The United States of America has a rich intellectual and artistic heritage, and that heritage should belong to us all. Increased use of copyright and intellectual property law as nothing more than a shield to protect corporate profits is unamerican, and must be curbed if we are to retain the intellectual, cultural, and creative dynamism that has so profoundly shaped our history.
The desire of companies like Disney and Time Warner to subjugate their place in history to the quest for a few percentage points on their next quarterly profit statement should not be enough to rewrite the law of the land. I can not believe that men like Walt Disney, Friz Freeling, Mel Blanc, John Wayne, John Ford, Orson Welles, Bob Hope, Cecille B. DeMille, or any of the countles other American legends who dedicated their lives to entertaining, educating, and enlightening their fellow human beings, would be happier to see their creations under lock and key in a studio vault than to see them available for appreciation and study as part of American culture.
They all understood, as to those who take up the modern debate surrounding intellectual property that commerce has a place in art, but they all worked with the understanding that copyright law would serve its original intent, which was to protect the rights and livelihoods of the artists and their patrons (the media companies). I do not deny the vital role played by the corporations which produce American art and media, but they can not be allowed, like spoiled children to hoard their treasures for all time. Mickey Mouse, Bugs Bunny, Beaver Cleaver, the residents of Mayberry and countless other media creations have been woven deeply into our cultural fabric, and because of this, the companies by which they were commissioned are faced with the artist’s double-edged blessing. There is a terrific honor in having one’s creation accepted and consumed by the masses, and there is pain in letting it go. An artist must understand that in giving her work to the people she sets it free to grow and change, and take on any number of forms, interpretations, meanings, and evolutions never envisioned by the artist. True artists have suffered and thrived on this process for hundreds of years, but it has only been in the modern age that the corporations which serve as the modern patron have felt as though they attained some absolute ownership of an artwork simply by providing money to have it created.
The true role of a patron is not to own or control art, but to set it free. Lorenzo de Medici never believed that he would possess the works of Michaelangelo for all time. Nor did he believe it was his right to milk the work of one of history’s greatest artists for unending profit. He understood that there are some artists whose talent demands release, and he was honored to be in a position to supply Michaelangelo with the tools and the materials required to bring form to his vision. Modern media companies may appear far more complex, but at their very best, they are simply the modern expression of the artist’s patron, supplying materials and resources to bring an artist’s vision to life.
If they could be made to understand and act on this simple truth, the state of American arts would more closely resemble art than the current bastardized amalgam of manufacturing and distribution. Imagine the place our nation would take in the pantheon of creative endeavor if our media companies understood the honor inherent in the absorption of an idea or a work of art into the public identity. And imagine what they could create if that was their aim.
Please do not misunderstand me. I do not deny either the need or the right of media companies to earn profits from their investments, but these profits must be reasonable, and must be balanced with the needs of our society. It is foolishness to think that company should be profiting from the work of artists who have been dead for longer than they lived. It is nonsensical to think that a company in which not a single current employee, associate, or contractor was alive during the creation of an artwork, should still exercise ironclad control over that art work.
The artists understand this, and the audience understands it intrinsically. Our elected representatives must understand it, and must act for the good of the people and the nation, not for the grasping interests of the petulant children that our once daring and passionate media corporations have become.
