Have we talked about Nina Paley in class? (I know JP blogged about her last month!) And was anyone able to catch the screening of her film “Sita Sings the Blues” and the Q&A at 80 Lafayette last week?

I wasn’t able to attend, but according to the 80 Laf blog, Nina talked with residents about her experiences making “Sita Sings the Blues”  and the issus she has with copyright laws. She was also joined by Karl Fogel of QuestionCopyright.org.

Since I was unable to attend the program, here is some background I dug up:

After pouring three years of her life into making the film, and having great success with audiences at festival screenings, she now can’t distribute it, because of music licensing issues: the film uses songs recorded in the late 1920′s by singer Annette Hanshaw, and although the recordings are out of copyright, the compositions themselves are still restricted. That means if you want to make a film using these songs from the 1920s, you have to pay money — a lot of money (around $50,000.00).

It’s a classic example of how today’s copyright system suppresses art, effectively forcing artists to make creative choices based on licensing concerns rather than on their artistic vision.

The music in Sita Sings The Blues is integral to the film: entire animation sequences were done around particular songs. As Nina says in the interview, incorporating those particular recordings was part of her inspiration. To tell her — as many people did — to simply use different music would have been like telling her not to do the film at all. And that’s part of her point: artists “internalize the permission culture”, which in turn affects the kinds of art they make.

2009-12-16: she eventually did pay them off, and then released the film under a free license. You can buy a DVD, or download it online

(http://questioncopyright.org/nina_paley_sita_interview)

Nina is now the artist in residence at Question Copyright, as her experience making “Sita Sings the Blues” has made her, well, question copyright.  Here’s her views on copyright as related to her film:

You don’t need my permission to copy, share, publish, archive, show, sell, broadcast, or remix Sita Sings the Blues. Conventional wisdom urges me to demand payment for every use of the film, but then how would people without money get to see it? How widely would the film be disseminated if it were limited by permission and fees? Control offers a false sense of security. The only real security I have is trusting you, trusting culture, and trusting freedom.

And here’s some info about Question Copyright:

Our mission is to educate the public about the history of copyright, and to promote methods of distribution that do not depend on restricting people from making copies.

Copyright was originally designed to regulate and subsidize distribution, not creation. It was never designed to provide an economic basis for creativity, and largely doesn’t even now. Today, the Internet has fundamentally changed the economics of distribution; copyright is now far more of a hindrance than a help at connecting creators with their audiences. (http://questioncopyright.org/faq)

Here are some relevant links:

http://blog.ninapaley.com/

http://www.sitasingstheblues.com/

http://questioncopyright.org/

http://80laf.wordpress.com/tag/nina-paley/

So…what does everyone think?

• Previous Entry: Education fee for course packs?
• Next Entry: Why “Open”?