Author – creator of the artifact
Consumer – the audience that views the artifact
Ownership – the author/company that owns the artifact
Rights – the author/company that owns the rights to sell, distribute and appropriate the artifact

Remix culture has not so much changed over the last 15 years, but the scale, quantity and media have. For example, the introduction of YouTube on a public domain meant that for the first time millions of people could upload their own and edited videos, giving birth to the mash-up culture we see today. This is not to say that it did not already exist in other formats.

Example: Gene Roddenberry (creator of Star Trek)

Fan based stories relating to star trek, using the same characters in homo-erotic imagery as front covers
Not so much a parody as a tribute, although imagery used may counter the message being portrayed by the original creative

The implications of remix culture are huge. Many people now view media with an eye to see what it can be re-appropriated into rather than creating something new using the original as inspiration.

This is what I have done with my piece. I have used a recognisable image of the current chancellor along with a picture of someone filling their car up with bio-fuel  however I have mixed them together to create something new with a completely different meaning.

As we were told that copyright was not an issue because the piece was being made for educational purposes. However, this is the culture of today, where copyright laws are unclear and therefore often ignored by the general public. In the past this was not so much of an issue, as artwork/music/etc. were closed pieces, and there weren’t many methods of re-appropriating.

Author – Print – Exhibit – Published

In 1917 Marcel Duchamp called a porcelain urinal art, and entered it in a New York exhibition. This marked the turning point for remix culture, re-using something for another purpose.

This spawned a generation of pop-art, including this piece by Andy Warhol:


The image uses the iconic face of Marilyn Monroe, repeated in an artistic format. This had limited distribution.

The digital age spawned the ability to mass produce and worldwide distribution for relatively no cost, and accessible to everyone.

This started to affect copyright laws, meaning that everyone who participated in mash-up/remix culture was branded a criminal.

Creative Commons is one alternative to copyright, allowing people to disregard copyright and replace it with a less aggressive way to regulate and allow reuse of media. These new licences allowed people to edit work that they had created, with different licences allowing work to be used either mainly for profit, or non-commercial use.
As a designer, I would personally not like my work to be used for profit, and if it were to change the meaning of my work neither would I want my work to be re re-appropriated at all.