media analysis assignment

                    Bret Gaylor, the author of the documentary we watched during class has a one sided bias. Although I find most of what I have to do for this assignment is as clear as a glass of milk or a cup of black coffee, I do understand how he looks at copyright companies. Bret Gaylor looks at copyright companies as they are: big, mean, and controlling. Which in that description, reminds me of my brother. I do not know if you want me to ether pour my heart out or write a proper essay. So I will try my best to come up with things I know nothing about or how to answer within a minimum of two hundred and fifty words.


                    Bias is shown in this film through appeal to authority and anecdote. Cory Doctorow, Greg Gillis, Lawrence Lessig, and Mark Holser: they all say the same thing. Copyright is just a brick wall of culture shock and censorship in one blockage. It limits us, consumers, creators, the little guy, from renewing the old. All of them say copyright is not right at all, not even remotely. That it is not here to protect us, it is here to protect them. As you watch the film, you may feel detached for a while. I was, to be honest: because of the excessive raving and ranting coming out of Bret Gaylor's commentary. But to rescue everyone from distress, it quickly changes, throwing me off and confusing me one hundred percent downright, and it changed to a more personable side. Anecdote was used as a personal view. For people who had to pay thousands due to the viewed harshness of copyright law, there was a human side. For example they show a woman, two kids, trailer, and a CD with some classic top hits. She had to pay around twenty grand for one song, just because it was written by Bon Jovi. Why should there be free music online, if you just get sued for copyright anyways? Why waste your copyright laws on a song anyone can buy for ninety nine cents on iTunes? Copyright does this, because they want money and because they can. Copyright reminds me of my brother: big, mean, and controlling. And remix and mash-up artists remind me of myself: small, creative, and crushable, Copyright laws are in place to stop others from copying what is there, changing or modifying it, and sending it out to the public. They do that, because they don't want anyone to go, get rich, and be successful off a song or movie they have published or allowed into society. It's like a parental control setting your mom puts on your personal laptop. Copyright is not just in music, it is everywhere. In Brazil, companies were making AIDs and HIV medication just like the USA was, but they were giving it away for free to people who needed it. US medical copyright told Brazil to shut it down, because Americans had to pay. Brazil told them: tough love America, tough love. All of this is personal.


                   My conclusion is that the glass of milk or cup of coffee is still as see-through as I saw them before. Yes, that means I am still uncertain of this still, even though I am ending it. I am more than sure that I have reached more than two hundred and fifty words, and my views are still the same. Copyright law affects us, the consumers, the creators, and the little guys. It turns everything into private property and it is a brick wall of culture shock and censorship. It stops us from mixing it up or being ourselves and expressing it. It is the big, mean, and controlling brother, because copyright companies make copyright laws, and we don't.