IP: Friend or Foe? - Compare/Contrast
The media used by both Robert and Kat really contributed to their overall thinking and argument. Kat's opening with a graphic depicted arguments for and against really started off the assignment strong. I think no matter what our stance is in a debate, we should all take a moment for this pro/con listing. The Soundcloud debate recording including the founder of Creative Commons was intriguing (even though I only listened to a little) since we all had to interact with this website to create the creative license.
Robert's video was very interesting. I didn't agree with the outlook that IP shouldn't cover music, movies or plays, but I think the video made a good point. I do see where he is coming from with his point on if recipes can't be patented then music shouldn't either. But both are very complex and yes his video shows how music/beats, just like food is so globalized. While recipes aren't copyright protected, the literature and photography around it is. So I do agree beats shouldn't be protected, but lyrics yes. In a way it's unfair and in another way it creates more inspirations. For example, did you see the video of an Iraqi rapper using Childish Gaminos "This is America" song to make his own political stance on "This is Iraq"? Here is an article on it.
Both Kat and Richard used great media to express their stance. The only graphic I used was more of a closing screenshot example. So I am disappointed in myself because I feel like I could have used media better.
Kat also brought in the economic factor that IP plays in the US economy , as I did. But I learned from her post an argument for against that is that "patents create monopolies", which makes sense. I didn't agree with the property part of the argument, but the way she expressed herself I could understand her point. Even if I disagreed.
Robert taught me that Google profits from activities in websites such as Youtube. I had no idea! Robert's expressing his view flowed well, just like Kat's. Good job both of you!