Digital Art(ists)

The digital world has not affected art so much as the way it has affected the way art is distributed and presented.

This artist called Issa distributed her music entirely on the net, without the help of record labels. I mean, I don't think she's very good, but what she did is cool.

Another band, called Atomic Tom, performed using iPhone instrument apps after their instruments were stolen. This technology allowed them to still perform their same music, with a similar sort of sound, but without their instruments:

Not only art has been affected. Any newsflash or social concern can be shared now thanks to the digital world, and in any way possible. A good example is this video.

Digital technology allows anyone to take art that already exists, and change it to make it their own. As we know, these are called remixes.

Remixes are both hindered and aided by the fair use policy. Most remixes are probably made without permission or knowledge of the original owner, and they are usually fine. The confusion between fair use and copyright infringement has inspired a comic book. ------------------------------------->

This comic book puts a particular focus on documentary film making, and how fair use and copyright infringement are a constant concern for any documentarian.

Things get really complicated when something like an SNL skit gets seen online on a site like Youtube. Then the whole issue of copyright and fair use really gets fuzzy, because it's being seen through a medium that is very difficult to control and moderate (for more about this, click here!)

I personally think that the difference between copyright infringement and fair use should be decided on the quality of the item in question. If it's good and well made, fair use. If it's crap, infringement. Here's a really clever one, which I thus dub "fair use." It's good because Glenn Beck is an asshole.