sarahsp1

__**About Me**__ Name: Sarah Speck Major: International Economics Computer Experience: Have dabbled in some Adobe programs like Illustrator, InDesign, Lightroom Art Experience: Little to none - took an art class abroad in Spain where we studied at the Prado and Reina Sofia Art Interests: Enjoyed cubism and studying the cubist movement

__**Week 1 Homework**__

As someone who appreciates the arts but has never formally studied fine arts, I admittedly have not given much thought to laws regarding intellectual property in the field. The stories that I am vaguely familiar with regarding copyrights are the seemingly petty and more extreme examples alluded to in the comic book about artists demanding enormous sums of money for a seemingly negligible use of their intellectual property. I strongly associated incidents like these with pettiness and greed in the entertainment industry, with successful people trying to extort every cent out of their work while building roadblocks to the creation of new work. I think that part of what bothered me about some of the cases in the text was the fact that very wealthy organizations and artists went to court over what was pennies to them but potentially a fortune to the defending artist. I believe that in some cases, extensive intellectual property laws induce a staunch focus on perpetual monetization of existing work as opposed to incentivizing new work.

The comic book mentions the simultaneous importance and difficulty of maintaining a balance in laws that both protect and promote creativity and intellectual property. I believe that this matter is complicated by how rapidly technology, and therefore art and the means to distribute and acquire art are changing. It is extremely important to hear the opinions of people immersed in both the art world and the legal world on the ever-changing realm of issues regarding intellectual property. It is my personal belief that finding a way to simplify the system, or at least simplify people’s understanding of intellectual property, would encourage artists to immerse themselves in the complicated legal side of property rights for the sake of a project that they feel passionate about. I also believe that there should be a concerted effort to deter companies and artists from going to court over cases that are obvious examples of incidental and fair use. If artists are less apprehensive about being indiscriminately pressured by powerful companies then they may feel compelled to take more “risks” with intellectual property.

During my internship this past summer I dipped my toes in some of the intricacies of copyright law and intellectual property protection when I was working in the marketing department of a large real estate developer. Whenever we completed a property we would send a photographer to the site to take interior and exterior shots for our internal use. However, the usage rights for these photos were often very complicated and included many stipulations regarding what types of platforms and in what context the photos could be used. It was not uncommon for property managers to call me requesting photos for use on their website. Most of the time the best I could do was put them in contact with the photographer to buy the photos separately since the property management company was not associated with our company. Another problem that I encountered that was reiterated in the article was losing track of the source of images or the photographer that had been used for older properties. The process of tracking down the photographer or the company from which we had purchased the rights to the photographs was often slow and delayed projects that we were working on at the time.