Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Wired Interview with Copyright Comic Authors

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the didja-always-want-to-be-a-comedian? dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Wired has an interesting interview with the authors of a recent book about comics, fair use and the permissions culture. There is also a gallery of some of the most interesting pages from the comic. According to the interview, their next project is going to be on the history of musical borrowing and the way law has affected it. 'Picture a conversation between Bach, Robert Johnson and John Lennon, in comic book form.' Now *that* would be 'Strange Fruit,' indeed."

7 of 31 comments (clear)

  1. Strange Comparison by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 4, Informative

    "'Picture a conversation between Bach, Robert Johnson and John Lennon, in comic book form.' Now *that* would be 'Strange Fruit,' indeed."

    I doubt that Bach and Lennon would lynch Johnson, though lynching Black Americans is what "Strange Fruit" is about.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  2. Strange Fruit by Quirk · · Score: 3, Informative
    For those who don't know..." "Strange Fruit" is a song most famously performed by Billie Holiday that condemns American racism, particularly the practice of lynching and burning African Americans that was prevalent in the South at the time when it was written.

    Holiday's phrasing was so unique that every song is a treat, but 'Strange Fruit' was, perhaps, the song for which she is best known.

    --
    "Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature."
    Cohen
  3. Sure Beats... by -Brodalco- · · Score: 5, Funny

    ..Captain Copyright, that canadian government produced comic about the importance of obeying copyright rules. Why is it the governments are always so bad at creating effective propaganda?

    --
    I regret spilling a glass of ginger ale on an achritect!
    1. Re:Sure Beats... by mboos · · Score: 3, Informative

      Not so... the site is from the Canadian Copyright Licensing Agency, which is an organization of Canadian writers and publishers, not the government.

      --
      --Mike Boos
  4. Irony by payndz · · Score: 3, Informative
    I kind of like the irony that the central character in the strip - Akiko - looks an awful lot like Hopey from Jaime Hernandez's 'Love & Rockets'. Is this a job for Captain Copyright?

    The comic does make a good point, though. The copyright laws (worldwide, not just in the US) are seriously fucked up if corporations are demanding thousands of dollars just because somebody's movie-theme ringtone can be heard in the background of a documentary.

    --
    You must think in Russian.
  5. So... by Kamineko · · Score: 3, Informative
    Is it illegal for Slashdot to mention the names of the authors or the title of the book?

    The book is called 'Bound By Law? Tales From the Public Domain', and it is co-written and produced by Keith Aoki, James Boyle and Jennifer Jenkins. The art is by Aoki.

  6. Even most artists don't benefit from copyright law by siriuskase · · Score: 4, Interesting

    That is the point that must be driven into the heads of the don't know/don't care people. The various industries that benefit from the long copyrights are very good at invoking the welfare of the artists, the actual creators of IP, even though most artists can't live off the royalties. Live performance is the only way to make a living for most of those who can make a living off their creations. All the money gets eaten up by the starmaking machinery behind the popular song, film, and book.

    If you didn't see Courtney Love does the Math in the Weird Al thread, please read it. it is a rather intelligent rant from the artist POV.

    A shallow understanding of copyright law would make it seem that artists and their fans would be on opposite sides of this issue. But, except for a few who have retired on their royalty checks and no longer need to create or perform, that isn't the case. It is fans and artists vs the distribution industry. As soon as everyone understands that it is artists who should get paid for creating and while the distributors should get paid for distributing, and royalties should only be an incentive to artists as originally intended, then maybe our culture will belong to us and not locked up in private hands. Once an artist goes public with his work, then it is no longer private property. The copyright is simply a reward for contributing to the public forum. Wasn't that the original intent of the US short copyright?

    --
    If you must moderate, please moderate as irrelevent, not something bad, because I'm sure someone will find this interest