Absolutely the worst movie.

Clever, believable, and super fun to watch. It totally has replay value.

The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

A film examining the battle over remixing , mash ups and recycling. Its a film that makes its point early and often...and it raises a good many questions- but it doesn't always have answers- such as how much use is too much? The film seems to be saying that everything is fair game... or should be.Beyond the questions the film has deeper problems. Its mentions the change in copyright in 1998 but doesn't explain the old rules. The history before the internet is missing. A film that talks about using the past to build the future ignores the past completely.Then it gets facts wrong- dating Alice in Wonderland from 1644. and there are other problems...taking the film into questions of science...before dropping the whole train of thought.I'm kind of mixed on the film. I see the point and side with them but I think the director is going about it in the wrong way...he has too much going on... is this about remix or simply the free down of all things? I think his argument that the total free exchange of all things will save the world is kind of off kilter...and what will it say about anyone wanting to create- why create a character or book or song or such if you can't control it, even for a little while? After all the argument here is total free exchange.I'm at a loss.

The day that this film arrived at my door in the post,I had been looking online at the days news,and I noticed that there had been a big "anoucment" in the entertainment industry about the entire music catalogue of The Beatles being "finally" made available for legal downloads online.When watching this excellent film about the history of copyrighting evolving ideas and peoples creation.I was a little bit surprised that the battle between the music industry and the rebel DJ DangerMouse mash-up defining album-The Grey Album,which entwined The Beatles White Album and Jay Zs The Black Album into something completely new and exciting,that was sadly not mentioned in the film.Thankfully,the film is that packed with truly shocking revelations of how drug and media companies are trying to put peoples evolving ideas into a permanent headlock.With this film,director Brett Gaylor shows that this is a subject that everyone should be asking some very big questions about...The outline of the documentary:Film maker Brett Gaylor looks at the history of copyrighting material.The film starts by showing how the Public Domain was created in 1710 with the stature of Anne copyright law,which was made so that the creators would own their material for fourteen years, before it went into the Public Domain,so that other people could build upon the ideas that had been created.Brett shows how the desperation of huge corporations to completely stop anything entering the Public Domain.In 1998,the copyright law was re-written in the US,so that the Walt Disney Corporation could hold the rights to Mickey Mouse for the next 0ne hundred years.When the law got put into place,all of the major companies took a huge sigh of relief knowing that they will now Always be in control of ownership.But,with a new creation of something called the internet, and a "movie villain" called Napster and other file-sharing websites,which gave people the chance to create the biggest music library in history,and also gave people the chance to download and discover an unlimited amount of music, without being forced to pay highly-inflated prices for one three minute song, Showed that maybe, the ownership and creation of peoples ideas might be getting won back by the consumers.

This documentary in general focuses around copyright, and the right to remix old music from other artists and it makes some very good points. You only have to look at YouTube to see for yourself; how many video's per day do you think get pulled because it contained some footage, music or sound (even when it concerns fan-art!) that is owned by some company? What started as a battle against copyright-thieves now evolved into a battle of control and money.Even Lars Ulrich from Metallica makes an appearance, in the form of an old interview concerning the whole Napster-debate which is hypocrite to say the least; tape-trading back in the day is what made Metallica so well known to begin with, so this is nothing more then a moneygrabbing issue from him.If you want to know more whats going on behind all the anti-piracy campaigns, then watch this. Its well worth the watch.

We are the sum of all our experiences and what we have learned from other people. Only a new born baby could possibly be 100% original. What happened to George Harrison with the My Sweet Lord/He's So Fine legal case was ridiculous. We need to restore sensibility to our copyright laws. The net effect of today's copyright laws are self serving to the corporations and rarely benefit the original creator. As mentioned previously the original creator is lucky to receive 10% of the final selling price. As with everything else today corporate property rights have higher priority than almost anything else including our democratic freedoms.But I do agree that some protection must be there so that one is rewarded for their hard work. My suggestions: Time limit such as with patents. Too much great creativity is rotting away because some greedy person (most likely not the author) wants more. Don't allow copyrights to be sold. Only the original creator can benefit from his/her work.