After reading the article in combination w/ our classroom discussion, I am reminded of story I watched last night. The AP news is suing the artist who created the Obama posters. The AP insists the artist violated copyright laws because the artist used a photo taken by a photographer working for AP news. Before class and before reading the article, I agreed w/ the Associated Press. If the artist has made money from this photo, I believed the photographer and AP news deserved a portion of the money. However, after our discussion and the reading, I see that the poster's image was remixed. It was not the photographer who created the new image, but in fact it was the artist that created something entirely new. It clear the artist was trying to make a political point which Knobel states is one of the reasons people chose to remix photos.
I visited some of the sites mentioned in the article, in particular anime. I was left feeling more confused about remixing. I am still unsure as to how these are examples of remix. I am assuming that these movies and sites can be used to remix. It seems way beyond what I am capable of doing. I wonder if even my students are familiar w/ in depth nature.
The exciting part of remix is the endless possibilities which is clearly acknowledged in the article. Hearing Dr. Shutkin discuss even changes in the postcards I find fascinating. Who thinks of this?