Blog#7

Like Robert, Jamie, and Michelle mentioned, being in an MFA program keeps me up to date with conferences and publishing opportunities, as well as teaching opportunities. I also plan to attend the AWP conference in February. Like Michelle, I use Poet’s & Writers to research literary journals and also used it while looking for MFA programs. Like Dana, I use LinkedIN though I plan to use it more when I have more of a reason to promote myself and my work. I have used social networking sites like Facebook for certain promotional work (such as to help publicize an independent press that specializes in publishing emerging women writers—my short story was also published in this journal). Facebook is great when planning events that need large turnouts (such as benefits).

I tend to create my own opportunities depending on how I feel at the time. I used to be a huge supporter of Idealist.org when I was more interested in non-profit work. I used NYFA (New York Foundation of the Arts) when I was interested in teaching artist jobs and writing grants. I used SIT (School for International Training) when looking for international work. My career interest is quite vast so I am not too concerned about the competitiveness of certain fields (i.e: Academia). I am more concerned with doing what I love in that moment.

Blog#8

I cannot say that the results surprised me as I feel that the law is completely arbitrary and pointless most of the time. I agree with Robert that it ideas are created collectively and it is highly unlikely that any person is the only person to ever have come up with anything. Deciding whether something is truly a parody, ‘transformative,’ or ‘commercial’ are dangerously subjective notions. I also agree with Jamie when he says that many of these cases have to do with money and whether the court feels you should or should not be able to make money off said use of someone else’s material.

Having said this, as a writer, there is nothing worse than the idea of having your words stolen from you. I read recently that the premises for The Matrix and Terminator were written originally by a black woman, Sophia Stewart. I don’t really know how credible this is, but knowing the politics surrounding publishing, this would not surprise me. I do not, however, see any problem with taking something that is already published and creating your own artistic interpretation to that piece such as in the cases we read about. I also don’t fully comprehend the purposes of stringent copyright issues related to education. These laws make it very difficult to disseminate less popular opinions and allow outdated and corporate media to do much of the teaching. For example, I was very interested in assisting independent filmmakers publicize their work to wider audiences but was soon discouraged by how difficult it is to find copies of such materials, particularly because of their high costs. These high costs are also related to copyright laws that do not allow individuals to purchase certain independent films for ‘commercial use’ only for educational use making the costs very expensive (as it is expected that these films will be purchased by libraries and universities not individual educators/people simply wanting to help promote). Similarly, I would argue that downloading songs illegally actually helps many less known musical artists get their music spread to a wider audience.

Post #8

As Jamie pointed out, the outcomes of many cases relate to any potential impact on the copyright holders’ profit. This seems a commonsense litmus for fair use. I was particularly interested in the satire and parody examples because http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifI have been writing satiric posts for the Minnesota Review’s blog this semester. However, I am in no danger of violation because my use of pop culture or literature references usually take the form of direct parody. In cases of emulation (like the rewritten Dr. Seuss), I will remember to transform the material appropriately. I am glad to have reviewed these examples because parody and satire are my favorite approaches to creative non-fiction. I am a member of The Daily Show generation. Since Saturday Night Live was mentioned, I wonder how much of the Daily Show and Colbert Report’s budget and resources are devoted to purchasing rights or determining what crosses the line where satiric borrowing is concerned. I imagine writers for such shows have little wiggle room because their product is for profit whereas, as an educator, I have more leeway in some cases. For example, I once formatted an oral presentation lesson to mimic American Idol. According to these examples, my use of the show format was fine in an educational setting because it would not impact the show’s profits negatively. When SNL does a Jeopardy sketch, however, I’m sure they have to pay for using the format.

Uren Blog 8

I was surprised by the finding in Roy Export Co. Estab. of Vaduz v. Columbia Broadcasting Sys., Inc. in the Stanford Copyright and Fair Use case summaries. Apparently, a news program used less than 2% of a Chaplin film to accompany a story about Chaplin’s death and a court determined that it was not fair use. Contrast that with a news program using a full 12.5% of a video for a news story (also not fair use). In the CBS case, the judgment was qualitative: the court decided that the portion of film used was "substantial and part of the ‘heart’ of the film.” That kind of assessment muddies the waters. It’s much easier to work with hardline percentages rather than ad hoc arguments about the “heart” of a work.

As a researcher, I may run into problems with copyrighted material. At a conference, I used portions of a copyrighted comedy performance, maybe a full tenth of it. I didn’t worry about infringing on rights then, and I’d rather not worry about it now or later.

A tenant of my religion is active disbelief in intellectual property, because we hold that human psyches themselves are not the sole possessions of individuals, but are constituted by and indebted to a community. Therefore, we believe that works come to being through the activation by a socially constructed self of communally created art or knowledge. So, as a writer committed to my faith as well as my craft, I intend to openly antagonize the neoliberal project that seeks to attach privatized ownership and quantified value to all human works, including those which could advance human understanding and empathy.

Blog Post 8: Jamie Rand

The parody cases listed here are kind of a surprise to me. I've always been curious about what constitutes parody--having grown up on Weird Al, and wondering how he never got his pants sued off--and the list of these cases follows a pattern. A number of the "important factors" concern themselves with how the parody was handled; it seems to me that there can be small similarities, or the parody itself must "poke fun at or ridicule" the original work. If neither of those occur, the parody loses fair use, such as in this case: "Not a fair use: An author mimicked the style of a Dr. Seuss book while retelling the facts of the O.J. Simpson murder trial in The Cat NOT in the Hat! A Parody by Dr. Juice. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals determined that the book was a satire, not a parody, because the book did not poke fun at or ridicule Dr. Seuss. Instead, it merely used the Dr. Seuss characters and style to tell the story of the murder. Important factors: The author’s work was nontransformative and commercial. (Dr. Seuss Enterprises, L.P. v. Penguin Books USA, Inc., 109 F.3d 1394 (9th Cir. 1997).)" (heh, and just to be on the safe side, here's the citation: http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/chapter9/9-c.html#2) So far as I understand it, then, according to fair use, "nontransformative" satire is different from parody. That makes sense, I suppose. But mostly, it seems to me that it comes down to a question of money ("commercial," as that example says): if someone should have made money for their work, and they didn't, then you're in violation. As for how those examples affect me: they've made me paranoid. The last thing I want to do is get sued for trying to show my students examples of good writing. The TEACH Act spells out what we can and can't do as teachers, but even still, as that website says, "It is also important to note that TEACH does not supersede fair use or existing digital license agreements." So I guess my plan is to make sure I don't step on anyone's toes while I'm talking about comma splices. Also, it turns out that Weird Al "seek[s] permission of the songwriters before recording their parodies." Who woulda thought?

Blog Post 7 - Hockman

In an effort to remain professional, I will not use any specific social media site (such as Facebook) to build my online identity. However, in an effort to stay or get connected professionally, I look at various university websites that include faculty and graduate student online curriculum vitae. I enjoy looking at current projects going on with certain scholars, such as Antonio Damasio for example.

To be honest, there really are not any websites, blogs, listservs, or other online groups that I follow professionally. For conferences, I usually look at the website at the University of Pennsylvania or follow the listserv within our department. My advisor, Paul Heilker, will also send me links. Some point soon, I will join certain professional or scholarly affiliations such as the National Council of Teachers of English. This semester has been a whirlwind, and at some point, I will get it together and become a part of these fancy pants things.

You know, until we did this module, I slightly planned to just search online library databases for new materials. In addition, I planned to look at the publications of different scholarly organizations. I now know that I need to Google more stuff - oh world wide web, let me embrace you with my human arms.

Blog Post #7: Dana

I have spent my entire online life ensuring that I avoid an internet footprint. I am a member of a variety of social networking tools and I have a series of miscellaneous internet accounts and identities but you won’t find me on any of those sites (unless I direct you to them) because I've protected myself from being searchable.

I'm privy to the belief that social networking sites are the go-to searches for the job market, and I don't intend for my entire career to exist solely within the sphere of academia. So when I do "go public" (with goodness knows what), I will rely heavily, if not solely, on social networking accounts (specifically Twitter, LinkedIn, and Facebook since they are the most popular social media forums). I’d host a big linking party to all these sites via an about.me page which would also provide an opportunity for me to upload/link to a resume, and would direct viewers to (now hypothetical) future publishments and collaborative efforts.

Getting your name out there seems important, so like everybody else I'll be looking for conference opportunities via sites like Upenn's Call For Papers which I believe we were directed to in an earlier module. Lately I've been receiving a pretty solid influx of opportunities for conferences thanks to the VT English departments listserv, so for now I'll focus on those. I've never had a problem with keeping on top of media trends, and now I have about two columns worth of bookmarked material chock full of everything I could ever want to know about literary academia.

It's good to keep all this stuff in mind, but for me, creating an online identity is a project for a different day.