Within my writing, much of the content, of the ideas I am exploring, finds roots in other people’s ideas. Social movements are the creative work of one person or a group’s ideas on love, on religion, on economics…

All of that is to say, that in its simplest context, I find my words and inspiration to write at the hands of other people. Without the ideas that spurred movements like Arab Spring, Black Lives Matter, and the Women’s March, I would not have the means to produce new content: original content that is inspired by other’s original content. The line of ideas can be traced back far before this blog had even been considered.

James Boyle poses this within his question of the Public Domain:

“But does intellectual property work this way now, promoting the ideal of progress, a transparent marketplace, easy and cheap access to information, decentralized and iconoclastic cultural production, self-correcting innovation policy?”

On a larger scale, specifically within professional writing how many times does a writer ask “Am I allowed to use this? I don’t want to get in trouble.” I would say the number is infinite. With the creation of new content, there is always the question of whether or not the use of information will result in penalty.

In her TEDxMaastricht presentation, Animator Nina Paley goes on to present the idea of “Permission Culture.” In her terms, the less information flows, the more it stagnates; evolution, progress, and innovation stall. All of this, she insists is due to the control of what information comes in, and in return, what flows out.

With this in mind, I believe that original thought cannot be a product of a world without free information flow. Through this, the ideas that spawn from a piece of writing, a song, an art piece, can then lead society to address larger social themes and create meaningful involvement within a culture.