Difference between revisions of "Cheliotis (2007)"
Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
* The propensity to reuse falls with the breadth and depth of reuse. | * The propensity to reuse falls with the breadth and depth of reuse. | ||
− | * Extrinsic incentives in the form of competitions can boost production by authors and | + | * Extrinsic incentives in the form of competitions can boost production by authors and attract new authors to the community. However most competition works are never used again and the motivational effects end when the competition ends. |
− | attract new authors to the community. However most competition works are never used again and the motivational effects end when the competition ends. | ||
|FundamentalIssue=1. Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare, 2. Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)?, 4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption), | |FundamentalIssue=1. Relationship between protection (subject matter/term/scope) and supply/economic development/growth/welfare, 2. Relationship between creative process and protection - what motivates creators (e.g. attribution; control; remuneration; time allocation)?, 4. Effects of protection on industry structure (e.g. oligopolies; competition; economics of superstars; business models; technology adoption), | ||
|EvidenceBasedPolicy=A. Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right), B. Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction), D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability), | |EvidenceBasedPolicy=A. Nature and Scope of exclusive rights (hyperlinking/browsing; reproduction right), B. Exceptions (distinguish innovation and public policy purposes; open-ended/closed list; commercial/non-commercial distinction), D. Licensing and Business models (collecting societies; meta data; exchanges/hubs; windowing; crossborder availability), |
Revision as of 14:36, 22 August 2015
Contents
Source Details
Cheliotis (2007) | |
Title: | Remix Culture: An Empirical Analysis of Creative Reuse and the Licensing of Digital Media in Online Communities |
Author(s): | Cheliotis , G |
Year: | 2007 |
Citation: | Cheliotis, G. (2007). Remix culture: an empirical analysis of creative reuse and the licensing of digital media in online communities. |
Link(s): | Open Access |
Key Related Studies: | |
Discipline: | |
Linked by: |
About the Data | |
Data Description: | 7,484 music items, collected june 2007. 3,982 remixed items, or 53% of total..
There are also a graph with data from january 2008. |
Data Type: | Secondary data |
Secondary Data Sources: | |
Data Collection Methods: | |
Data Analysis Methods: | |
Industry(ies): | |
Country(ies): | |
Cross Country Study?: | No |
Comparative Study?: | No |
Literature review?: | No |
Government or policy study?: | No |
Time Period(s) of Collection: |
|
Funder(s): |
Abstract
In 2003, the US recording industry, hoping to change what some view as a ‘culture of piracy’, initiated lawsuits against its own consumers. What is this culture of piracy and what is at stake in trying to change it? In this article, I take an ethnographic look at music file-sharing, and compare the situation in the US with Japan, the second largest music market in the world. My findings are based on fieldwork in Tokyo, and surveys and discussions with US college students. By considering the ways social dynamics and cultural orientations guide uses of digital media technology, I argue that a legal and political focus on ‘piracy’ ignores crucial aspects of file-sharing, and is misleading in the assumptions it makes for policy. A focus on fan participation in media success provides an alternative perspective on how to encourage flourishing music cultures.
Main Results of the Study
- Author provides visual representations of the interactions within the ccMixer network.
- Reuse can span multiple generations of works and has the potential double the output of a community.
- The propensity to reuse falls with the breadth and depth of reuse.
- Extrinsic incentives in the form of competitions can boost production by authors and attract new authors to the community. However most competition works are never used again and the motivational effects end when the competition ends.
Policy Implications as Stated By Author
A policy to promote remixes and reuse could increase creative production.
Coverage of Study
Datasets
Sample size: | 3,982 |
Level of aggregation: | |
Period of material under study: | january 2008 |
Sample size: | 7484 |
Level of aggregation: | |
Period of material under study: | january 2008 |