property house information

>> from the library ofcongress in washington, d.c. >> thank you so muchfor coming this morning. my name is maria pallante. i'm the united states registerof copyrights, and on behalf of the u.s. copyrightoffice, i want to welcome you to my favorite day ofthe year, world ip day. this year's theme as given to us by the world intellectualproperty organization is "digital creativity:culture reimagined."

it's a great theme. it speaks to a lot of things. it speaks to balance. it speaks to collaboration,and it speaks to the fact that the digital revolutionhas changed the way that people create as well. and for the fifth year, i'mvery proud and pleased to say that we are hostingthe copyright alliance. standing here with meis keith kupferschmid --

who will speak in a moment -- who is the head of thecopyright alliance. and as usual, the copyrightalliance has brought to us just an extraordinarylineup of creators. and we will get out ofthe way as fast as we can so that you can enjoyyour morning with them. but, before we do that, i wouldlike keith to say a few words about the copyright alliance. >> well, good morning,everybody.

it's also one of myfavorite days of the year. my son happens to beborn on this day as well, so that has somethingto do with it. so i am the new ceo ofthe copyright alliance. since the copyright alliance hasjoined in the copyright office in this event for the past fiveyears, many of you are probably at least a little bitfamiliar with alliance, but let me describe a little bitof what we do and who we are. we represent over 15,000individual creators

and organizations from alldifferent copyright disciplines, from movies, music,literary works, software, photography, thearts, and so on. our objective is to promoteand preserve the copyright law and to protect creators so thatthey can do what they do best, which is to create. it's a pleasure to be backhere at the copyright office where i worked as a policyplanning advisor many, many, many years ago.

back then, i can recall beingvery impressed by the commitment and passion of thecopyright office staff. as i returned to the officein a different capacity, it's apparent thatthis commitment and dedication continuesto be the case today. the copyright community is very,very fortunate to have an office that is staffed withsuch devoted and enthusiastic workforceheaded by the great leadership of register pallante andher legal and policy team,

who i see sort of scatteredabout the audience here. so, of course, it goeswithout saying that we at the copyrightalliance are thrilled to be joining thecopyright office in putting together whatwill be a fantastic event. trust me on this one. it's going to be fantastic. and now, another thing youshould know about me is that i have no creative talent.

i can't sing. i can't play an instrument. i can't act, and icertainly don't code. and my idea of creativewriting is putting a contraction in a legal brief. so i consider myselfvery fortunate to be working alongsideand for thousands of very unbelievably talentedpeople, individual performers, video game developers,photographers, songwriters,

artists, directors, authors, journalists, andthe list goes on. and that list includestoday's panelists. the group of the panelists that we have here today aretruly the poster children for creativity and innovation. on capitol hill,the press and others like to pit the copyrightcommunity against the tech community.

like the game of thrones, this makes for a verycompelling story, but really has nobasis in reality. the creative community ispartners and collaborators with the technology community. in many instances,individual creators and organizations are playingdual roles, both as creators of copyrighted works andas technology innovators who themselves develop newtechnologies or who adopt

and drive demand fortechnologies necessary to the creation anddistribution of their works. there are no betterexamples of this than the panelistswe have here today. although i don't have anycreative talents myself, as the head of thecopyright alliance, it is my and my staff's responsibilityto use our legal expertise to make sure thesecreators can make the most out of their talents.

in short, my job is to makesure creators can do their job and get paid for it. i want to briefly raisethree things that we can do to help these creators. the first is to modernizethe u.s. copyright office. few government offices aremore important to the growth of creativity and commercialactivity in the united states than the u.s. copyright office. despite the critical natureof the services provided

by the office, the officehas failed to keep pace with technology andthe marketplace. to be clear, this isnot the fault of past or present registersor the office itself. many of these deficienciesare the result of years of budgetary neglectand structural deficits that have made it impossiblefor the office to keep pace. in fact, if you look deeper intothese problems, it's evidence that many of thechallenges confronted

by the office can betraced back to the fact that the copyright office iswithin and under the direction and supervision of thelibrary of congress. the copyright office must beable to rapidly adapt to ensure that it can offer the toolsand resources that all users and staff of the office demand. and the best way to ensure thisis for the copyright office to have control overits it system, its budget, and its staffing.

thankfully, there is agrowing groundswell of support for modernization, andthe copyright office seems to be moving in theright direction with its recentlyreleased it plan that is both forwardthinking and pragmatic. to the extent we or anyone elsehas concerns with that it plan, these concerns are not withthe direction of the it plan but rather, with howfast the office is moving in that direction.

the sooner newer, improvedsystems can be employed by the copyright office,the sooner the users of the office's servicescan reap the benefits of it modernization,and we can get closer to a 21st centurycopyright office. the second issue i'd liketo raise is the possibility of a small claims process. it's an unfortunate truth today that small creators haverights but no remedies.

they struggle to protecttheir copyrighted works from infringement. infringement actions areparticularly troublesome for visual and literaryartists because of the nature of their transactions andthe volume of their work. one reason for this problem isthe excessive litigation costs required for bringing aclaim in federal court. we need to fix this. one way to do thatis for creators

to bring small infringementclaims before a copyright office small claims tribunal,instead of it having to go to federal court. and that's somethingwe should make happen. the last issue, before we get tothe panel and other speakers -- the last issue i'd liketo raise is commonly -- what is commonly referred toas the "all vid proposal." the all vid proposal isa proposal by the fcc that will require cable andsatellite tv distributors

to allow third partiesto provide subscribers with their own settop box through which to access the tv programmingthat is licensed to the -- by the tv distributor. while this might soundinnocuous and even laudatory, the all vid proposal does notmerely allow third parties to sell tv subscribers acheaper or better set top box. what it does is allow that thirdparty, who has not paid a dime to license the copyrightedtv programming,

to offer their owncommercial video service that includes that programming. in other words, the all vidproposal will create a class of free riders that don'thave to pay for tv programming but are allowed tomake money from it. the primary form of compensation for creative professionalsresponsible for the video content --the directors, the writers, the designers, the actors,composers, costume makers,

visual effect specialists,film crews composed of grips and cameramen -- they're allgoverned by complex contractual or collective bargainingagreements that provide for residuals, participationrights, or contributions towardhealth and pension benefits. by allowing the distributionand public performance of video and entertainment worksoutside of these agreements, the fcc is underminingthe system by which creatorsare compensated

and harming the very peopleresponsible for the works that consumers want to watch. while the copyright allianceencourages the development of new technologies to bringlicensed works to the public in new and innovative ways,we are gravely concerned that the fcc's proposalwill permanently and significantly harm thesecreative professionals. and so with that, you'veheard enough from me. i will turn thingsover to maria.

thank you. [ applause ] >> thank you, keith. thank you for not sayinganything controversial. world ip day, of course,doesn't come together in a -- with a wave of a magic wand. so i want to thank a few people,if you could raise your hand. from the copyright alliance:sarah, eileen and claudia. and from my team:syreeta swann - so shy.

syreeta is in the very back. so thank you. thank you, guys. in putting this event together,i also want to thank those of you who are from organizations also puttingtogether ip events today, and also, we're verysensitive to the fact that many of you are runningfrom event to event. we tried very hard toschedule our event at a time

that would not conflictwith other events. we weren't entirelysuccessful there, in part because of chairmangoodlatte's schedule, in part because of the flights of our extraordinaryartistic talent that has come into d.c. today to be with you. so, as it turns out, chairmangoodlatte has pre-recorded his remarks today so that we couldhold this event in the morning to make sure that we had allof our artistic team here.

and i'll introducehim in a moment. what i wanted to say,though, is that if you go back to copyright review three yearsago, you know that the advice of the copyrightoffice to congress was that the time had come for themto step back and look at all of the differentissues that a variety of stakeholders wereputting forward as the singular mostimportant issue or, in fact, the issue that congressshould stay away from

and let the marketplace handle. and our advice tocongress was that congress and congress alone hasthe role constitutionally of balancing all of those publicequities and stepping back and then deciding whether toact or whether to revise the law or whether to monitormarketplace developments, all of which are thedomain of congress. in making that recommendation,we noted that in order for that to happen, you need to havecommittee leadership in congress

that has a meaningful degree offluency in the copyright act, as well as a staff committedto that committee or committees that also has a meaningfuldegree of fluency and a commitment tokeep copyright moving from session to session. and as such, we wereabsolutely pleased that chairman goodlatte firstput copyright review before the subcommittee on intellectualproperty and then moved it to the full committeelevel, where it still is,

and as we move to thenext session of congress, i just want to make sure that weall thank him for stepping back and running such anincredibly transparent and comprehensive process. and you're probablywondering what's next. and i think you'll find thatin his recorded remarks, he answers that question. so although he's not here,let me introduce him. some things you maynot know about him.

so you know thathe is the chairman of the house judiciarycommittee. how many of you knew that he isthe first judiciary committee chairman from virginiain the last 125 years? raise your hand ifyou knew that. that's an extraordinary fact. the house judiciarycommittee, aside from looking at copyright law, is atthe forefront of some of the most significantissues of the day,

including protectingconstitutional freedoms and civil liberties, oversightof the u.s. departments of justice and homelandsecurity, legal and regulatory, [inaudible] innovation,competition and antitrust laws, terrorism, crime,and immigration. many of these issues willbe the deciding factors in determining the futuredirection of our nation. the jurisdiction of the judiciary committeeis well suited to many

of bob's legislativepriorities, which are ip, constitutional rights,private property, second amendment rights,securing our borders, strengthening our criminallaws, and so forth. we are indebted, of course,in the copyright community for his very forward thinkingand thoughtful leadership, and without further ado, i'dlike to introduce, virtually, bob goodlatte, chairman ofthe house judiciary committee. >> thanks for the opportunity togive remarks at today's event.

unfortunately, i had apreexisting commitment in charlottesville thismorning that prevented me from being with you in person. three years ago, thecommittee began a process to thoroughly review ournation's copyright law, an overdue effort thatresulted in gathering input from a diverse range ofcopyright creators, owners, distributors, platforms,and end users. beginning with 100 witnessesat 20 formal hearings,

the committee then traveledto nashville, santa clara, and los angeles forthree public roundtables with over 60 participants. committee staff then followedup with all prior witnesses and those who had expressedan interest in copyright, to develop a comprehensiverecord of the issues facing theamerican copyright system today. what copyright issues didthe committee hear about? more than most could imagine.

some of the topics included: in what ways can consensus beachieved in copyright policy? how does copyright and technology createinnovation in america? what is the proper roleof voluntary agreements and how can they be encouraged? does the scope of copyrightprotection need updating? does the fair use balance,as it exists today, reflect congressional intentwhen it was first codified?

is section 512 working wellfor all interested parties? are bad faith actors abusingthe notice and takedown system? does u.s. law create the properframework for the preservation and reuse of copyrighted worksthat are either deteriorating or lacking copyrightownership information? is the current compulsoryvideo license framework the best approach? how is first saleworking in a world of mixed and digital goods?

does the music licensing systemwork to the detriment or success of musicians, and is thecurrent compulsory license system working? is the termination rightsframework too complicated? does the u.s. need greater moralrights or a resell royalty? does the current remediesframework reflect an appropriate balance between providingcompensation for damages, for actual losses, whiledeterring future infringements? does this same remediesframework provide a meaningful

enforcement right forsmaller copyright claims? do the anti-circumventionprovisions of chapter 12 efficientlydetermine exemptions for adverse effectson non-infringing uses or for security andencryption research? are the needs of the visuallyimpaired community being met? what is the impact of currentcopyright law upon students, professors, and theiracademic institutions? is the copyrightoffice functioning well

in its present framework, oris there another framework that would work better? what are the resources andinformation technology necessary for the copyrightoffice to function well? while not all of these questionsare of interest to everyone in the copyright system, they demonstrate theinterconnected nature of u.s. copyright law. simply changing a paragraphhere and a word or two there

in title 17 may have amajor impact far beyond its intended approach. thus, it is critical that congress understand theoverall impact of any changes in copyright lawbefore proceeding with formally introducedlegislation. it is also clear that neither asolely copyright owner-focused bill nor a copyrightuser-focused bill could be enacted by congresstoday nor should they be.

any potential changes to copyright law cannot bebased upon mere talking points of interested parties. copyright law, much likeall of the other titles of the u.s. code, areabout the details. words matter, not bullet points. in the weeks ahead,we will identify areas where there is a likelihood,a potential consensus, and circulate outlines

of potential reformsin those areas. then, we will convenestakeholders for further work on these potential reforms. and you have my personalcommitment that as the review shiftsto more focused work on potential reforms, theprocess will be transparent, and the committee willcontinue to ensure that all interested partieshave the opportunity to weigh in on issues of concern to them.

our copyright systemdeserves no less. while no one can guarantee that every interested partywill share the same views on every copyright policyissue, i can guarantee that we will have an openear to everyone who wants to contribute to this process. all views are welcome. thank you again forthe opportunity to speak with you today.

when our nation's foundersincluded intellectual property in our constitution, theyrecognized the importance of creativity to ournation and our economy. we need to ensure that our lawscontinue to promote creativity and innovation inthe digital age. i look forward to workingwith you in the months ahead. >> all right. so you've heard fromall of us policy and washington d.c.-based folks.

it's now time to turn the panel over to the real interestingpeople, the creators and our creators' panel. and so i want to introduce ourmoderator and ask devlin to come on up here and take a seat. devlin hartline isour moderator. he is the assistant director atgeorge mason's law school center for the protection ofintellectual property or cpip. at cpip, devlin leadscpip's communication

and academic advisoryefforts, working closely with cpip scholars to publicizeand promote rigorous research on the law, on economics,and on history of intellectual property,and he also writes a really, really good blog so you shouldcheck it out at lawtheories.com. so devlin, why don'tyou come on up? >> good morning, everybody,and happy world ip day. we have an excitingpanel for you, but first, i want to thank registerpallante for hosting this event,

and i want to thank keithand the copyright alliance, and i especiallywant to thank sarah for organizing the panelists and handing me all thesefancy questions to ask them. so, thank you. so we've got threecreators on our panel today, and without further ado, i'dlike to get them on the stage so we could get started. the first is jared geller.

he's the executive producer of the open-collaborativeproduction company, hitrecord. next up is anna metcalfe. she's a ceramic artist and thefounder of the wedding registry, gather, which enables guests to give local artfor wedding gifts. and, last but not least,is photographer, founder, and ceo of creativelive,chase jarvis. creativelive is the world'slargest live streaming education

company focused on photography,video, design, music, and entrepreneurship education. so we're going to startwith presentations from the panelists, and thenwe'll move into the questions. jared, you're up. >> good morning. it's so exciting tobe recognized by -- first of all, it'sgreat to learn that there was a world ip day,

so that's just --happy world ip day. but it was really suchan honor to be recognized by the copyright alliance and by the copyrightoffice to present today. i actually broughtalong two videos. one to introduce whowe are at hitrecord. i think that's probablythe best way to -- yeah -- to explain who weare and what we do. so, without further ado.

>> okay. recording. hello and welcome to hitrecord. i'm joe. i started thisplace a long time ago with my brother, dan. and it's a little bit differentthan your typical internet, social network kind of thing. the point here isn't to keepin touch with your friends or to follow celebrities or even to showcase somethingyou made on your own.

the point here is tomake things together. hitrecord is a new kindof production company, and we produce allkinds of art and media. we've played shortfilms at film festivals. we published books. we put out records. we made a tv show that wonan emmy, and our website and our mobile app isdesigned to allow anybody to come join this community andcontribute to those productions.

and yes, any time one ofour productions makes money, the contributorsget fairly paid. so, certainly, if you arean artist of any kind, if you're a writer, a filmmaker,musician, graphic artist, photographer, illustrator,animator, editor, or anything, come work with us. or even if you don'tfancy yourself an artist but you've got a good story totell or just something to say, that can make a greatinspiration

for one of our projects. if you've got good taste andyou want to give feedback on the stuff we're making here,if you want to curate the things that you see on here that youlike, that's really valuable. or if you don't want to doany of that, and you just want to hang out and watchhow it happens and maybe meet a few coolpeople, that's all right too. but it's really funif you join in. now, how does this all work?

where do you get started? one good place to start is with what we callcreative challenges. so this is for those timeswhen you know you want to do something creative, but you don't know exactlywhat you want to do. this site will serveyou up a whole bunch of different challenges,and you'll find probably at least one that inspiresyou at that moment in time.

i issue a lot of thechallenges as do the fine folks who work here in this office, but anybody can issuetheir own challenges. so, for example, say youshot a bunch of footage, and you're lookingfor a video editor, you can upload your raw footageand then issue a challenge to editors and say,"here's all my footage. let's see you guyscut it together." which brings us to remix.

so when you uploadsomething here, everybody else has permissionto download it, sample it, revise it, refine it,build on top of it, and upload their new version. so, for example, say you'rea singer and you're looking for an instrumental to singon top of, there's tons of great instrumental piecesof music on hitrecord, and you can write asong on top of that. if you're an animator, youcan go find an illustration,

download it, put inthe after effects, and turn it intosome kind of cartoon. writers, you know that goodwriting is in the rewriting. so if you see something onthe site that you like -- this is a good piece of writing, but i have a differentidea for it, do that. write a new draft. punch it up. add some jokes.

change the ending. think of this as a hugeworldwide writer's room. so now comes the question:how does all of that lead to a cohesive, finished product? so i, as well as other folkswho work here in this office, we're always on the lookout forstuff coming through our site that we can sort of take tothe traditional marketplace. who decides which projectsbecome productions, and who has sort of final cut onhow those productions turn out?

it's a simple answer,and it's me. i'm the director ofthis production company. but, like every great directorthat i've ever worked with, i know that, as a director,i'm nothing without the artists that i'm collaborating with. now, like i said before, when one of our productionsmakes money, we do pay the contributingartists, and i'm proud to say, since 2010, we've paid differentcontributing artists all

over the world almost$2 million dollars. so, i know nobody wants tojoin another internet thing. we all have too many user namesand passwords to remember. but, all those hours youspend on the internet can add up to something, and i'mreally proud of the stuff that we've made together. there's more stuff we're makingall the time, and i'd love for you to be a part of it. so -- thanks.

[ music ] so that's who we are. so you can imagine that wespend -- to make all that work, we spend a lot of time thinkingabout copyright laws and terms of service and licensingand monetization and all of those things. and since we spend so much timeon this and thinking about: okay, we want to do this,we want to work with artists around the world, and they'recontributing their ideas,

their art, their ip. how do we make sure thatthey're represented fairly and that they're paid fairly and what we do isall very transparent? and so like i said, wespend a lot of time thinking about the ways inwhich we do that. so to be recognized by you guysand actually to get to know some of the people who arehere in d.c. working on this stuff isextremely exciting.

and i -- when i told josephgordon-levitt that we were going to be participating inthis, he was excited, so we made actually thisvideo specifically for today. and yeah, take that away. >> we're recording. hey, everybody. my name is joseph gordon-levitt. i work in movies and tv, and i also started acompany called hitrecord.

it's an online communitythat works together as a media production company. obviously, i'm prettyinterested in the topic of intellectual property. i'm glad we're dedicatinga day to talking about it. i actually think theway that we figure out how intellectual propertyis going to work today and especially how it'sgoing to work moving in the future is going to bea huge part of us succeeding

as a -- as a human race. so one thing i'll say is in thepast, i used to be of one mind, which is, the whole notion thatinformation wants to be free and that anything you canput into ones and zeroes because you can just copy itas many times as you want, it shouldn't cost anything. it shouldn't be worth money. and my mind really changeda lot a couple of years ago. and it was largely this onebook that got me thinking

of it differently thati really recommend. and the book is calledwho owns the future? and it's by a writernamed jaron lanier. his contention is that intellectualproperty is worth money, and it has to be worth moneyfor capitalism to keep working. right now, this sort ofnotion or you might say, the myth that intellectualproperty is not worth money, has largely decimated the musicindustry, is doing quite a bit

of damage to the field ofjournalism, but moving forward, it could damage so much morethan just those industries. and another thingthat mr. lanier points out is digital information, intellectual property,it is worth money. it does generate money. it's just that right now, whenwe're sort of under the illusion that it's free, allof the money, all of the value generated bythat intellectual property,

is just going to a few biginternet giants like google, facebook, etc. becausethose companies sort of trade information, gettinginformation to its consumers for free while advertising tothem and making tons and tons and tons of money becausethey're not compensating the people who generatedthe information that they're delivering. and so the notion thatintellectual property in the digital formis not worth money,

that's something ithink we need to sort of get past and get over. it has to be worth money inorder for our economy to work. i'll give you another example, and that's my company,hitrecord. we make all kinds of things. we make short films andmusic, books, made a tv show, and our company is sort offounded on the principle that yeah, actually theartists who do contribute

to these things, eventhough they're making their contributions digitally,they deserve to be paid, and that if we makemoney as a company, hitrecord compensatesthe artists and the contributors whoseintellectual property generates that value. i'm not saying everybodyshould do it this way, but this is a way thatwe have found to work. over the last five or six yearsthat we've been doing this,

we've paid out almost $2 million to different artistsall over the world. it's been a beautifulthing for me. a lot of people who get paid from hitrecord productionshave never been paid for their art before, andthat's a wonderful feeling. even besides the actual amountof money, just the principle of getting paid, itfeels validating, and i think the folks whodo get paid, they deserve

to feel validated becausetheir contribution helps to make money. we designed our termsof service to do this. we have a unique legalagreement that everybody who joins our site andcontributes to our projects because they've clickeda box and they've agreed to these terms of service,and this terms of service lays out this methodology of payment. that's also important,having fair

and transparence interms of service. it not only helps the membersof our community who are able to get paid for their work,it helps us as a company. i definitely think the trustthat we earned by having fair and transparent terms of servicehas really benefitted us. but again, it goes backto the principle then. just because somebody'scontribution is digital, doesn't mean it'snot worth money. and if some work thatsomeone did made money,

then they deserve to get paid. i'll leave it there. thanks for listening. and again, thanksfor having this day, talking about intellectualproperty. i think it's something reallywell worth talking about. thanks again. thanks a lot. >> good morning, everyone.

happy intellectual property day. i, too, was excited tofind out that it existed. and i'm super happyto be here and honored to have been chosento be a part of this. my name is anna metcalfe. and i'm originally fromvirginia, but in 2006, i moved to minneapolis wherei graduated with my mfa in ceramics from theuniversity of minnesota. my personal work ranges frompublic art, installation,

community engagement,and dinnerware. i'm also an educator. i teach ceramics at theuniversity of minnesota, and i also teach business skillsto artists all over the midwest with an organization calledspringboard for the arts. i'm here this morningas one of three founders of a web-based startupcalled gather art registry. we are in our ninthmonth of our first year. we were friends long beforewe were business partners,

and we had a lightbulbmoment one day. my now business partner, rachel,was purchasing a ceramic piece for me for a friend's wedding. and as i was wrappingup the gift on my front porch,she made a comment. "couples should be able toregister for art they know and love for their weddings,and i should be able to buy it for them just like i canbuy towels and toasters from macy's online registry."

i said "yes, they should. that should be a thing. and it should be carefullycurated and presented to highlight the value of theart in our community to buyers." so that got us wondering. what if it was possible forpeople to register for local art for their wedding, and what if an online registry platformcould make it really easy for their friends and familyto buy couples handmade gifts?

and that is how gather was born. it combines threebasic ingredients: art, wedding gifts, and the internet. we learned how to write abusiness plan after that. we began contracting with localartists, and in early 2014, we started gather llc. after an indiegogocampaign in late 2014, we launched our registryin the summer of 2015. now, midway through ourfirst wedding season,

we're in the process ofadding to our collection and expanding our audience. this is an example of aproduct page on our site. to create -- our mission ispretty simple actually -- it's to create a new marketfor artists and their work. it's to provide a platformthat meets the demands of a new generation ofshoppers and art collectors. and it's also to educate newaudiences about the value of art and handmade crafts.

i personally curate ourcollection from artists from around minnesotaand wisconsin. we offer items like whatyou see in this image: hand forged bottle openersfrom antique wrenches, laser etched coasters, hand carved mugs,and original prints. we also make it possiblefor couples to commission original workfrom their favorite artists. erin and jay, who gotmarried last august,

wanted to commission minneapolisartist, nicholas harper, to paint an originalwork for them based on their favorite novel calledgeek love by katherine dunn. he obliged, and afterreading the book, he created a painting basedon two of the main characters who happen to be siamese twins. it was a very interestingcollaboration. this is an imageof the unveiling that we had last month.

like any small business, ourpath is filled with discoveries and challenges that leadus to make adjustments that benefit bothartists and our customers. however, like artists, we findourselves navigating systems and structures thathave been constructed by software engineersand marketplaces that don't always take the artsor artists into consideration. our mission is to createan easy to navigate bridge between the wedding industryand the creative work of artists

through an ecommerce platform. our challenges are a result ofthe potential incompatibilities between creativetendencies and audiences that understand the value as being producedby big box stores. what is true for artists -- thatcreativity requires an abundance of time, the willingness to beopen to unexpected outcomes, and that innovationrequires constant change -- are actually the very things

that make our missionchallenging in a marketplace that demands fast turnarounds,consistency, and predictability. where an artist findstime to be an asset, our customers are looking forshortcuts and fast shipping. where an artist -- where constant change is apositive marker for growth in an artist's career, our customers aredepending on consistency. where artists seekthe unexpected,

our customers don't tend to appreciate surprisesin the same way. so our task is to work enoughwithin systems and the markets that encourage entrepreneurshipin the arts all while continuing to support individual artiststo do what they do best. we are fully aware that our jobis not to convert the masses into art supporters,but we are also aware that even art consumerslive in the same world that covets convenience,and we would be foolish

to ignore the opportunities that the internet hasprovided to small businesses. whether that means we have totweak the online platform we use to make it work for original art or repackage a traditionalconcept for our clients, gather is a matchmakerbetween the arts and the rest of the world. our hope is thatwith time and effort, the systems will be more willing

to accommodate a differentversion of productivity and value as offeredby individual artists. thank you all againfor having me, and happy intellectualproperty day. >> thanks, anna. chase, you're up. >> got a couple of slides,couple very basic ones. maybe you can skipto the next one. or i'll do that one and thengo ahead and play this video.

this is just a brandreel of what i do. >> this is what we do. that's incredible. so i'm guessing thatby watching that, you actually haveno clue what i do. and that's sort ofmy point actually. this is the classicfive paragraph essay that you learned towrite in college. i'm going to tell you whati'm going to tell you,

and then i'm going to tell youthree things, and then i'm going to tell you what i told you. so the first thing is thatmy goal here is to share with you all what ishappening on the streets. we represent a vast sort ofdifferent spectrum of creators. and it's my hope to come towashington and share a message that the world, thelaws, have to sort of be consistently evolving. so the point one here isthat we are all hyphens.

i started out -- first ofall, i dropped out of -- well, i bailed on a careerin professional soccer, bailed on medical school, and dropped out of aph.d. in philosophy. my poor parents. right? in order tobecome a photographer. that's very strange forthe people in my family. but i was a photographer,and then i figured out how to be a photographer, and theni figured out how to make money.

so i became sort ofa business person. and then i became a director. i started directingvideos and short films and television commercials. and then i was a guest speaker. i keynoted all over the world, and then i was theauthor of three books. in 2009, i createdthe first iphone app that shared photosto social networks.

so it was pre-instagram. we had millions of users. and it fundamentally helped to shape the photo-sharingeconomy that you know today. now, that was by a photographer. my photo studio becamea little incubator. again, millions ofdownloads all over the world, and that was the appof the year in 2009. that is a fundamentalsort of shift.

so i was a softwaredeveloper then. and that helped meunderstand how technology and creativity canwork together. so in 2010, we spawnedthis little company called creativelive out of a room thatwas a third the size of this with the goal of educatingthe world's creators. so i took an audience of amillion people that i had built over the course of five yearsand put them in connection with my peers, who are thebest photographic, design,

music educators in the world, and that company iscalled creativelive. our first class had50,000 people in it. and today, we're the largest, live streaming educationcompany in the world. we reach millions ofcreators all over the world. we've raised about $40 million. we've had more thantwo billion minutes of creative educationconsumed on a video platform.

so what am i now? am i a ceo? am i a founder? am i a company guy? what am i? the point is we're all hyphens. there's like 15 differentthings, and we used to be just onething, and now, we are many. so that's point one.

i'm going to showa little video. this is a thing thatjust dropped yesterday. it's a little bit ofan idea of who we work with at creativeliveand what we do. so i've got one morevideo here actually. where's that? go ahead and play thisvideo if you would. >> hey everybody. how's it going?

i'm chase jarvis,photographer, founder, and ceo of creativelive. at creativelive, we believethat there's creativity inside of every person regardlessif you're an artist, an entrepreneur, ateacher, any profession. the hard part is unlockingthat creativity and inspiration and taking real actionevery day. to help with that, i'msuper excited today to announce a new seriesof videos that's going

to help you live your dreamsand career, hobby and life. that series of videos iscalled thirty days of genius. this is certainlythe most exciting and inspirationalseries of videos that creativelive has evermade and definitely one of the most exciting things i'vepersonally ever been a part of. signing up is super easy. go tocreativelive.com/30daysofgenius. that's number 3-0,days of genius.

click that blue button, andthen every day you'll get one of these videos in your inbox. these videos are thethings that are going to help you make a change thatyou want to see in your life. >> so again, what are we? we're all hyphens. that was a program thatjust dropped yesterday. there's already 7,000 studentsregistered for that class. and over the courseof the next month,

i bet we'll see 100,000 studentsregistered for this class. and those are just yourcreators down the street. this isn't just teachingabout wedding photography. we absolutely -- we have thebest curriculum in the world for that, i believe, inphotography, design, filmmaking. and we teach people realbusiness skills too, which is something thatart school does not do. but i mean, you see names likerichard branson, jared leto. this is a globalcommunity that cares

about the future of creativity. now, point two is that weare creating differently, faster than ever before. so this is a very riskything what i'm about to do, but there's risk in creativity. i don't know if we cando this in washington, d.c. there's a lot of suits. i've heard from many peoplesay they're not creative. but we're going to try

and actually do somethingreal quick here. first of all, i'mgoing to surprise her and take a picturewith the register. all right. so we're creating aphotograph together. now, this is theriskiest part of all. i'm going to ask thatyou guys do something that you were notprepared to do today, and i'm going to record it.

i'm going to make a little videoon a thing called snapchat. we'll talk aboutthat in a second. so, this is a serious endeavor. i need serious faces. put your laptops downfor a second and join me. i'm serious here. this is -- i want you to dothis for like 15 seconds. okay? can we do this? you don't even knowwhat you're going to do

so it's hard to say yes, right? so join me in clapping. okay, ready? [ clapping ] ok. well done. so what have we done? right now, we havetaken a photograph. we have just made avideo on my snapchat. you don't even knowwhat that is yet,

but we made a video together. we collaborated. this is how creatorsare working these days. in terms that used to be -- that's not the onlyway they're working, but these are just newways that we're working. so in, say, a film production, those schedules areweeks, months, years. the new schedule for creatorsare minutes, hours, days.

and the laws that we have,they don't address that. now you can be saying -- that'sjust -- this is just child play. snapchat is a thing thatmy 14-year-old uses. i could get paid alot of money for this. and people do. 10, 20, 25 grand. i don't think there'sa person in this room who wouldn't want 25 grandfor creating the thing that we just created together.

so my point is thatthings are different. and we need laws, and we needmentality that can address it. so that's point two. and point three is thatwe all have real reach. i'm going to push that thingout, whether you like it or not, to two million people. the irony is not lost on me. it is absolutely a pointthat i'm trying to make. i had the good fortune of beingat the white house yesterday --

last week with president biden. and he hosted -- sorry,vice president biden, yeah. he won't mind. obama doesn't careabout that stuff. regardless of what sideof the aisle you're on, i had the good fortune ofbeing with vice president biden and some other influencers,whatever that term mean. and they were youtubeinfluencers, and biden made areally important point.

and that point was,hey, a couple weeks ago, i was at the oscars,and i made a speech about the campaign called"it's on us," ending assault on women and vulnerable men. and it's a very powerfulcampaign that i'm very proud to be a part of, but he saidsomething to the eight of us, it was really -- it struck me. it was like, "i was on oscars,and the reach of that is about 30 million people."

the audience that wehave collected here in this room today, the eightof you, you have a reach of 40 million peopleon a daily basis. so what we are doing iswe are sharing at scale, without permission, differently,faster, i would say, more effectively,than ever before. so, i promised afive paragraph essay. i told you what i wasgoing to tell you. i'm telling you these threepoints, and now i'm very,

very excited to sit downhere and talk with my sort of esteemed colleagues aboutwhat the future of creativity, specifically, digitalcreativity, means and how it's different. i appreciate your time. i'm chase, and ijust hit my mic. i'm going to do it one moretime because it's cool, and so remember, it's different,it's faster, and we need laws and mentality to address it.

>> thank you, chase. and thank you everyone else. those were great presentations. so i want to start with askingyou guys the same question, and then we'll move tothe individual questions. and so my first question is - i just want to give the audiencesome background information about you. and could you telleverybody what is it

that brought you to the arts? and i'd like to start with anna. >> gosh, i actually didn'tconsider myself an artist for a really long time. there is something intimidatingabout calling myself an artist. and i think it was probablywhen i went to graduate school to get my masters offine art that i decided to call myself an artist. but i think ultimately,

it wasn't even achoice that i made. it was simply makingthe inevitable choice and material -- i'm aceramic artist, and so, getting my hands actually inmaterial, transforming material, fire, and food -- those kinds ofthings have always compelled me, and i think, willprobably continue to compel not onlythe work that i make but then also how iconnect with communities, which i think is trulywhat now compels me

about being an artist,which is communicating and effectively giving voiceto a lot of different people. >> great, thanks. chase? >> i'd love -- i'llreference two words, sort of community and voice. that was really important to me. i felt a dramatic pressure, and i don't think itwas family specific.

maybe a little bit, but wheni was growing up, it was - "the creative kid"was a weird moniker. and so i ran the other way. i became the captainof the football team because i wantedto sort of fit in. i ended up going to collegeon a soccer scholarship, but my whole sort of being wasin conflict, and ultimately, the ability to createsomething is a thing that is uniquely human.

it differentiates us from almostevery species on the planet, the ability to have a voicefor underserved community, for connection, for empathy. to me, that was something thatif i could figure out a way to get paid would makethis a life worth living. i think again i referencedearlier people saying in this room that they don'tthink of themselves as creative. everything in this room -- it'sa pretty beige room honestly - but was created by noone who was no smarter

or no creative than anyone else. it's really aboutunlocking that creativity. and if i could play a role inthat for myself and ultimately, i've learned later in mycareer, that's what i want to do for others, that it wouldbe a life well lived. so it's sort of a calling butmore than anything, an awareness that this is one ofthe reasons we're here. >> great. jared, whatbrought you to the arts? >> i was really fortunateenough to grow up in new york,

and my parents took me to livebroadway shows when i was a kid. and being in the audienceand being in the same room with the audience and theperformers at the same time and feeling what they'refeeling at the same time, it felt like i was a partof it, because i felt like if i wasn't here, maybe theperformance would be different. and so from the very early agei wanted to always be a part of that feeling, being apart of sharing ideas and art in such a visceraland immediate way.

and i started workingout in theater. i worked off broadwayshows as a -- doing anything that i coulddo just to be a part of it. and i worked as a p.a.,and then a stage manager, and then i just startedproducing my own shows, and so yeah, and i think thatactually having a background with live and experiencingthings live and immediately reallyspeaks to what we're talking about here today withthe digital format

because what we do,like chase said, he's going to push this out,something that we made together to two million people,and that's exciting. and the fact that we can sharethat together is inspiring and really exciting to me. >> great. so the rest ofmy questions are aimed at one particular person, butif the other panelists want to jump in, feel free. so, chase, i'm goingto start with you.

you created an online classroom,bringing together creators with the world's topexperts in their fields. and what is it about the currentcreative economy that led you to develop this dynamic website? >> oh, man. there's a -- it's aconvergence of many things. i like the questionbecause it addresses a -- what i think that is there'sa real need and a vacancy, that we value creativity.

look at all of theindustry around creativity. as i mentioned earlier, everything in yourworld was designed. it was first concepted by an artist beforeit was manufactured. and there's a realdisconnect between -- we throw around words likeinnovation and creativity, but we don't knowwhat that means, and we don't knowwhere it comes from.

well, it comes fromfostering and nurturing that. and we can't have a culturethat values it, but a system that doesn't provide forit, which is currently -- the education system is very,very broken in our country. one of the first things toget cut, the arts programs. and so, i recognizethat, and with a bunch -- to be crystal clear, it's myselfplus it's a hundred other people who go to work at creativeliveevery day with the vision of helping peoplelive that life.

and there's another disconnectaround sort of the ability to make a living anda life as a creative. we talked about thislast night at the bar. i don't know if i'msupposed to say that. and it's -- art schoolcurrently does not create -- there's no part of thecurricula that has anything to do with the business. and so at creativelive, wewanted to connect millions of creators all over theworld who are interested --

and these are people whoare going not just from one to ten in their career. they're already identifiedas a creative, and they're becomingmore creative, or they're having amore successful career, but these are also people whoare going from zero to one. these are people whoare working at amazon or in an accounting firm, and they've beentold their whole life

that they weren't creative. my mom is a great example. told her whole lifeshe wasn't creative and then i gave her an iphone, and with that littleapp i created in 2009, and she went instantly frombeing not recognized as creative to the most creativeof all her friends. "joy, your picturesare incredible." now, those two communitiesare both underserved.

so by creating creativelive,we were hoping to sort of support that, support theareas, the gaps in our culture that were missing at thispoint, and teach them how to make a living anda life from people who are actually doing it. this is not an academicinstitution. it is very much a practical,hands-on, skill-based learning. and when you have instructors,who are world-class experts, and i'm talking -- i mean,you saw the list of names:

pulitzer prize winners, newyork times best-selling authors, grammy award winners,oscar award winners. these are peoplethat are coming back and giving back totheir community. they're also gettingcompensated, but to me, that's a gap in thesort of marketplace and intellectual culturalspace that we needed to fill. >> great, thank you. jared, some other questions.

so what first sparkedyour decision to explore online collaborationand use digital tools to create and distribute works? >> it's funny. there was no decision really. this was something that,especially for me, well, for me, personally, was something that just happenedpretty organically. like i said, i have a backgroundin live shows and live art.

and i had worked on a playwith joe gordon-levitt. and i think it was about tenyears ago, he put this -- this is before youtube. so, i guess, it wasmore like 11 years ago. he put up an onlinejournal called hitrecord where he thought, "a lot ofpeople know me as an actor, but they don't knowme as a writer. they don't know meas a musician." and so he put up a journal,a blog that would --

he would put up writing, and hewould put up video and music, and people would download it. this is before click-to-playvideo. and a community startedto crop up. people were writing to him whatthey thought about his art, and then it became a littlebit more of a dialogue, and joe would respond towhat people were saying. and then i remember he made avery crucial decision as to: do we put up a message board?

do we put up a message board sopeople can talk more, faster, and the dialogue canjust get more specific? and it was a big decision, andhe put up this message board. and what we -- what startedhappening almost instantaneously was not, "hey, i'm goingto put this thing up, and then you respond to it." it was -- there was a naturalprogression that people wanted to start creating together. and on this message boardwith just a few hundred people

at the start, the very firstcollaboration that we had or that was up on the messageboard was a word association game where somebodywould say a word and then another personwould say the first thing that popped to mind. and then that evolved intothousands and thousands of words, and thensomebody had the idea, "let's take all these wordsand make a story out of it." and so i think peoplehave the natural tendency

to want to create together. and after more and more ofthese threads with different -- there was a writingcollaboration and a music collaborationand a video collaboration -- we started talkingand said, there's -- people want to do this. let's provide a --we've got to create -- we're developing thiscreative community and sometimes providingsome creative direction.

how can we really make -- turn this into something wherewe're making real productions, authoring in terms of service, making it legal andpaying people? and that's what we did,and starting in 2009, we started buildingthe tech infrastructure and the legal infrastructureto do that. so, i mean, just to answeryour question more succinctly, it wasn't a decision as much asit was a natural progression.

and i think that's what makesour community so special is that it wasn't -- it'snot a marketing campaign. it's not somethingthat we forced. if you were to say how doyou make an online community, i wouldn't be able to answer it. but yeah. anna, so what are some ofthe challenges that you faced when trying to connectwith your audiences? people looking forwedding gifts,

but they've neverheard of gather? >> yeah. well, i think it'skind of a two part answer. one is it boils down to sortof straight up marketing and the ability to just geta product out into the world. we have lots of mechanismsto do that. right now, i thinkthe most exciting part about our business modeland the way that we do it is that there's this whole industry where people gethitched all the time.

and there's a gift economyassociated with getting married. and so when two people decidethey're going to do that, they send out our information,as any kind of wedding registry or any kind of ecommerceplatform at this point, to 250, 300 of their favorite friends. and so those people are reallydoing our marketing for us, which is actuallykind of a cool thing. i think -- and so i think ourchallenge is to get the interest of that original couple, thesort of -- our original client,

if you will, and one of thethings that is really exciting about that is that theytend to be younger, and they tend to be interested. they have all of the towels andthe toasters that they need. and so they tendto be interested in doing something uniqueand so when we intersect with those couples, thepeople who are interested in registering with gatheror anybody who's interested in setting up a gift registryfor that matter, it's a matter

of communication, and ithink that's the second part of it is how do we effectivelytalk about value and curation? what is it that makes the artistthat we represent excellent? i think the idea of excellenceis something that we -- is a conversationthat is evolving as we put our workout into the world. how do we curate and how dowe consider different works of art to be excellent? and we really work hard ontrying to communicate that gap

between what are the -- i have this user experiencewhen i go into macy's online. i'm going to pick on macy's. their online registry page. i feel like that's the kind ofuser experience i want to have, and so does that --can that translate into bringing the fineart object to my life? and our task is tosay yes, it is. there are some things wehave to negotiate, but --

and effectively communicatingthose differences is really kind of our challenge. yeah. >> all right, thanks. chase, there's a lot oftalk in the arts community about finding ways to supportartist-centered technologies. what's the value in artistsdeveloping their own online platforms to distributeand make creative content? >> well, it's the first timein the history of the world

that we are not boundby gatekeepers. we require no permissionnow to share at scale. it used to be we were keptout by the gallerists, by the photo editor,by the art director, or the creative directorat the agency. and now with the benefitsof technology, you can reach that same scale or much greater,as in my earlier example, at the push of a button. so what that creates is inmany ways a sense of freedom.

and the technology -- the sortof technology community -- i don't want to putcrosshairs on their back. i think joe is wise to pointout that google and facebook and others are making billions,hundreds of billions of dollars. but the message isn'tthat they should not exist or that we shouldcontinue on the paradigm. it is a very, very dynamicand complicated thing. for me, technologyliterally created my career. i was a very sexy?

i was a very sexy photographer. i was a very successfulphotographer pre-internet because i learned thevalue of my work early, and that was out of necessity. i needed to eat. i needed to put foodon the table so i'm not naturallygifted in business. i had to become that. and i was very happywith my career and then

in a pre-youtube -- it wascalled google video at the time, where you could put up videos,i started telling the story of what i call the blackbox of photography. it was a very closedworld, and if you were out there sharing a pointof view, you were sort of -- the industry or the people thatwere comprised of the leaders in the industry werevery upset with you. i was vilified, in fact,for sharing the first videos that i was -- about what itwas like to go on location.

it doesn't matter -- iwas shooting for the nikes and the apples and fortune 100brands, and telling the story about what it was like todo that, effectively opening up this sort of black box, and sharing secrets wasa very risky proposition, and you might be sitting inthe audience judging, thinking, "well, geez, why aren'tyou undermining your own livelihood?" but the reality isthat we need to --

there needs to be some sort ofmiddle ground between pretending that that doesn't exist, ahead in the sand mentality, and acknowledging that information is movingfaster than ever before. so it was my very proactivedecision to sort of open that up and to help otherpeople become -- i wanted to take a world ofjust millions of photographers and make it into a world ofbillions of photographers. and make the image morepopular than the word.

and that again maybe controversial, but that enabled -- that wasonly enabled through technology. and my career was able togrow very, very quickly when that sort ofparadigm flipped because no one wasusing the medium. so i sort of steppedinto a vacuum. and this isn't just about me. this is about somany of the other -- i will call them thousandsif not millions of creators

who have been ableto now make a living. i mentioned earlierthat there are people who will pay 20 thousandbucks for the little video that we made right there. maybe not that one because thatwas pretty boring honestly. but the point is thatthere is a new economy, and we are experiencingseismic shifts in how the technology world and the creativeworld are interacting.

i think it's, by and large,up to us to define whether that will be positive or not. >> great. so, jared. your organization isunique to say the least. and i'm wondering why do youuse non-exclusive licenses and why do you invitecreators to the table to discuss revenue sharing? >> so, i think the internetcan be, probably is, a very scary place, and when --

every so often when a socialnetwork you're on, like facebook or instagram, updatestheir terms of service and certain elements arerevealed that organizations want to make money throughyour ip in certain kinds of ways, we all freak out. we're very transparentwith our -- with what we're doingat hitrecord. it's very important to createa really safe environment if you're going tocreate art together.

so we're very clearand transparent with what it is we do andhow it is we make things. and that really -- and ifyou're going to do that and you're going to have thatdialogue, it has to be fair. and we're very activewith that dialogue. in terms of non-exclusivity,we want you to be able to use your ip to dowhatever you want to do. we don't want to own it. we don't want tocontrol your ideas.

but we are a for-profitorganization so if we can figure out a way to make money withyour ideas in combination with everybody else's ideas, there needs to be somesort of agreement. and so we enter into that. and when we talk aboutprofit sharing, we've -- as joe mentioned in thevideo -- we've paid out -- at the end of thisyear, it'll be closer to 2.5 million dollars.

and when we were thinking ofour terms of service and laying out our monetization policy,we wanted to make it efficient and just make a formulaor create an algorithm and just say, "all right,that's how you get paid." but it's not -- that'snot how it works. every piece of art is different. every ingredient to thatpiece of art is different. and how you feel about thatpiece of art is different. so what we do is every payperiod, we take the money

that was made for that project. we post those profits on thesite for everybody to see, and we say, "these areall of the elements that went into this project." whether it's a music video, whether it's a televisionepisode, whether it's a tv commercial,whether it's a vinyl record. we say, "these are all thethings that went into it." and this is what we think is afair split amongst everybody.

and the community has two weeks to have an open dialogueabout that. now, we've been doingit for six years. so there are pretty much --a lot of the question marks and variables as to how thiswould work in different cases, there's a precedent for it. but for two weeks, wehave an open discussion. some people say,"you forgot me." or, "maybe i should get more."

or, this person may be, "iwant to give mine to this." and we have that discussion. and at the end of twoweeks, we say, "okay, we take that feedbackinto consideration, and then we make a decision." and what we have found isthat people, of course, love getting paid andrecognized for what they do. but i should say the attributionand the credit is almost as important, if not moreimportant, just that people know

that they got credit forwhat their contribution was. what's really great -- and i think there's videosof joe signing checks. i mean, it's more automatednow, but it is really gratifying to have -- to see a stack ofchecks go out to thousands of artists all overthe world for stuff that we've made togetherand feeling good that everybody feels good. not only about the stuff thatwe've made, but about how --

what they were paidand how they were paid. so, anna, the nature ofgather is local and intimate. and so presumably that affectsthe way that you can scale. so i'm wondering, how doyou think of it as an asset and how is it a limitation? >> yeah, that's sucha good question. and i think we are in suchbeginning stages of our business that it remains to be seenhow that's actually going to play out.

but i do think that firstof all, the localness, if you want to call it that,of gather is truly an asset because it allows people to -- and i think peoplehave this compulsion -- i know in minnesota this is thecase anyway, to want to dig deep into something reallyclose to home that when we feel reallygood about spending dollars from an artist like twoblocks from our house or we feel even betterwhen we realize

that our contribution wentto creating a commission that would never have happened without my smalllittle contribution from the artist in northeast. so i think there's somethingreally gratifying about that. i also think that ithelps really create, generate an audiencethat has the capability of transforming individualartist's lives. so that there's trulya mechanism

by which the community canimpact the continued development of a local arts economy,which is something that we think a lotabout in minneapolis. so i think that thatis an asset, and that's really something thatwe want to promote and foster. i imagine that gather will beginto extend, and we already kind of do between minnesota andwisconsin, that there's kind of an upper midwestern regionthat we'll be really kind of focusing on developing.

and as far as scalingbeyond that, i think there's that compulsion existsin other communities. and so the way that weimagine expansion is to actually franchisein kind of a weird way, but to have individual artistsand kind of groups of people to curate because i thinkcuration is really essentially to our process as well. but to curate a similarlylocally-based version of gather in different corners of the u.s.

so we're not sure howthat's going to happen. we're kind of like tryingto dig deep right now into the minneapolis, st. paul,and bigger minnesota market. but i think it hasa lot of potential. like i said, people reallydo like supporting local. and also being able to kind ofpoint at something on their wall and say, "not onlyis that a cool piece, but it's from across town. i actually met theperson that made that."

and there's just like a lotof warm fuzzies about that. so we want to continueto promote that. >> sure. all right, thanks. chase. creativelive enablesrevenue stream for creators who are also educators by payinginstructors to teach courses. so what philosophies do youhave in selecting and working with these instructors? >> i'll borrow your term. curation. it's absolutelycritical that the people

that are teaching atcreativelive are the best. there are many sortof marketplaces, online education marketplaces-- i don't need to name them. the way i describe it, though, is they're an inchdeep and a mile wide. and they really don't carewho's on their platform. it is sort of something thatwas by and large created in a -- i know most of these companiesvery intimately and they, by and large, were createdby mba's with business plans

to scale online education. we consider ourselves very,very focused on creativity. photography, design, video,music and audio, crafts, the maker movement, and theability to make a living and a life, and allthose things. and so for us, we wantto serve a community, a community of creatorswho are going from zero to one or one to ten. and in that world, our name, ourbrand, the value that we bring

to our students is all we have. and so taking thatlightly would be something that i wouldn't advocate as thefounder and ceo, and deciding who gets to be the people who teach our futureartists is a thing that we don't take lightly. we take that very, veryseriously because we're trying to arm these creators withthe skills that they need to go into the future.

and we're all literallyassembled here on world ip day because the futureis so uncertain and we need the stewardsof our future to be people who are validated, who arecarefully curated to sort of help the rising tidefloat all the boats. so we're meticulous about it. i wouldn't bore you with theactual details, but it has to do with being great at what you doand also have teaching skills. it's no different -- think

of the best teachers-- actually do this. think of the bestteachers you ever had. they were not the smartest. they were part entertaining,part wise, very much human, and those are the people that weseek to bring on our platform. so it's not just thepeople with the most papers. it's not the people whohave the most experience. it's the people who aregreat teachers, that connect. you like to say that there's ahuman being behind the pieces

of art, and we wantour instructors, our experts to be worldclass, to be all these things and to be able toconnect with a community. so we take that very,very seriously, something i'm super proud of. jared, you probablycame to your project with certain goalsand philosophies. has hitrecord exceededyour expectations or taught you new thingsabout the creative process?

>> well, yeah. i think one of the mostinspiring things about hitrecord for me is that there'sno end to the creativity that is contributed every day,whether that's writing or music or animation or --i mean, stop motion, claymation, all sorts of things. and what's -- one of the things that i've learned is themore people who have a say and the more people who are apart of the art that we make,

the richer these stories,the richer the art is, the more perspectives. and we just hear stories thatwe just never would have written ourselves becausewe just didn't -- we don't have that experience. when we were doing the firstseason of our television show, the first episode of ourshow was regarding -- we had art and ideas and -- about regarding adifferent theme.

each episode is regardinga different theme. and the first episode wasregarding the number one. and we had a -- we had a -- weput out a call to action to say, "tell us about your -- tellus your stories regarding your first time." and that was your firsttime doing anything. so people wrote all sorts ofstories, contributed stories, and one girl wrote astory about the first time that she saw the starswhen she was 16 years old.

she has a rare eye disorder where she can't seepinpoints of light. and when she was 16, her dadbought her night vision goggles to allow her to see thestars for the first time. and that's just a story thatwe never would have heard if we just hireda bunch of writers in hollywood in a writer's room. but when you have such ahuge community of artists that are contributingideas to these stories,

i think that's the mostsurprising thing is every collaboration that wedo is you never know -- we always have to throw cautionto the wind whenever we -- and can't plan too muchabout where we're going to go with a certain projectbecause we go where the community wants to go. it's where we --where's the story going? and i think that's -- again, oneof the most surprising things and the thing that ilove about creating art

in a digital space is thatyou just have the scale of people with different ideas. >> that was the last question? [ inaudible ] okay. all right. well, i guess we'reto the last question. okay. can each of you brieflystate what do you think the future holds? and let's start with jared.

>> future. >> future holds. specifically, i imagine,with regards to art making and the digital spaceand copyright. i think -- firstof all, i think -- and one of the things i wasthinking about on the plane ride over here was just the factthat world ip day exists and people are learningmore about what that means and educating artistsas to the value

of their contributionis a huge step forward in us not only understandingwhat the value of our ideas in art is but whatwe can do about it. and so i'm -- i think it'sgoing to be an evolution. i think there's always goingto be a push and pull and -- but i'm extremely optimisticjust -- and i said it earlier, but meeting everybody here whois so passionate about copyright and figuring thingsout with artists, i think it's a challenging time,but it's a really inspiring

and exciting time tobe a part of this. there's -- i think it's -- what a pressing issue andwhat an exciting time to help to start figuringthese things out. >> excellent. anna? >> that is such anamazing question. >> no wrong answers. >> yeah, no.

it's true. i think about thisa lot actually just from the perspective ofthe other work that i do, which is to help artists grow in their own professionaldevelopment and grow their businesses andgrow their living and a life -- that's such a wonderful slogan. that's what we work reallyhard to do at springboard. and i think there's thisreally interesting tension

between collaboration -- thisis a word that i think all of us talk about -- and thenalso having an individual voice. and i think that something inthe future will present a "yes, and" solution to thistension in such a way where our human species,the creativity that happens when human beings gettogether to make art work and to push our culture forward, which is truly the mostinspirational thing i can think of.

when that can happenand also acknowledge all of the individual voices thatwent into that happening, and i'm so inspired by all ofthe efforts that everyone here on the stage aremaking to do that, so i think that is an optimisticwhat i think will happen in the future for the arts andfor artists is this, again, realization of the movementforward as a collective and also the individualvoice being recognized. >> great, great.

chase, the future? >> i'm inspired bymy stage mates here. i think jared, you said it wellwith -- it's an exciting time. we used the word tensiona lot last night as well. i think it is the mostexciting time in the history of the world to be a creator. i think there is a tensionaround sort of preserving that in a way thatmaintains sustenance for the people who create.

as the world sort ofcommodifies so many things and goods are being madecheaper and cheaper all the time and in many ways, intellectualproperty is becoming commoditized, how do we keepthis from being a problem? to me, that is a very, very-- it is the responsibility -- i'm honored to hear thatpeople love world ip day. that you are out there thinkingabout that on a daily basis. i believe deeply that thisis very much a packaging and an access challenge.

the packaging -- i have litigated againsta publicly traded company. i want to say thanks to genemopsik from the asmp for helping to support it, five years, hundreds of thousandsof dollars in costs. i had a -- it was against-- i'll just say it, it was against k2,a ski manufacturer. it's a well-documented case. it was more than150 infringements.

cost me five years of my life. i had to testify infederal court for three days by an attorney that was making12 hundred dollars an hour to be there. and that -- we won that case andhad to appeal our own victory because the judgment waswritten in such a way that it was bad for artists. so we appealed that, and itwent to the ninth circuit court of appeals where wewon that as well.

and i loved the openingremarks because if you think that cost me hundreds ofthousands of dollars in order to do that, and whatk2, the reason -- i had a voice message thataccidentally was removed at some point from my messagebecause it was saved so long of the vice president sayingreally unpleasant things to me like, "you don't knowwho you're f-- - - - g with." and if that is the plightof artists going forward, we're in a real bad spot.

if the people in this roomcan usurp that mentality and if we can through apackaging exercise of making -- world ip day is a greatstep, but let's make it sexy to understand that thereis value in our creators. let's create access to thatinformation because access to information isreally what helps sort of the tide risewith all the boats. by and large, i find that mostof my peers who are struggling to make a living and a life is

because they eitherhave not chosen to or they don't havean understanding of access to that information. so my ask is that thatis what the committees, the copyright office,congress consider as their sort of their future,their future moves. it's an incrediblyexciting time. it's a little bit dangerous, and i believe ourfate is in good hands.

good shall persevere. >> all right, so we're goingto open it up to the audience if anybody has any questions. i believe there are microphones, so if you could waitfor the mic. don't be shy. >> come on, you guys. we came all the way acrossthe country for this. >> now's your chance.

there's a gift for thefirst person who asks. >> hi. my name is[inaudible], the us editor for a magazine calledmusic week, and i cover copyright issues. oh, thank you for the gift. that's lovely. i didn't know there was one. i thought you were just -- the copyright allianceserves a purpose --

there's one thing in the videosand also in a couple of things that you said aboutinformation wants to be free. isn't there a problem whenevery time you mention the work of art, actually it becomesinformation, i.e. one and zero. and the semantics are importantin a sense that whenever -- and it really used to upset me when i think informationwants to be free. therefore, we can access music. we can access photography,etc. these are not --

this is not information. these are works of art. so shouldn't we start byinstead of saying information, saying that these are works ofart and that will help everyone to actually understandwhat it is? >> to be clear, i was talkingabout information in terms of access to the informationabout art, not actually about art in and of itself. but i understand very,very deeply your --

how the challenge exists there. again, i dropped out of aph.d. in the philosophy of art so this is really, reallyan interesting area for me. the -- i guess idon't want to pretend that it's not complicated. and if we've had some ofthe brightest thinkers of our times strugglingin politics, in the copyright office, in ourgovernment and governments all over the world -- ifthere's a real challenge

to overcoming these problems,i don't think one of us from the stage isgoing to answer it. but let's actually acknowledge that what you've saidis the central problem. there really is a gap betweensaying well, this is just a mess and what do we do aboutit, and saying actually, let's identify the problem. the problem is that isone very precise problem that we need to try and solve.

and to say that it's justtoo big for us to tackle. we have a historyin this country. our law was created over time. we didn't just walk outand say this is the law. i think i know just a littlebit about the philosophy of law, and it was created over time,and it continues to evolve. we have to put astake in the ground and saying these are a coupleof the central challenges that we're goingto try and solve.

and if we don't puta pin in those things and start workingtoward that solution, we certainly willnever get there. you know that saying? if you don't have amap, you're not going to get where you're going. you can't just walkin the woods. or even a broken clockis right twice a day, whatever that saying is.

we need to identify the problem. keep going. come on, you guys. >> to build upon what youwere saying, there is a -- i think there is a culture because that is thecentral problem. well, i'll just sharethis music or i have no -- people might be predisposed tobe fine with just taking music or in essence, stealing music,because that's just the culture

that we're now living in. and i think thatyou said it right. all right, now i think it'sreally raising our hands and saying actuallythis, understanding that this is a problem,understanding that this way of thinking shouldn't be the wayof thinking and then figuring out well, how dowe deal with this? but it is -- i do think thatwe are living in a culture where i think thereare a lot of people

who just think it's okaybecause it's so easy. how could somethingso easy not be okay? so it's identifying that problemand then figuring it out. >> and also i think identifying where there are solutionsalready embedded into that question and theproblem because what i find is that artists don't --smaller artists, anyway, don't tend to have theproblem of too much exposure. in fact, they really needmore exposure and that idea

of turning what theydo into information that can be widely distributedis often times the thing that gives them theliving and the life that they can then build upon. and so, yeah, i think there's -- i'm going to use the wordtension again because it -- certainly -- maybe it's thetwo sides of the same coin that there is the assetto information going out to the masses and thenthere's also what we have

to do is protect that too. >> hi. how would yourcompany protect -- okay, say if i was to submitsomething to your company, a picture, and how wouldyou protect that from those who are trying to make aincome, a passive income? say amazon has a way where youcan copyright somebody's work. with hitrecord, how would youprotect the work that i submit? >> if i'm understanding your --i don't know the amazon service that you're referencing --

if i'm to understandyour question correctly. if you were to upload apicture and somebody else were to download it and try tomake money off of it outside of the website, actually we --it gets back to the question about non-exclusivity. we don't represent -- if you were to dothat and it happens -- i shouldn't say thatit happens -- i'm not aware of a case wheresomebody would download a photo

and make money, but iknow that there are cases where people woulddownload art off of our site and perhaps put it ontumblr or on facebook and perhaps there's amonetization stream that way. but we don't representthe artists for protection against that sort of thing. and if we did, we would thenrequire the exclusive rights to your ip because thenwe can represent you. there is an infrastructurefor us to do that.

we essentially have alicense for us to work with and to monetize alongwith other people's art. so i guess the shortanswer is that could happen. that's for the artistto represent themselves. that is to say when people makeus aware that things are going on with either onemember or a combination -- if somebody takes yourphoto and combines it with another member's photo andtries to do something with it, we do make best effortsto try to make it right.

but at the end of the day,we don't have the authority to speak on behalfof the artists because we don't havethat kind of license. >> i think we have to end. sorry. >> okay. >> they'll be here briefly, ithink, after the event if you'd like to talk to thema little bit. but would you please help methank them for being here today?

as register, i'lltake the liberty of offering a fewclosing remarks. just summarizingwhat i just heard. obviously, being an artist from what you can tell is anextremely disciplined craft and a lifetime craft at that. i agree wholeheartedly withchase and his observation that you should not, ifyou're an artist listening to this today or will listento it later on our website --

don't underestimateparticipation from our nation's artists in the copyright debatesgoing on currently. it would be illogicalto have a copyright act that does not protect andsupport our creative voices. we're doing our best inthe copyright office. there are many organizations that obviously agreewith that principle. certainly, congress does, butthey need to hear from you.

i'm tempted to provide therecommendation to congress that they should takejared's business model of giving everybody two weeksto weigh in on any proposal that comes off the hill, andthen they'll make a decision. i'm not sure it'll go that way. so instead, i'll end with anna'sobservation that of course, even in the copyrightdebate, there is a tension between expressing one'sindividual goals or perspective and then collaboratingwith others.

and of course, we haveto have both so here's to working together for thenext great copyright act. thanks. >> this has been a presentationof the library of congress. visit us at loc.gov.