To say that I love films would be an understatement. I have used movies and television the way others have used comfort foods (although I’ve indulged in that as well). In the last year I have come to understand that I have been privileged to be part of cinemas audience in its first century as an art form. As Marshall states, I also agree that the status of us, as the audience, is in transition (2004, p.75). As a member of this audience, I’ve become more satisfied as a fan and a viewer as the film industry has utilized new mediums to interact with me. Director’s cuts, interviews with the cast members, interactive web sites, and other types of merchandise are all things that I have bought into as a fan. This generation of product on their end, and consumption on mine has been beneficial to both sides. As a fan, I am more immersed in the story and this leads to better profits for the industry. However, with file sharing and connectivity provided by the internet, tinsel town has now come to see the internet as liability in their control module.

I also agree with Marshall that  the remote control for television, channel surfing and the broadening of options through cable and satellite were something of a precursor to modern web surfing (2004, p.90). As products and services such as video on demand hit the market, it became easier for my relationship with television to transition from passive receiver to interactive. By interactive, I mean that I told the DVR what to record, and it made recommendations based on my pre-selected options. Services like Netflix have obviously taken this algorithm to the next level, increasing interactivity.  For films and television, I envision the merger between television, cinema and internet to become more salient. I already know individuals that watch television and movies solely on their computers through services like Netflix and Hulu, which clearly hadn’t reached their current saturation when Marshall wrote New Media Cultures.

As far as fair use is concerned, I have to admit that I’ve come a long way this semester. A bit brainwashed by my education in the music industry, I had come to think of copyright as something of a security system, ensuring that one’s own work would provide for oneself. However, after readings this semester, and particularly this week, my views on fair use have softened. I’ve never been of the variety that thought that precious Micky Mouse should be protected from the public domain at all cost, but I did have some conservative views on ownership. I can now see how current bullying in tort law is distorting the ownership on work to exaggerated levels to ensure a bottom line. Aufderheide’s issue of “transformativeness” is something I had studied in contract law and publishing classes (2011, p.278). Outside of my understanding of the law and case litigation, I hadn’t considered how the “prohibition” brought on by the over extension of copyright law could damage our culture (Lessig, 2012). I don’t know what the answer is to these legal questions for the benefit of our culture, but I am grateful to have broadened my own perspective on the subject. I’m sure it increases my value as an audience member.