How can online communities of “producer-consumers” literate in new media work toward building a robust and freely accessible cultural commons in the face of restrictive copyright laws? This is both a complex and perplexing question to answer given the intricate and constantly changing relationship between producer and consumer, specifically in the online realm. On the one hand, producers of various types of media, such as news casters, music and movie producers, and many other producers that post content online, want Internet users, or their consumers, to subscribe to their services and attain their information without the user reproducing the information the consumer provides (without their permission) or altering it and posting it to other Internet websites or forums. However, as Jenkins (2004) suggests, “consumers are learning how to use different media technologies to bring the flow of media more fully under their control and to interact with other users,” (p. 37), allowing them to utilize the Internet as a tool that allows them to share and reproduce third-party information and media through things such as posting music videos and edited film clips on YouTube and sharing links and information on social networking sites like Facebook and in other forums. It seems as though producers want to provide their consumers with information and media, however they do not necessarily want their consumers to actively use the information or media for their personal use, which is a large reason for users accessing the Internet. This notion is succinctly suggested by Jenkins (2004), claiming that “media producers are responding to these newly empowered consumers in contradictory ways, sometimes encouraging change, sometimes resisting what they see as renegade behavior. Consumers, in turn, are perplexed by what they see as mixed signals about how much participation they can enjoy,” (p. 37).
This notion is adequately highlighted by Miller (2004), alongside the recent copyright scares that many Internet users faced. As Miller (2004) suggests, entertainment services have become a “crucial sector in ‘first world’ production” (p. 58) and such services have become backed by “well-policed copyright systems and low expectations of permanent employment,” (p. 58). Often times, the products of entertainment services become topics of high interest in the online realm by users of the Internet. Internet users typically enjoy posting their favourite pictures, videos, and information regarding various news pieces, musical preferences, and video clips that interest them, however, the well-policed copyright systems that Miller highlights have become critical in at least the past year as to what Internet users are comfortable with posting online. There have recently been numerous claims and viral messages going around the Internet as to what can and cannot be posted on certain sites, such as Facebook, and with the recent seizure of the incredibly popular Megaupload website and the sentencing of the owner, it appears that Internet users have become much more conscious and in many cases hesitant to post what they normally share online.
Keeping the notion that the producer-consumer relationship is both a complex and perplexing relationship in mind, at least in the online realm, and considering the aforementioned issues, how then, can we collaboratively work toward building a robust and freely accessible cultural commons in the face of restrictive copyright laws? In his blog, Colin B suggests that it may be possible, highlighting the idea that in the past, “copyrights and patents were originally designed to allow creators a certain amount of time to assure they were compensated for their research and development. Then the patent would expire and others were free to try and build upon or improve the original,”. Although I do not think it is realistic that copyrights would be dropped from the many things that are posted online, such as music and film clips, it may be reasonable to allow users who view such material and reproduce it in a way that appeals to their interest, so long as what they do not make money off of the reproduction and the reproduction does not stain or remove itself in an inappropriate fashion from the original purpose of the material. However, with the response that producers appear to be taking with respect to heavier copyright backing, this idea might be quite the uphill battle. With that being said, the idea that Katie benedict presents in her blog appears to be more realistic. The reality is is that consumers have access to various technologies, such as torrent and downloading programs with a seemingly endless reserve of information, music, videos, and various other things, and even though copyright scares are certainly evident, many perceive that it is almost unjustifiable to purchase anything that is made freely available via the Internet. With these two imposing and contradictory perspectives, collaboratively working toward building a robust and freely accessible cultural commons in the face of restrictive copyright laws appears to be at a stand still. Although producers are enhancing their copyright backing on their material and many Internet users refrain from reproducing such material, many Internet users, perhaps out of spite, try their hardest to step around such barriers and access the content that is almost forbidden to them. As long as these perspectives remain and producers and consumers have difficulty mending their perplexing relationship, I do not know that it is possible to achieve a robust and freely accessible cultural commons.
References:
Jenkins, H. (2004) The Cultural Logic of Media Convergence International Journal of Cultural Studies March 2004 7: 33-43
Miller, T. (2004) A view from a fossil. International Journal Of Cultural Studies, 7(1), 55-65.
theryannicholas.wordpress.com 