break
[Music]
that's a good question simply put I
don't want my arts right to exist put in
the hands of someone else I could offer
to pay a million dollars and they could
still refuse and even if it was a sure
sale aren't you then saying that the
only people who deserve to make
derivative art are the people who can
afford it that's kind of discriminatory
okay now we can talk about this fair use
I call it fairly useless fair use is a
clause that allows certain limited usage
of existing material to not be
considered infringement the actual rules
surrounding fair use are completely
fuzzy and claiming fair use is an
absolute crapshoot usually it just comes
down to whether the work is
transformative or not which we've
already shown is completely arbitrary
also guys it doesn't even [ __ ] apply
in every country Canada ahem the UK ahem
Australia most countries have an even
wimpier version of fair use called fair
dealing the meaning of which is
dependent on country so no fair use
isn't a get out of infringement free
card like everyone says it is especially
if people keep on buying rights to be
safe instead of claiming fair use the
clause is just going to dwindle
[Applause]
[Music]
there is a scary amount of people who
want to keep a deadlock on every idea
that comes out of their heads if you've
been following me fuss far this is
terrifying if I have had any hand in
letting you see the artistic merits of
derivative works this can't be seen as
anything other than Stalinist levels of
censorship no you shouldn't control how
your art is used you should have no say
over who is or isn't able to be inspired
by your work no one should have any
right to put a stopper in the pipeline
of artistic evolution and that my
viewers is why I'm giving the entire
world permission to remix cover
recontextualize and redistribute all of
my music my albums are free to download
on my Bandcamp go nuts because I hope
for a world where all art is free not as
in free beer but as in free speech
because art is the Lord and copyright is
the Golden Calf
[Music]
[Applause]
[Music]
you