This guest post is written by Matt Rutherford, Web Strategist and technology producer for Charlie Rose. Matt focuses on the macro themes affecting the internet and the wider world.
In an intimate interview with Charlie Rose on PBS tonight, and available here, Stanford professor Larry Lessig reveals some profound views on copyright, remix culture, and the new hybrid economy that is emerging.
In particular, Lessig speaks out against the abolitionist movement growing against copyright:
My real fear is that the last 10 years have unleashed a kind of revolutionary attitude among the generation that will take over in 10 years. And it will be hard for them to distinguish between sensible copyright legislation and the kind that we’ve got right now. So my real fear is we’re going to lose control of this animal… I just want to reform [copyright] to make it make sense.
A reform of copyright is clearly overdue. We require a new form of regulation that takes into account the ease and speed of digital distribution and appropriation. Every week, books cross my desk clamoring for this change - some of which are certainly worth reading. And as Lessig explains on the show, it’s counterproductive to continue to criminalize kids for file-sharing, remixing and recreating with content. Copyright was established to encourage creativity, not stifle it.
Cultural Roots
Lessig thinks on a macro time scale. For him, the emerging “read-write creativity” seen on YouTube and elsewhere is actually a return to our natural cultural roots. Historically, man has always absorbed and re-created culture – the symbolic retelling of stories and re-interpreting of songs on the front porch. It is only the emergence of mass media in the last century that caused us to accept a passive relationship with culture.
What’s so extraordinary about the last four years is that they’ve demonstrated that the technology of the internet is giving us a chance to go back to the way culture has been from the beginning…Only the 20th century was a deviation from this. But from the beginning of culture, it was a normal thing for people to be able to create and recreate the most important parts of culture that were around them.
As evidence of this, Lessig cites the numerous Charlie Rose remix videos that are floating around the web.
I’ve seen some of these Rose remixes, and they are enormous. They’re fantastic. But I would hope, you know, eventually you could be in a position to say I want to encourage this, please. Please do it.
A lot of these remixes also come across my desk. In the spirit of research, here are a few of the best so far: Beckett, Kung Fu, nuclear weapons. They’re all superb. And yes, we do encourage this. As Lessig says, Please do it.
Hybrid Economy
There remains the fundamental question of how a ‘new’ copyright can maintain revenue. After all, despite the ease of pointing out the flaws in the current system, it’s quite another matter to propose a viable alternative. Lessig sees the solution, in part, coming from a new hybrid economy, one that combines the traditional commercial economy with sharing economies seen in Wikipedia, YouTube and elsewhere:
Businesses have begun to realize that the world is in part divided between commercial economies like buying and selling books, and sharing economies like Wikipedia where enormous value is produced for nothing, people are doing it all for free. The most interesting thing I think we’ve seen though in the last five years is the development of a hybrid economy where commercial entities are trying to leverage value out of these sharing economies or vice versa, sharing economies trying to leverage value out of commercial entities. And this hybrid depends upon the commercial entity showing the proper respect for the creation in the sharing economy, and giving space to it, encouraging it so that the sharing economy can produce enormous value that is beneficial to the people inside, and also to the commercial business.
Lessig’s Big Idea
Lessig concludes the interview with his ‘big idea’. It is an inspiring, and elegant reminder that we are in the midst of an unprecedented social change. Just as the Gutenberg press facilitated the spread of the Protestant Reformation, fundamentally altering the course of Western civilization, so too is the internet beginning to spark tectonic changes, the breadth of which we don’t yet have the historical perspective to grasp. As Lessig explains:
I think the big idea, as every big idea is, is just one amazing step beyond where we are right now. And I think you think about the Obama campaign, something like Wikipedia, something like the stuff that’s going on on the Internet, the kind that I think of as read write culture. What it really is doing is reviving the sense that people can do something. Not the passive couch potato politics or couch potato culture, but that they can do something. We’re close to making it really effective. I think the next cycle, what you’re going to see in the way politics functions, will be unrecognizable, even from today. But when we’re there, it will be a revival of ideals, aspirations about democracy that will surprise us. The cynicism that we had in the 20th century will look very 20th century.
Larry Lessig’s interview on Charlie Rose was first broadcast on Friday 11/21/08 on PBS, and is available in full or in clips: Larry Lessig (full segment), Larry Lessig (clips). Matt Rutherford can be reached at matt@charlierose.com.
Comments
Thanks for the guest post Matt. Great show tonight.
Shake up… they need a shake up!
Alas … I say “It isn’t true until someone on the A-list sez it”, and here’s a case in point.
p.s. If you google “participatory deliberation” will you first find Lessig? or me?
Is me because while Larry sings the praises of art I work with techne and praxis and “mere craft”. (So no way Matt would ever be able to acknowledge the email I’ve sent him over the years … he’s simply not aware of them.)
p.s.2 Very nice that you have “create a Gravatar”. But I have had a Gravatar for the longest time … you get credit for bad practice? *tsk-ktsk* That’s not good karma. *Even though you don’t care, it still matters.*
The last question sums up the fact that Charlie Rose really doesn’t understand the Net.
History will be rewritten thanks to the internet.
BigLocator.com -Digital Big Bang 2010
Larry Lessig seems to persistently conflate passive downloading (which is by far the bulk of p2p filesharing), and remixes/mash ups/etc. that make use of copyrighted content. I think the argument for the latter is far more cut and dry to old-media thinkers than the former, though, as Mike has mentioned many times, the former is also an unavoidable trend in today’s world, and also will likely benefit the consumer. Anyway, it’s just worth keeping these two concepts separate, in my opinion, and considering the arguments for and against each independently.
He conflates them, because the issues are linked and both are related to the outdated copyright system.
As you say, the remix issue is cut-and-dry. I think that most people would agree that for the advancement of art and culture in our society, creative people should be allowed to build on the works that pre-date their own.
However, that’s really no different than what you call “passive” copyright infringement. Though not limited to young people, I would say that virtually every person under the age of 30, who has the means to do so, has “illegally” downloaded music. Almost everyone does it, almost no one feels bad about it (especially among young people).
Also consider YouTube. If there was a funny clip from a network show posted on YouTube, I don’t think that most people would consider the posting or watching of that clip to be an act of infringement or piracy. Sure, legally, someone owns the rights to that clip, but for the most part, nobody cares.
That’s just it, right there; why bother having laws which are in opposition to the values of the people that those laws apply to? To put it another way, why should something that most people believe is acceptable behavior be illegal?
So, to one of Lessig’s points, there is a window of opportunity that’s in the process of closing. The 1900’s view of copyright is out of step with what regular people and especially younger people are doing and thinking. If the concept of copyright cannot be adjusted soon, so that it properly balances the protections it grants to content creators with the way that normal people view their rights to consume and share that content, then there just won’t be any way to get a sensible balance in the future (when the young people of today are the one’s calling all the shot).
“why bother having laws which are in opposition to the values of the people that those laws apply to? To put it another way, why should something that most people believe is acceptable behavior be illegal?”
–”most people” in your comment are likely the “people” you associate with. Let’s compare this to the use of marijuana: it is illegal, although “many people” use it.
Your comment shows your morals…
We love you too, Larry
Oh, and I just looked at the charlierose.com redesign. For F***’s sake, really simple things still missed.
Just to point out a few that any “strategist” would have fixed: If one of the brand’s pegs is “conversation”, then build it into the architecture, not in redundant “conversations with” text.
And, really, repetitive head shots of the same guest?
And Charlie Rose Green room: what, gone? No, it’s still there, somewhere, because someone persists in naming the clips. But it’s not in any pull-down menus or anywhere else to be found.
And comments now buried on page level. Absolutely nothing dynamically generated so it can appear on a topic or main page. No invitations for people to join in. No incentive, no emotional grab, either from user contributions or from the content itself.
Nice. So while I’m on a rant, let me just point out that a strategist who embraces what Lessig said would be providing opportunities to extend the “conversation” to the audience by getting those collaborations/remixes/hybrids onto charlierose.com by link or by post.
I think CC movement is great. It gives more easy-to-understand options to people, not just all (full Copyright) or nothing (Public Domain).
I wish there were more options between CC and All-rights-reserved copyright. CC is developing licenses between original CC and Public Domain. When I asked Professor Lessig about it at his lecture in Korea, he said that my observation was right.
Another problem of copyright is is that it is too difficult to understand, and therefore intimidating. Make it easy to understand, just like CC has been doing with simple license marks and short descriptions.
Thanks Michael, glad you liked the show. We have General Chilton, US commander in charge of cyberwarfare, being broadcast soon.
Mike Cerm: you hit this spot on.
Ben: I’ll keep an eye out for your emails.
Cherie: Thanks for the website comments. We completely agree that we need more conversational architecture in the site. Phase one was designed to re-brand the site, and add clips and collections alongside the full shows. That’s where we are now, and we’ve seen a nice jump in pageviews and time-on-site. We’re planning for phase two, which will expand the communication and conversational aspects of the site. It’s mainly a question of finances at this point - but conversational features are in the pipeline.
This is a work of unmitigated genius and a turning point in my life. Matt Butterfield, whoever he is, deserves a pay rise.
Great to hear about your plans for the website. I, for one, think the new redesign looks great. Much much easier to use than the old one. Excellent choice of guests with Lessig, too. Tell Charlie to keep up the great work.
Its so true that this denial of this right is causing a generation of lawbreakers. This upcoming generation is constantly having to deal with knowing they are breaking the law. Everyday.
Can you imagine what this does to the psyche? The law is wrong, we’re always against the law, the law is the enemy, show no respect to the law and ultimately ‘it’s my duty to fight the law’.
If you allow a culture to lose it’s respect for the law, then you’re in for much bigger problems than remixes…
Def check out Larry Lessig’s TED Talk - He explains this theory a million times more eloquently than I. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Q25-S7jzgs
Lessig is too self serving to make any valid points. He is forever seeking the limelight. He is constantly proving that he does not understand technology. His work against microsoft highlights this fact. Do something useful Lessig, and please do not run for political office. Or, just stay right there where you are, doing meaningless work and pretending it is groundbreaking.
The copyright laws don’t make sense now, what we’re finding is that with the new media platforms emerging there’s just a lot of ambiguity. I’d also add that it does hinder creativity and definitely needs to be re-examined.
I think everyone outside the record industry agrees criminal law is far too harsh a remedy, and all elements of the current regime are overdone. However, I think Lessig’s fear that we will go ‘too far’ and just get rid of copyright is both foolish and patronizing. Most people understand that copyright gives artists an incentive to create and that the current regime is disproportionate in response and unnecessary. The problem is that the government is captured by entrenched people funded and lobbied in part by the RIAA. This won’t change the moment Obama becomes president or likely ever, as long as we have this form of government and society. We the people don’t run the show in D.C., and we probably never did.
“We the people don’t run the show in D.C., and we probably never did” — Never will. Obama promised change, but so far it is all the same: all white Washington insiders for his new administration. His “advisers” are running the show…
i like the charlierose.com site. check out my dad: http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/9002 (it’s Orville Schell)
And EHjr, you are doing such groundbreaking work that I can’t wait to see you on Charlie Rose sometime soon.
Don’t you just lv people who criticize others for putting their ideas out there? In widely published form no less? How dare they go on CH to discuss.
Lessig is a monumental thinker in terms of these ideas, practical applications, experiences, societal norms, and culture. The guy is a rock star with no peers in what he does. He is the leading authority.
He is so far beyond the thinking of others that he is moving on to issues that are over reaching of this one (did you watch the complete episode or did you abandon the show prior to the end because your thinking and research is so far beyond Lessig’s on this matter that his voice should not be heard in the same room as your mind?)
And Joe Cheng, FYI most people don’t smoke pot, but you should. It may provide some enlightenment.
“And Joe Cheng, FYI most people don’t smoke pot” — that is what I wrote on my comment. Please read it again…
” but you should. It may provide some enlightenment” — You should know… Please read my comment again. However, if you are smoking now, you will forget it as soon as you read it. Drug addicts claim that consuming drugs “enlighten” them. This is bs, because the use of illegal drugs does destroy brain cells –some readers would not understand this. Precisely.
The point of my comment was that existing laws should not be changed just because a few do not like them. Most laws are created to protect the interests of “most” people… although, the way our system works allows for “some” laws created to benefit a few individuals. Like it or not, this is not going to change.
Lessig had a better understanding of “the Internet” as a medium some years ago, however, he has lost touch with it… to the point of advancing theories and opinions that do not make sense, although many consider him a “leading authority.” Of what, I don’t know.
By any chance, did he anticipate Obama’s successful run for the Presidency with a big help of “the Internet”? –I don’t think so. So much for a “leading authority.”
Being a guest on the Charlie Rose show is not proof of “greatness” –It is only proof that you are a liberal…
Mathew, being a liberal IS a proof of greatness. While both liberals and conservatives both believe in socialism, conservatives believe in only socialism for the rich, which defines what capitalism has become.
Lenin also feared that inciting hatred of private property might induce the peasants to question the workers’ avant-garde’s right to special stores.
Did anyone notice that Lessig has babbled absolute nonsense here? Truly, this is a meaningless, inane phrase: “And this hybrid depends upon the commercial entity showing the proper respect for the creation in the sharing economy, and giving space to it, encouraging it so that the sharing economy can produce enormous value that is beneficial to the people inside, and also to the commercial business”
Er, do you guys have a plan for how the commercial entities keep hiring people to produce stuff for the masses to consume if they never pay for anything and there aren’t even any ads?
Larry, please: you invented that ridiculous Creative Commons bullshit to browbeat everyone to give everything away for free, using the shill that they could at least demand crediting and somehow get recognition. That failed to pay them. Now you still haven’t found a way in all this “space” *for those creators to get paid*. You know, like you get paid, when you write books or give lectures?.
So we’re supposed to be just happy collective farm workers, “We pretend to work, and they pretend to pay us?”
As for the remarks about the couch potatoes — huh? Kids on the Internet, egged on by adults in Silicon Valley making funny YouTubes ridiculing Hillary, McCain, and Palin, paid for the Obama presidency. The kids did have to get off their computers to go vote for Obama, though. But now what, they’re going to all continue running the country by ridiculing people in YouTube and clicking on stuff and sending Facebook gifts?
Wasn’t Comrade Larry supposed to be working on “transparency in government”? Oh, now that his friend Obama is in power, I guess he’s scratched that goal off his list, and is likely one of those who thinks Bam should get to keep his Blackberry secret messaging lol.
Interesting post Matt.
I wonder if politics during the next election cycle really will be unrecognizable from politics today. That’s a bold claim. I think Lessig’s directionally correct there, but perhaps stymied by thinking on a relatively short time frame instead of on the macro level he prefers. In any case, that’s an exciting and uplifting thought, if a bit hyperbolic.
Copyright needs to make sense and it needs to work, but it will always be violated and violable. We cannot solve problems by retrofitting our ideology to current pragmatic reality. Our theories around copyright need to be durable, sound, and workable, but not guided by a desire to simply reflect the status quo.
“Copyright was established to encourage creativity, not stifle it.”
What’s creative about copying the works of others?
Copying and building on are separate. Building on the existing works to “promote the progress of science and useful art”, starts with an idea that is distinct from the idea that the original work conveyed. When an idea needs an existing work to express itself the “purpose” behind the new idea must be different. I’m not advocating copying just for the sake of copying which adds nothing to benefit society, but the new expression of an idea, should be recognized for the value it adds to societal benefit even though it need an existing work so accomplish this. This is how copyright reconciles itself to the first amendment.
I think this post goes a long way in capturing the complexity of the copyright issue…I think for me it’s best illustrated in the Google Books wars that are raging on college campuses and elsewhere. It just seems that any line we draw between the public domain and copyrighted material will ultimately be fairly arbitrary, but I don’t know that there’s any way around this. Also, nice job on the new site.
Leave Comment
Commenting Options
Enter your personal information to the left, or sign in with your Facebook account by clicking the button below.
Alternatively, you can create an avatar that will appear whenever you leave a comment on a Gravatar-enabled blog.