“Intellectual Property is the oil of the 21st Century” – Mark Getty
Image Credit: Mark Anderson
The chairman of huge image database, Getty Images, made this proclamation at the turn of the century. Moving on from the concept of physical property or wealth, Getty has stressed that our most vital assets in the current day, are our ideas. From the moment we express or divulge an idea, it is forced into the possession of everyone as it is no longer insulated in the private sphere of our cognition (Lessig 2005, 354).
The 1710 Statute of Anne, was the first legislation to recognise ownership of ideas – granting you control over your intellectual property – essentially the birth of copyright. Copyright has become the central method of protecting our precious ideas and as soon it has been thought to be breached, the lawyers are on the phone and a lawsuit is being prepared.
Video Credit: Brad Tem
I infer the reasoning behind Getty’s comparison to be in relation to the potential of original ideas. The ideas themselves are worth nothing in a material sense, yet can be translated into something of great commodified value. People take their claim to intellectual property possibly more seriously than their material possessions because of this factor of potential. The level to which copyright is enforced or followed up is often over the top, as seen in the estate of late author Adrian Jacobs filing a lawsuit against J.K. Rowling, the creator of the Harry Potter saga, citing allegations of plagurism from Jacobs’ 1987 book, Willy the Wizard (Adams 2010). One major issue that cases like these raise is, where do we draw the line between inspiration and pure plagiarism?
In many instances, the idea of breaching copyright is taken too far. In terms of literature, it has been thought that there are only seven original storylines:
Rags to Riches
Overcoming the Monster
The Quest
Comedy
Tragedy
Rebirth
Voyage and Return
Inspiration plays a pivotal roll in most creative endeavours. Our intellectual property is not exclusively our own as it is a result of our interaction with our surroundings – inspiration is as much an unconscious occurrence as it is a conscious one (Booker 2004, 3).
This intense policing of our ideas goes from accusations of plagiarism in basic inspiration to the creating of parodies. A bit of comic relief, a parody usually takes a much more serious piece of work and puts a lighter spin on it. Wierd Al Yankovic has made a career out of parodying the work of others – while it may appear that he is breaching copyright laws, due to the satirical nature of parody, it is recognised as fair use and is excluded from being branded as plagiarism. Despite this, Yankovic must obtain permission from the original artists before he is able to make any revenue from his parodies – his most recent single ‘Perform This Way’, a Lady GaGa spoof, was not allowed to be released until GaGa gave her consent. Although the majority of Yankovic’s parodies are making fun of the subjects, most artists with a good sense of humour recognise that its all fair game and that satire will need to get its material from one source or another.
Video Credit: Brent Larry
Video Credit: Wierd Al Yankovic
We definitely take the claim to our intellectual property very seriously in the 21st century, as seriously or more so than that of our material property. Getty was not over-reacting in his statement that it is the oil of the 21st century as the way in which our society is moving, away from industrialisation and towards innovation, ideas are integral and an original idea is gold – quite literally.
…
REFERENCES:
Adams, Stephen. ‘JK Rowling ‘stole plot’ for Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, High Court writ claims’, The Telegraph. 19. Feb, 2010. accessed on 29/5/11 from: <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/harry-potter/7264794/JK-Rowling-stole-plot-for-Harry-Potter-and-the-Goblet-of-Fire-High-Court-writ-claims.html>
Booker, Christopher. The Seven Basic Plots: Why We Tell Stories. 2004, UK: Continuum
Lessig, Lawrence. ‘Open Code and Open Societies’, in Joseph Feller, Brian Fitzgerald, Scott A. Hissam and Karim R. Lakhani (eds) Perspectives on Free and Open Source Software, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2005. pp. 349-360.
bridgetalicelane 