The concept of the REMIx is a dangerous one. Especially dangerous only if you don’t know what it is, what it means, or why people are saying things like “Talent Imitates, Genius Steals.”
So, in case you missed the original LIVE version of chasejarvisLIVE: the REMIX episode with Mike Relm, we have delivered you with some re-watch goods once again. As always, the rewatch episode is not the complete show and you miss out on the chance to interact with us LIVE, however there’s still a veritable cornucopia of deep, important, even controversial info here for your devouring.
Couple more important notes:
1. Please join the boisterous many who have already signed up to receive my insider, shortlist email newsletter. Do this by clicking here and entering your email in the blank spot on the right. This will allow you to a) be the first to know about anything I’m doing that’s worth your attention, b) be the first to receive invites to special anythings… c) find out before anyone else who the next guests on cjLIVE will be, and d) become able to attend a cjLIVE show in person.
2. The next chasejarvis LIVE is coming up on February 29th and it will be insanely cool. All the details are here. Watch yours truly and Will Hyde shoot and direct a fashion video using the $150,000 dollar PHANTOM slow motion camera…LIVE in real time. If you want to be first to receive details or reminders on this in the future, see number 1 above and sign up for the newsletter. There will be some exclusive ways to participate.
3. Follow Mike Relm. He is a badass. Here’s his twitter. Here’s his YouTube channel. Here’s the number on his credit card. Just kidding on that last one, but it’s still a useful link.
—
I think this is a very important topic and I’m glad you are approaching it in such a thoughtful way. I am seriously torn on this subject, and I suspect that the vast majority of your audience is as well.
I think it’s hard to be objective when this is something discussed by a world class photographer and a mix artist as talented as the one showcased here. In other words, he really adds value to the work.
The problem is that this really doesn’t represent the situation as it exists in the real world (and as someone who’s had another artist “re-interpret” their work), I can assure you that this is so unusual as to have been noteworthy to the producers of the movie Iron Man. In most cases, the new work is less than the original, but who is to be the judge or arbiter in these cases?
On one hand, I see a huge amount of creativity that could come from a loosening of the current Copyright laws, but I also see that the original artists could be hesitant to display their best work for fear it would be ripped off.
Tough topic. I don’t have any solution, but I do think we (as a community) need to talk about this.
that’s the goal with this. thx for sharing your opinion!
why not have the remixer get permission from the original content creator before they “share” the remix? or, the remixer could create their own original content and/or collaborate with others who can? also, when someone like mike receives financial compensation for his work does the original content creator get royalties? very interesting topic that i think will be a dominate subject in the years to come.
I keep getting an error message when trying to sign up for your email newsletter.
there error i get is “There was a problem processing your submission.”
help?
The spilled coffee coming back up to the cup, was a Film School standard back in the 1970s. Everything Old ls is New again
If you hold the camera up-side-down for filming and reverse the film tail to head for projection the action takes place in reverse. Digital make many things easier now-a-days
Interesting topic. I can argue both sides….but how about I toss in another curve ball.
What if the remix is actually “better” than the original. Example:
I would never have known or wanted to see the Disney movie Wall-E….but “if” it was like this trailer spoof I would:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Trv6PDoO8Q
Combo of two trailers – best elements of both.
I call bullshit on this. This is not T.S. Elliot talking about improving a previous artists work, this is stealing content for his own profit. Not only are the previous artists being ripped off but what about the actors, the camera crew, the producers, the director, etc from the original content? Do they get compensated? What if I lift ever photo off of Chase’s site and develop my own remix video ( I can’t easily because Chase’s site uses java to protect his content ).
So Chase, I have an idea to improve your work, so give me access to all your content, I’m not stealing….I’m improving it. Or I got another idea. Chase I bought your Zack Arias creativeLive video. I think I’ll remix it and post it on YouTube this weekend. I bet I hear from you and Zack.
The video keeps talking about if it is good it is ok but what if it isn’t good, it’s not ok? Who decides if it is good or not?
The dude is stealing plain and simple. There is a difference between taking an idea and improving; it is completely different to take someone else’s content and use it. If the original artist says it’s ok to use their content then great but how about the person who doesn’t want their content taken? What if that person was already working to improve their original content in a similar fashion as the person who just ripped them off? Is that right?
Hey I believe in taking ideas (not content) and working to improve, to expand on the original thought/idea. This doesn’t only apply to creative work but also products and inventions. Steve Jobs did not take other people’s MP3’s and put colorful colors on them and resell them. He took an idea and improved on it without infringing on their patents.