Remix Culture
In this sketch we will explore and discuss how remix culture is applied and engaged with using Vine.
The purpose of this sketch was to explore remix culture. The concept of remixing originally spawned from the introduction of multi-track mixers that made remixing a standard practice. With each element of a song (vocals, drums, etc), it became possible to “re-mix” the song. Gradually the term evolved to represent any reworking of already pre-existing cultural work(s). Lev Manovich, professor of Visual Arts, at the University of California, specialised in new media and digital culture. Manovich theorised and applied the concept of remix frequently in his papers and books. In his article ‘Deep Remixability’ (2007) Manovich explores the way both the production and the consumption of culture has changed with the coming of new media. Through the development of new media software, remix is ubiquitous.
Our exploration of remix culture in relation to the #6SecondScare Vine competition, led us to consider: can you infringe copyright in six seconds? And furthermore, would a remixed video submission be an acceptable submission. We found that a lot of people (including businesses and institutions) have created artificial rules for fair use, for example, the number of seconds a video clip can be. Seemingly the regulations around Vine copyright infringement are vague and flexible. Creators and consumers may think it is hard to infringe copyright in six seconds (the length of a Vine), as a clip that short is unlikely to defame an original work. As for the competition, we both agreed that a remixed video is still applicable, as the competition is seeking creative ideas, not skilled video practitioners.