[Professor Deni Elliott] As young children, we learned that everyone has the right to
control the use of their property.
Keep it, share it, give it away; it seemed that simple.
But as adults, we find ourselves trying to navigate through physical and virtual worlds,
where issues of intellectual property and ownership are much more complex.
Much of what is ethical and unethical in the area of intellectual property has to do with
following the law.
While laws governing appropriation and attribution are struggling to keep up and add clarity
in our rapidly evolving world, ethical analysis can help guide the way.
[Beranger] I was a camp counselor for a couple of years, and once my kids graduate high school,
they are fair game to add me on Facebook.
I came across a photo that one of these teenagers had shared on her Facebook page that was a
photo I had taken, and posted to my Facebook page, and she didn't credit me or link me
to the page.
I had just come across it.
And so I was very, I felt violated!
If she had credited me for my work and just even tagged me or something, just mentioned
my name of who had taken the photo, I really wouldn't have had a problem with it.
Attribution means giving credit where credit is due.
In theory, the author of any published work has a right to control how his or her
intellectual property is used.
But in practice, most people click "agree" when signing on to websites such as YouTube without
ever being aware that they're signing over their rights to their material to the corporation
that owns the site.
We all know that we're not supposed to plagiarize our papers.
But what about artists or musicians who learn their craft by copying famous predecessors?
Would we call that stealing?
Or influence?
[Shaun] Copying someone's work directly with the intent to using it and passing it as your
own I think is definitely stealing, obviously so.
[Letisha] Intention matters, and I would never intend to steal something.
I would do everything in my power to actively try not to, but there's a huge difference
between influence and stealing.
Music professor and computer scientist David Cope created a computer program that produces
"original" compositions in the style of Mozart or Bach, for instance, but it's not.
Two CDs have been produced and sold with no legal action taken because the copyrights
to the individual works expired long ago.
In another case, Composer John Oswald created sound collages, using samples of
previously recorded works.
He claimed that the sound collages were original compositions.
He listed all his sources, but did not get permissions to use them.
Record companies filed lawsuits, and ultimately, unsold copies of his albums were destroyed.
Even though music and sound are things that can be repurposed, I don't always think that
it's necessarily the correct thing to do if you can't talk to someone who knew them
and if they would be okay with that.
[Jacky] There are very few things that have been original in this time era, so it's just
a matter of, like, you can't say, "I was the first to come up with it", because there's
always someone else who had.
Ethically speaking, using others' intellectual property for one's own gain without permission
is stealing.
But appropriation is more complex.
Appropriation can mean borrowing ideas, images, symbols, sounds and identity from others.
Many would argue that progress in art, music, and architecture wouldn't even be possible
without incorporating important artistic developments of the past.
Sometimes appropriation is ethically permissible and other times not.
For example, many of our government buildings and banks have appropriated ancient Greek
architectural features, such as columns and capitals, to project images we associate with
democracy, wealth, and freedom.
On the other hand, controversial instances of cultural appropriation abound, such as
the NFL's use of Native American symbols like the logo for the Washington Redskins.
[Hannah] My friends and I were actually talking recently about Miley Cyrus and how she's kind
of shifting from one image to more of like an African American influence.
If we asked our African American friends what they would think about that,
what would their reactions be?
And that's almost like a sampling of an entire culture rather than just like a series of
notes or a beat.
If you come across an artist and you really like how they did a certain skill or a process
it's okay to take that and try to make it your own.
I guess in a more professional setting, you do want to cite that effort that someone else
made just to pay respect to that person;
that's definitely something that's taught in the art world.
When it comes to appropriation and attribution, the laws may still be murky, but ethical behavior
doesn't have to be.
If what you want to use doesn't belong to you,
then use it only in ways that the owner permits.
If it's impossible to ask for permission, then ask yourself how you would want the creation
to be used or attributed if it were your own.
And if ownership itself is the subject of debate, then the use should be subjected to
a systematic moral analysis to determine what harms the appropriation might cause
and whether they are justified.
The thought of people stealing my work, it does bother me, and it does upset me, and
it almost angers me in a way to know that someone could get away with that.
[Rich] If you're borrowing material from an artist, you definitely need permission for that
just because that artist worked very hard on that, you know, regardless if it's music,
or art, or writing.
[Dana] It' a good idea to give credit and also put in your own style because whenever
you do create art or something like that,
you're taking from another idea that was already there.
And you need to be influenced some way or another.