Sign in or register
for additional privileges

Flows of Reading

Engaging with Texts

Erin Reilly, Ritesh Mehta, Henry Jenkins, Authors

You appear to be using an older verion of Internet Explorer. For the best experience please upgrade your IE version or switch to a another web browser.

2.11 Inspiration versus Plagiarism


Some critics have argued that remix is not creative because artists are simply copying the work of others. Lawrence Lessig, a law professor who has made intellectual property central to his research, takes a different perspective. What are some of the arguments he constructs in favor of greater respect and tolerance for remix?

Remix often is described as plagiarism; in fact, it can be seen as the opposite of plagiarism. Plagiarists mask the sources of their material and take claim for them. Remixers depend on our recognition that the material is borrowed and our understanding of the specific contexts from which it is borrowed (suggesting a logic closer to allusions or inspiration than to plagiarism). For example, Kanye West’s video for his song about the ethics of the diamond trade, Diamonds from Sierra Leone, features a sample from Shirley Bassey’s song, Diamonds are Forever, the theme from a James Bond movie. This song would lose the power of meaning if we did not recognize its references to the earlier work. 

Even if we believe that remix constitutes a meaningful form of creative expression, we still must address core questions about the ethics and legality of contemporary practice: 
  • Who owns a remix?
  • And who should be compensated?
  • What responsibility does a remixer have to the original content and creator?
Comment on this page
 

Discussion of "2.11 Inspiration versus Plagiarism"

Add your voice to this discussion.

Checking your signed in status ...

Previous page on path Appropriation and Remixing, page 11 of 13 Next page on path