What is copyright infringement and what is fair use? These are questions that have plagued the world in the digital age. With so much access to information, these two entities were bound to butt heads. And these are the issues the 3 assigned articles try to answer, or at the very least, bring attention to.
           In the case of Gordon v McGinley, The most interesting article of the 3, a case about when inspiration becomes infringement, I found myself absolutely confounded. The audacity of Gordon to essentially say that none shall be inspired by her work without her permission is nothing short of absurd.
           Imagine if Braque sued Picasso, or vice versa. Cubism may very well have never been invented, as the two drew constant inspiration from each other. In other words, society and culture could very well become stagnant if we all had to obtain permission to be inspired. New works and ideas would essentially be eliminated.
           I found the article on GirlTalk to be very interesting, as well. I fully support everything Gillis does with his mashups, and the idea of mashups being fair game. However, I simply can’t stand the sounds he creates with them (I know, that is beside the point).
           Why he isn’t being sued by the music industry befuddles me. He is in clear violation of the rules that have been established, so why is he not subject to those rules? Even if one doesn’t agree with the rules, and I don’t, one ought to still believe he should be sued for violating said rules.
           This article brings up an interesting point in order to try to answer this very question – the benefit of suing Gillis is far outweighed by the cons. In other words, the chance that the industry will fail with a lawsuit brings far greater consequences, i.e. the likely collapse of their established rules, than a successful lawsuit, which would likely only result in restitution, which would be far less money than what the industry could earn from keeping it’s stranglehold tight.
           In short, the dollars and cents don’t add up for a lawsuit. If Gillis is allowed to continue to operate with impunity, however, he will inevitably continue to shine a spotlight on the hypocrisy of the current copyright laws. This may ultimately be more damaging to the credibility of copyright laws than a lawsuit.
           It’s hard to tell if copyright laws will be reformed in my lifetime. But with the way technology is transforming the very idea of copyright, it almost assuredly will.
