The antecedents of remix

ABSTRACT

Reuse of the works of others has become common practice on the Internet and has formed the basis for collaboration in some online communities. However, some works are reused much more frequently than others. In this article we build a quantitative model that explains which factors are most salient in determining the likelihood that an author's work will be reused. Controlling for common factors, such as the work's popularity, we show that the probability of reuse depends on (a) the degree of derivativity of the work in question, (b) the specific ways in which it derives meaning from other works (intertextuality), (c) the audience's preferential attachment to authors of high fecundity, and (d) the author's social embededness in networks of reuse. We use trace data from an online community that was built for the purpose of demonstrating the ability of open sharing and reuse to spur collaboration and innovation in music. Although our model is designed for broad applicability, we explain that the size and direction of the effects reported in this paper may vary, when reuse is performed with other media or for different purposes.

References

1. Anderson, C. The long tail: Why the future of business is selling less of more. Hyperion, London, UK, 2006.
2. Barabási, A.-L. An introduction and keynote to a networked self. In Z. Papacharissi (ed.) A networked self: identity, community and culture on social network sites, (2011), 1--14.
3. Bauwens, M. The Political Economy of Peer Production. CTheory e-Publication (2005).
4. Benkler, Y. Coase's Penguin, or, Linux and the Nature of the Firm. Yale Law Journal, 112, 3 (2002), 367--445.
5. Benkler, Y. Peer Production and Sharing. In The Wealth of Networks, (2006), 59--90.
6. Benkler, Y. The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. Yale University Press, New Haven, 200
7. Berger, J., Sorensen, A. T. and Rasmussen, S. J. Positive Effects of Negative Publicity: When Negative Reviews Increase Sales. Marketing Science, 29, 5 (September/October 2010), 815--82
8. Bonner, S., Walther, B. and Young, S. Sophistication-related differences in investors' models of the relative accuracy of analysts' forecast revisions. The Accounting Review, 78 (2003), 679--706.
9. Bonner, S. E., Hugon, J. A. and Walther, B. R. Investor reaction to celebrity analysts: The case of earnings forecast revisions. Journal of Accounting Research, 45, 3 (2007), 481--513.
10. Bouas, K. and Arrow, H. The development of group identity in computer and face-to-face groups with membership change. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 4, 2 (1995), 153--178.
11. 1Broder, A., Kumar, R., Maghoul, F., Raghavan, P., Rajagopalan, S., Stata, R., Tomkins, A. and Wiener, J. Graph Structure In The Web. Computer Networks, 33, 1--6 (2000), 309--320.
12. Capocci, A., Servedio, V., Colaiori, F., Buriol, L., Donato, D., Leonardi, S. and Caldarelli, G. Preferential attachment in the growth of social networks: The internet encyclopedia Wikipedia. Physical Review E, 74, 3 (Sep 1 2006), 6.
13. Cheliotis, G. From open source to open content: Organization, licensing and decision processes in open cultural production. Decision Support Systems, 47, 3 (2009), 229--244.
14. Cheliotis, G. and Yew, J. An analysis of the social structure of remix culture. In Proc. Fourth international conference on Communities and Technologies (C&T 2009), ACM (2009), 165--174.
15. Chen, P. Y., Wu, S. Y. and Yoon, J. The impact of online recommendations and consumer feedback on sales. In Proc. of the International Conference on Information Systems (2004), 711--724.
16. Chevalier, J. and Goolsbee, A. Measuring prices and price competition online: Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Quantitative Marketing and Economics, 1, 2 (2003), 203--222.
17. Clemons, E. K., Gao, G. and Hitt, L. M. When online reviews meet hyperdifferentiation: A study of craft beer industry. Journal of Management Information Systems, 23, 2 (2006), 149--171.
18. Culler, J. Presupposition and Intertextuality. MLN, 91, 6 (1976), 1380--1396.
19. Derrida, J. Of Grammatology. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD, 1997.
20. Duan, W., Gu, B. and Whinston, A. B. Do online reviews matter? -- An empirical investigation of panel data. Decision Support Systems, 45, 4 (2008), 1007--1016.
21. Grossman, L. Time's Person of the Year: You. Time Magazine (2006). http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html.
22. Gunderson, P. A. Danger Mouse's Grey Album, Mash-Ups, and the Age of Composition. Postmodern Culture, 15, 1 (2004).
23. Hill, B. M. and Monroy-Hernández, A. The Remixing Dilemma: The Trade-Off Between Generativity and Originality. American Behavioral Scientist (December 21, 2012).
24. Hutcheon, L. A Theory of Adaptation. Routledge, New York, 2006.
25. Johnson, B. K. Incentives to Contribute in Online Collaboration: Wikipedia as Collective Action. In Proc. International Communication Association (2008).
26. Keen, A. The Cult of the Amateur: How Today's Internet is Killing Our Culture. Doubleday, New York, NY, 2007.
27. Kim, M. An Analysis of the Creative Commons as a Solution for Copyright Protection in the Digital Era. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 2005.
28. Kittur, A., Chi, E. H., Pendleton, B. A., Suh, B. and Mytkowicz, T. Power of the few vs. wisdom of the crowd: Wikipedia and the rise of the bourgeoisie. In Proc. Alt.CHI at CHI 2007 (2007).
29. Lessig, L. Free Culture: The Nature and Future of Creativity. The Penguin Press, New York, NY, 2004.
30. Lessig, L. Free(ing) Culture for Remix. Utah Law Review, 961 (2004), 961--975.
31. Lessig, L. Remix: Making Art and Commerce Thrive in the Hybrid Economy. Penguin Press HC, New York, NY, 2008.
32. Linville, P. W., Fischer, G. W. and Salovey, P. Perceived Distributions of the Characteristics of In-Group and Out-Group Members: Empirical Evidence and a Computer Simulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 2 (1989), 165--188.
33. Liu, Y. Word of mouth for movies: Its dynamics and impact on box office revenue. Journal of Marketing Research, 70, 3 (2006), 74--89.
34. Manovich, L. Remixing and Remixability, 2005. http:// manovich.net/DOCS/Remix_modular.doc.
35. Marwell, G. and Oliver, P. The critical mass in collective action: a micro-social theory. Cambridge University Press, New York, 1993.
36. Miller, P. D. Rhythm science. MIT Press, Cambridge MA, 2004.
37. Navas, E. Remix Theory: The Aesthetics of Sampling. SpringerWien, 2012.
38. Nov, O. What motivates Wikipedians? Communications of the ACM, 50, 11 (2007).
39. Postmes, T., Spears, R. and Lea, M. Breaching or Building Social Boundaries? Communication Research, 25, 6 (December 1, 1998), 689--715.
40. Postmes, T., Spears, R. and Lea, M. The formation of group norms in computer-mediated communication. Human Communication Research, 26, 3 (2000), 341--371.
41. Roberts, J. A., Hann, I.-H. and Slaughter, S. A. Understanding the Motivations, Participation and Performance of Open Source Software Developers: A Longitudinal Study of the Apache Projects. Management Science, 52, 7 (2006), 984--999.
42. Spears, R. and Lea, M. Panacea or Panopticon Communication Research, 21, 4 (August 1, 1994), 427--459.
43. Stone, V. ccMixter: A Memoir (2009). http://fourstones.net/ccmixter-a-memoir.
44. von Hippel, E. Horizontal innovation networks - by and for users. Industrial and Corporate Change, 16, 2 (May 16 2007), 293--315.
45. von Hippel, E. and von Krogh, G. Open Source Software and the "Private-Collective" Innovation Model: Issues for Organization Science. Organization Science, 14, 2 (Mar-Apr 2003), 209--223.
46. Wasko, M. M. and Faraj, S. Why Should I Share? Examining Social Capital and Knowledge Contribution in Electronic Networks of Practice. MIS Quarterly, 29, 1 (2005), 35--57.
47. Zittrain, J. The Generative Pattern. In The Future of the Internet - And How to Stop It (2010).

Index Terms

• Applied computing

• Human-centered computing

  • Collaborative and social computing