We Exist Somewhere Here: The Remix

The above image is by Dan Eldon, the Reuters photojournalist who inspired my career as an investigative reporter. This image is, in itself, a derivative work. Dan Eldon was murdered by an angry mob while covering the crisis in Somalia in July, 1993. I created the below image, which is symbolic of ideas about death, and how to live life fully, that I learned from Dan Eldon. I did have his mother Kathy Eldon's permission to create derivative work. In fact, in seeking permission, I sparked a long friendship that changed my life. I can only imagine how far-reaching Dan's influence, particularly over young, creative people, might have been had he lived long enough to participate in the digital culture. But not all copyright holders are as responsive as Kathy Eldon.

While intellectual property laws are critically important, so is the ability to share ideas, spin them into new creations, and grow in service of the greater public good.

This was the subject of last night's discussion with activist attorney Larry Lessig, artist Shepard Fairey (who created the iconic blue and red image of President Barack Obama) and Steven Johnson, "Remix: Making Art and Commerce Thrive in the Hybrid Economy" at the New York Public Library.


The event tackled a serious subject: What is the future for art and ideas in an age when practically anything can be copied, pasted, downloaded, sampled, and re-imagined?

This topic is far more nuanced and serious than it seems, because creators have a right to protect their intellectual property and at the same time, one of the core characteristics of the up-and-coming digital native culture is the ability to be collectively creative and to riff on ideas that have already been generated by other human beings not only to express one's own individual ideas, but hopefully to tackle serious issues that will benefit the public good. The young have already been strapped with an incredible roster of challenges that will affect the entire systemic functioning of the planet's population, both culturally and economically, and stripping them of their most powerful tool, the ability to collaborate without criminalizing that behavior, is inexcusable.

Shep Fairey is currently embroiled in litigation over his use of the image on which his fabulous poster was based, and he said he could have backed away but chose to fight because not all artists are in the position he's in with regard to public attention. Frankly, it surprises me that AP ever took Fairey to task, considering that he fairly attributed his use of the image and had he not bothered to do so, it's conceivable (given the number of almost-identical shots of President Obama) that the photographer and AP might never have made the connection, much less prove it. Additionally, the value of the original has been greatly amplified by the attention created by Fairey's work.

Lessig is right when he says that many of the policy decisions that run counter to the greater public good stem from campaign finance and the resulting crony corruption that occurs as a result. (In fact, I wrote chapter eight of the very recently published book, "Race, Place and Environmental Justice After Katrina," in which I detail this very subject following a six-month investigation).

This aspect of copyright law is a bit like the Serenity Prayer: May we find serenity to accept that artists are often inspired by other humans, the courage to fight blatant exploitation, and the wisdom to know the difference.

PS. The first question of the evening came from DJ Spooky AKA That Subliminal Kid via the Internet, who texted me to say he was Yale at that moment, premiering his new film. Not long ago, he was flying back from Tanzania to premiere North/South, an exhibit surrounding his Antarctica work. DJ Spooky is a perfect example of the way the lines of reality are being blurred within the digital culture for enhancement of our understanding of the physical world.