Nate Harrison, on the use of the “Amen Break” 1, described the appropriation of creative expression and problems of copyright enforcement as it relates to creating original works.
Orthogonally related, dissenting opinion:
Over-protecting intellectual property [that is to say, in effect, “not protecting” property not defended by wealth (rather than law or the juridical] is as harmful as under-protecting it. Culture is impossible without a rich public domain. Nothing today, like nothing since we tamed fire, is genuinely new. Culture, like science and technology, grows by accretion, each new creator building on the works of those who came before. Overprotection stifles the very creative forces it is supposed to nurture.2
…and where are The Winstons?
- Nate Harrison, “Can I Get An Amen?”, 2004 recording on acetate, turntable, PA system, paper documents dimensions variable, total run time 17 minutes, 46 seconds (see: http://nkhstudio.com/pages/amen_mp4.html; also, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SaFTm2bcac ↩
- Seventh court of appeal circuit judge, Alex Kozinski, 9th Circuit copyright ruling, 989 F.2d 1512 ↩