Skip to main content

tv   Student Cam - Second Prize High School  CSPAN  April 11, 2018 1:36am-1:48am EDT

1:36 am
a presidential candidate, foreshadowing the conservative revolution to come. our guest is the editor of the "american conservative" and author of "where they stand." the george washington university professor and author of "the right moment: ronald reagan's victory and the decisive turning point in american politics." watch "1960 eight: america in turmoil, conservative politics" at 8:30 a.m. eastern on c-span's washington journal and on american history tv on c-span3. >> c-span, where history unfolds daily. c-span's "washington journal," live with news and policy issues that impact you. oh today, we continue to bring you unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court, and public policy
1:37 am
events in washington, d.c. and around the country. c-span is brought to you by your cable or satellite provider. ♪ >> this month on c-span, we feature our studentcam contest winners. we asked middle and high school students to choose a provision of the u.s. constitution and illustrate why it is important to them. our second prize high school west winners are jayson ventura, elyza de lara, and marob wiseman. 10th and 12th graders. in their winning entry, titled "copy rights," talks about the intellectual property clause. >> the provision we chose was the intellectual property clause. we chose it specifically since we are in our school's video production and broadcasting class. >> the thing that surprised me
1:38 am
is i could say i made two new friends and that we combined editing and shooting. >> i was very honored to get chosen. >> plastered over paper. inspiration from the environment. digitizing people's expansive creativity. crafted by adept hands. produced even in the form of fulfilling sound. art is everywhere. it is the foundation of our world. it portrays many things, like emotions, society, an author's life. basically anything. it causes viewers to understand things from different perspectives or even create abstract opinions that vary from generation to generation. for that reason, it creates value to us. and not just sentimental value,
1:39 am
but also monetary value because of it. people of all ages, young and old, make art that is cherished by many. but while some may create art as a hobby, some create art for a living. some may think being an artist is simple, but in reality, artists have to worry about not just the struggles of creativity and criticism, but also protection. in this day and age, with technology, it is easy to copy work in a matter of seconds, and for artists, that can devastate them. why would artists need production over their work, and how? >> the copyright clause basically gives you security over what you own. >> authorizes congress to pass laws that protect the works of inventors. >> protects the creative works of an individual. >> the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries. >> a contract that protects
1:40 am
people's stuff. >> the formal definition of article 1, section 8, clause 8 states congress has the power to promote the progress of science and useful arts by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries, known as the intellectual property clause. this creates two types of protections, patents and copyrights. patents protect useful inventions, while copyrights protect creative works. this means creators can register their works under the library of congress so that they, and their art, are protected under law. >> attaining copyright is relatively easy. all you have to do is submit a work to the copyright office for a small fee. it can be done online with an electronic form. you can submit a manuscript in a simple, digital format. it's usually easy to convert and create. >> registering is important to an artist in preventing other
1:41 am
people from copying their work and claiming it as their own. but in our technological era, copyright infringement happens commonly in ways some people do not expect -- social media posts. >> this one guy reposted one of my pictures on his instagram page. i immediately contacted him -- "delete this, or i will sue you." he actually immediately deleted it. i was pretty glad, because i actually did not have a watermark on that picture, because he stole it straight from my instagram. >> with our spontaneous urge to show friends something funny or cool, we sometimes post another person's work without regarding their rights. >> in the past, i've had people use my drawings for icons and stuff online. usually, i do not mind, as long as they give some sort of credit, which they usually do. but there are issues with people who do not want to give credit. >> infringement can damage an artist's reputation, work, and self-esteem. it is also illegal to steal
1:42 am
their handiwork because, first off, it does not belong to you. secondly, how will they get paid if other people do not know who made it? >> one of my favorite examples is to have a project that they work two or three hours on, and they really are proud of it, and then you turn to them and say, "johnny, i am going to put thad's name on it." that is the most graphic way to let them know that art and creativity should be protected. they should give credit for it. they should do that. >> but what about those who rely on the works of others as their artistic medium? some people have found success from the work of others by creating remixes or parodies of another person's creativity, but is it legal? as it turns out, the u.s. code of laws has the answer. title 17, chapter 1, section 107. many people call it the fair use clause, which basically states
1:43 am
people can use the works of others in their own way, so long as it is changed in a way that is expressed differently from the author's original intent. so things like doing product reviews, reactions, song remixes, and even news is fine with some caution. >> some people try to copy my work, but i do a special signature so they know it is me. >> cases simply fall down to who owns a work of art and whether others have asked permission to use it. most issues are resolved between creators and users with simple requests, like having a post being taken down or crediting the author. >> they have an issue that can be resolved through mediation. they can resolve their issue in a confidential and inexpensive and time-friendly way and go on doing their work. because creative people need to
1:44 am
be able to focus on their work and not really worry about lawsuits or people stealing their work. >> but bigger issues involving well-known organizations like record labels or corporations have larger consequences that may require a large amount of monetary reparation. but for the most part, it is just a good rule of thumb to ask permission from creators and give them credit for their work. if licenses are required, just make sure you and the creator both know what you are signing up for. for those making creative works, know your rights and do what you can to protect them. in the end, it is a loop of sharing. creators sharing works with their viewers, and viewers sharing their works with the world. so help creators you know share their work to the world by making sure you know your copy rights. >> to watch all of the prize-winning documentaries,
1:45 am
visit >> c-span's "washington journal," live with news and policy issues that impact you. coming up wednesday morning, a session on foreign investment rules in the u.s. with north carolina republican congressman robert kittinger and then the california congressman who represents silicon valley. and mark zuckerberg's testimony before congress and the debate over data privacy. and a look at the u.s. budget. the congressional predicts the deficit in the u.s. will pass $1 trillion by the year 2020, 2 years sooner than estimated. we will discuss that with the bipartisan policy center. be sure to watch c-span's "washington journal" and join
1:46 am
the discussion. >> monday on landmark cases, brandenburg v. ohio. laurentklan leader brandenburg was convicted of hate speech under an ohio law, but the supreme court unanimously ruled the state law violated his first amendment rights. strossen, are nadine the former head of the american civil liberties union, and professor at new york law school in manhattan. and katie italo, a senior at institute.iversity's watch "landmark cases" monday and join the conversation. and follow us on c-span. websiteresources on our for background on each cases. the companion book on a link to the national constitution center 's interactive constitution, and the landmark cases podcast at
1:47 am aremong the issues that near and dear to me is this idea of having conversations across party lines and political ideologies. feel that common sense requires common experience. of having adea sharing point of information we can all rely on as opposed to be -- suspiciouss of of. that is something we are working on as educators and citizens. >> affordable housing, making sure we have a diversion -- diversity inclusive city. we want to address homelessness, which many cities are struggling 21stnationwide, and century policing and making sure that our police bureau respect the cities that we live in. >> one of the most important issues for me is the economy in oregon


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on