Copyright – the reason for the dominance of pop culture
Recent acquaintance with the book "Imagine no copyright. As well as reflections on the transnational corporations that control cultural assets" of Joost of Smirk and Mareike van Schendel came upon a small observation that I would like to share.
Pop culture or mass culture – the culture prevailing among the broad layers of the population. In this concept, you can attach different meanings, classify certain music bands, books, movies, etc. But the most important is the aspect that pop culture is a cultural product that sells well. Many the term is associated with a certain level of primitivism, to appeal to the base instincts of man.
Contrasting the pop culture example of classic art or the art-house, to see the difference in difficulty perception. Blockbusters themselves captivate the viewer on a simple story, carefully protecting from trauma and the resulting almost invariable happy end. Many "other" works of cinema requires a thoughtful viewing. This film is almost incompatible with popcorn or chatter in the back row of the cinema.
But most important to this observation is the peculiarity that the bulk of pop culture is concentrated on the tops of several of the charts and ratings. For all its variety of pop-culture stimulates the unification and favoritism among consumers. For the year produced a huge number of movies, books and music. At the same time on all channels, we see the unchanging face and hear constant voices. Reasons why new performers difficult to break, rarely associated with the talent – it is often wholly lacking. Most often the "star candidates" for their modest results, blame the lack of luck or money. Luck and money. Why they are subject to contemporary art?
This phenomenon everyone can allocate a range of reasons at their discretion. I, because of my profession, I want to draw attention to the role of copyright in this process.
The existing system of distribution of intellectual property is based on the principle "everything is forbidden". The owner has absolute rights to dispose of their own product of intellectual activity. The industry distribution of the objects is still largely based on the activities of intermediaries, for example, the so-called majors in music. These companies are buying the rights to the work and then operate continuously charged royalties. They are a sort of equivalent of the medieval merchant has a monopoly on the rare commodity.
And now look at the logic of sales. It is obvious that the seller is easier to sell the same product, if the demand is not falling. There is no need to provide a diversity of products, if "people hawala". System of marketing products is beneficial to accustom the consumer to a single product or type of products, soaking them all strata of society. To date, this is expressed by the word "promotion". On the logic of incentives of sales forces to actively move to the mass market. And the easier to "digest" the product, the more it is massive. Hence the total shift of mass culture in entertainment. Hence, the multimillion-dollar fees the mass of performers, when others, like the recognized talents, are doomed to lack of money. A simple well-selling product for the best mediators, since it ensures maximum profit with minimum effort.
Imagine that if the suppliers of grocery stores were able to sell to the buyer one buckwheat, accustomed to her consumer, displacing all other products. No need to spend efforts on launching new products, come up with complicated recipes, contact with perishable foods. Buckwheat! Widespread buckwheat with pay-per-swallowed a seed (and some twice). On the market of intellectual property suppliers have been able to subdue the market. Consumers in other areas have long been consumes what he is told, but in the arts it more clearly. And somehow more insulting.
For a more complete analysis of the situation need to consider the examples which show the presence of an alternative mechanism. In memory POPs up the first Peter nalitch with his Internet hit, which put the contractor at no extra promotion in the list of most recognizable of Russian pop stars. The Internet has provided a direct connection between the author and audience, without intermediaries and a direct response, expressed in the popularity of concerts, clips, albums. However, in the environment of traditional pop culture, this group immediately became popular with all the ensuing consequences. But his example shows that a direct contact between the author and the public, without intermediaries, is cultural diversity.
The Internet can be a channel for direct communication, which minimizes the impact on market intermediaries. Authors need to learn how to use it. Not a ban, and services to attract consumers and stimulate their desire to pay for the goods should become a modern tool for authors. Then the consumer will really get the opportunity to choose, and the author can rely on an adequate assessment of his talent. Otherwise freedom will remain only a mythological image and the slogan of modern blockbusters.
Article based on information from habrahabr.ru
Pop culture or mass culture – the culture prevailing among the broad layers of the population. In this concept, you can attach different meanings, classify certain music bands, books, movies, etc. But the most important is the aspect that pop culture is a cultural product that sells well. Many the term is associated with a certain level of primitivism, to appeal to the base instincts of man.
Contrasting the pop culture example of classic art or the art-house, to see the difference in difficulty perception. Blockbusters themselves captivate the viewer on a simple story, carefully protecting from trauma and the resulting almost invariable happy end. Many "other" works of cinema requires a thoughtful viewing. This film is almost incompatible with popcorn or chatter in the back row of the cinema.
But most important to this observation is the peculiarity that the bulk of pop culture is concentrated on the tops of several of the charts and ratings. For all its variety of pop-culture stimulates the unification and favoritism among consumers. For the year produced a huge number of movies, books and music. At the same time on all channels, we see the unchanging face and hear constant voices. Reasons why new performers difficult to break, rarely associated with the talent – it is often wholly lacking. Most often the "star candidates" for their modest results, blame the lack of luck or money. Luck and money. Why they are subject to contemporary art?
This phenomenon everyone can allocate a range of reasons at their discretion. I, because of my profession, I want to draw attention to the role of copyright in this process.
The existing system of distribution of intellectual property is based on the principle "everything is forbidden". The owner has absolute rights to dispose of their own product of intellectual activity. The industry distribution of the objects is still largely based on the activities of intermediaries, for example, the so-called majors in music. These companies are buying the rights to the work and then operate continuously charged royalties. They are a sort of equivalent of the medieval merchant has a monopoly on the rare commodity.
And now look at the logic of sales. It is obvious that the seller is easier to sell the same product, if the demand is not falling. There is no need to provide a diversity of products, if "people hawala". System of marketing products is beneficial to accustom the consumer to a single product or type of products, soaking them all strata of society. To date, this is expressed by the word "promotion". On the logic of incentives of sales forces to actively move to the mass market. And the easier to "digest" the product, the more it is massive. Hence the total shift of mass culture in entertainment. Hence, the multimillion-dollar fees the mass of performers, when others, like the recognized talents, are doomed to lack of money. A simple well-selling product for the best mediators, since it ensures maximum profit with minimum effort.
Imagine that if the suppliers of grocery stores were able to sell to the buyer one buckwheat, accustomed to her consumer, displacing all other products. No need to spend efforts on launching new products, come up with complicated recipes, contact with perishable foods. Buckwheat! Widespread buckwheat with pay-per-swallowed a seed (and some twice). On the market of intellectual property suppliers have been able to subdue the market. Consumers in other areas have long been consumes what he is told, but in the arts it more clearly. And somehow more insulting.
For a more complete analysis of the situation need to consider the examples which show the presence of an alternative mechanism. In memory POPs up the first Peter nalitch with his Internet hit, which put the contractor at no extra promotion in the list of most recognizable of Russian pop stars. The Internet has provided a direct connection between the author and audience, without intermediaries and a direct response, expressed in the popularity of concerts, clips, albums. However, in the environment of traditional pop culture, this group immediately became popular with all the ensuing consequences. But his example shows that a direct contact between the author and the public, without intermediaries, is cultural diversity.
The Internet can be a channel for direct communication, which minimizes the impact on market intermediaries. Authors need to learn how to use it. Not a ban, and services to attract consumers and stimulate their desire to pay for the goods should become a modern tool for authors. Then the consumer will really get the opportunity to choose, and the author can rely on an adequate assessment of his talent. Otherwise freedom will remain only a mythological image and the slogan of modern blockbusters.
Комментарии
Отправить комментарий