WEBVTT 00:00:00.758 --> 00:00:04.049 讓我們回到1964年 00:00:04.049 --> 00:00:07.022 23歲的巴布·狄倫 (Bob Dylan) 00:00:07.022 --> 00:00:09.183 他的事業正如日中天 00:00:09.183 --> 00:00:11.624 他作為當代文化的代言人 00:00:11.624 --> 00:00:14.084 用難以置信的速度 00:00:14.084 --> 00:00:16.047 譜出一首又一首的經典佳作 00:00:16.047 --> 00:00:20.498 但少數異議人士指責 00:00:20.498 --> 00:00:24.237 巴布·狄倫剽竊他人的作品 NOTE Paragraph 00:00:24.237 --> 00:00:28.377 2004年 Brian Burton，即 Danger Mouse 00:00:28.377 --> 00:00:30.290 將披頭四 (Beatles) 的 "白色專輯" (White Album) 00:00:30.290 --> 00:00:32.067 搭上 Jay-Z 的 "黑色專輯" (The Black Album) 00:00:32.067 --> 00:00:33.891 創作出 "灰色專輯" (The Gray Album) 00:00:33.891 --> 00:00:35.810 "灰色專輯" 在網路一炮而紅 00:00:35.810 --> 00:00:38.570 卻收到唱片公司雪片般飛來的 00:00:38.570 --> 00:00:41.810 禁制令 (cease-and-desist letters)，稱其為 00:00:41.810 --> 00:00:45.691 "對我方資產的不當競爭及耗損" NOTE Paragraph 00:00:45.691 --> 00:00:47.683 "灰色專輯" 是一種混搭 00:00:47.683 --> 00:00:50.080 借鏡舊素材，創造新作品 00:00:50.080 --> 00:00:52.665 混搭用到下面三種技巧： 00:00:52.665 --> 00:00:55.907 借用、轉化和重組 00:00:55.907 --> 00:00:57.829 做法如下。找幾首現成歌曲 00:00:57.829 --> 00:00:59.549 分割成小段並稍作改換 00:00:59.549 --> 00:01:01.389 全部拼湊起來之後 00:01:01.389 --> 00:01:03.366 成為一首新曲，這樣的曲子 00:01:03.366 --> 00:01:06.100 很明顯是從現有歌曲重組而成 NOTE Paragraph 00:01:06.100 --> 00:01:09.413 這些要素並非混搭所獨有 00:01:09.413 --> 00:01:12.457 我認為這是構成所有創意的基礎 00:01:12.457 --> 00:01:14.268 一切都是混搭 00:01:14.268 --> 00:01:18.959 我認為混搭更適合用來理解創意的本質 NOTE Paragraph 00:01:18.959 --> 00:01:21.952 回到1964年，我們將聽到幾首 00:01:21.952 --> 00:01:24.973 狄倫早期作品的來源 00:01:24.973 --> 00:01:26.850 我會將兩者並列比較 NOTE Paragraph 00:01:26.850 --> 00:01:28.056 第一首歌是 00:01:28.056 --> 00:01:30.470 "Nottamun Town"，一首傳統民謠 00:01:30.470 --> 00:01:33.051 接著是狄倫的 "Masters of War" NOTE Paragraph 00:01:33.058 --> 00:01:37.958 Jean Ritchie: ♫ In Nottamun Town, not a soul would look out, ♫ NOTE Paragraph 00:01:37.958 --> 00:01:44.556 ♫ not a soul would look up, not a soul would look down. ♫ NOTE Paragraph 00:01:44.556 --> 00:01:48.830 巴布·狄倫: ♫ Come you masters of war, ♫ NOTE Paragraph 00:01:48.830 --> 00:01:57.435 ♫ you that build the big guns, you that build the death planes, ♫ NOTE Paragraph 00:01:57.435 --> 00:02:00.504 ♫ You that build all the bombs. ♫ NOTE Paragraph 00:02:00.504 --> 00:02:02.426 Kirby Ferguson: 兩者有相同的基本旋律 00:02:02.426 --> 00:02:05.585 和整體架構。下一首是 "The Patriot Game" 00:02:05.585 --> 00:02:07.577 歌手是 Dominic Behan，對比 00:02:07.577 --> 00:02:09.851 狄倫的 "With God on Our Side" NOTE Paragraph 00:02:09.851 --> 00:02:15.109 Dominic Behan: ♫ Come all ye young rebels, ♫ NOTE Paragraph 00:02:15.109 --> 00:02:19.639 ♫ and list while I sing, ♫ NOTE Paragraph 00:02:19.639 --> 00:02:27.851 ♫ for the love of one's land is a terrible thing. ♫ NOTE Paragraph 00:02:27.851 --> 00:02:33.663 狄倫: ♫ Oh my name it is nothin', ♫ NOTE Paragraph 00:02:33.663 --> 00:02:38.191 ♫ my age it means less, ♫ NOTE Paragraph 00:02:38.191 --> 00:02:45.010 ♫ the country I come from is called the Midwest. ♫ NOTE Paragraph 00:02:45.010 --> 00:02:46.636 KF: 在這個例子中，狄倫也承認 00:02:46.636 --> 00:02:49.076 自己可能聽過 "The Patriot Game" 卻忘了 00:02:49.076 --> 00:02:50.635 於是當曲調再次在腦海浮現 00:02:50.635 --> 00:02:52.946 便以為是自己的創作 NOTE Paragraph 00:02:52.946 --> 00:02:54.178 最後一組， "Who's Going To Buy You Ribbons" 00:02:54.178 --> 00:02:55.738 另一首傳統民謠 00:02:55.738 --> 00:02:58.035 對比 "Don't Think Twice, It's All Right" 00:02:58.035 --> 00:02:59.860 這次主要是歌詞上的相似 NOTE Paragraph 00:02:59.860 --> 00:03:06.751 Paul Clayton: ♫ It ain't no use to sit and sigh now, ♫ NOTE Paragraph 00:03:06.751 --> 00:03:14.615 ♫ darlin', and it ain't no use to sit and cry now. ♫ NOTE Paragraph 00:03:14.615 --> 00:03:20.560 狄倫: ♫ It ain’t no use to sit and wonder why, babe, ♫ NOTE Paragraph 00:03:20.560 --> 00:03:24.212 ♫ if you don't know by now, ♫ NOTE Paragraph 00:03:24.212 --> 00:03:29.603 ♫ and it ain't no use to sit and wonder why, babe, ♫ NOTE Paragraph 00:03:29.603 --> 00:03:32.490 ♫ it'll never do somehow. ♫ NOTE Paragraph 00:03:32.490 --> 00:03:34.762 KF: 類似的例子還有很多 00:03:34.762 --> 00:03:36.776 據估計狄倫的早期作品裡，三分之二的旋律 00:03:36.776 --> 00:03:39.319 是從別處借用的 00:03:39.319 --> 00:03:41.175 這個情況在民謠歌手界相當常見 00:03:41.175 --> 00:03:43.538 狄倫的偶像，伍迪·蓋瑟瑞 (Woody Guthrie) 曾說 NOTE Paragraph 00:03:43.538 --> 00:03:45.068 「重點在歌詞」 00:03:45.068 --> 00:03:46.900 「別擔心曲子，找一段旋律」 00:03:46.900 --> 00:03:48.576 「把該唱高的地方唱低」 00:03:48.576 --> 00:03:51.784 「該唱慢的地方唱快，就有新曲了」 00:03:51.784 --> 00:03:55.781 (笑聲) (掌聲) 00:03:55.781 --> 00:03:57.728 蓋瑟瑞就是這樣做的 00:03:57.728 --> 00:04:00.335 而大家也都耳熟能詳 00:04:00.335 --> 00:04:06.252 (音樂) 00:04:06.252 --> 00:04:08.647 似曾相識？大家都聽過? 00:04:08.647 --> 00:04:10.060 其實不然 00:04:10.060 --> 00:04:12.744 它出自 "When the World's on Fire"，非常老的曲調 00:04:12.744 --> 00:04:15.005 在這裡是由卡特家族 (Carter Family) 演奏 00:04:15.005 --> 00:04:17.683 蓋瑟瑞將它改編成 "This Land Is Your Land" 00:04:17.683 --> 00:04:22.003 因此，跟所有民謠歌手一樣 巴布·狄倫借用現有的曲調 00:04:22.003 --> 00:04:24.725 稍作改變，再加入新的歌詞 00:04:24.725 --> 00:04:27.122 而不同歌手的作法不盡相同 00:04:27.122 --> 00:04:29.383 各具特色 NOTE Paragraph 00:04:29.383 --> 00:04:33.046 今日，美國的智財及專利法案反其道而行 00:04:33.046 --> 00:04:35.769 反對藉前人基礎發展創作的理念 00:04:35.769 --> 00:04:38.436 這些遍及全球的法律 00:04:38.436 --> 00:04:42.158 (將創意)用彆扭的產權觀念來類比 00:04:42.158 --> 00:04:44.601 或許創作在某些面向類似財產 00:04:44.601 --> 00:04:46.910 但同時也是後人賴以創造的基石 00:04:46.910 --> 00:04:49.399 創新能量的發展茁壯 00:04:49.399 --> 00:04:52.115 仰賴於基礎的完善 NOTE Paragraph 00:04:52.115 --> 00:04:54.961 亨利·福特曾說 「我從未發明新事物」 00:04:54.961 --> 00:04:56.964 「我只是將別人的發現湊在一塊」 00:04:56.964 --> 00:04:59.551 「而這些發現都是幾世紀以來進步的積累」 00:04:59.551 --> 00:05:01.934 「當所有要素齊聚一堂」 00:05:01.934 --> 00:05:05.964 「進步必定會發生」 NOTE Paragraph 00:05:05.964 --> 00:05:10.509 2007年，iPhone首次亮相 00:05:10.509 --> 00:05:13.176 無疑地 蘋果讓我們提早接觸到一項創新 00:05:13.176 --> 00:05:15.673 這項技術已趨成熟，因為它的核心科技 00:05:15.673 --> 00:05:17.719 已經發展了十幾個年頭 00:05:17.719 --> 00:05:19.701 "多點觸控"，只要觸摸螢幕 00:05:19.701 --> 00:05:21.478 就可以操作裝置 00:05:21.478 --> 00:05:23.897 下面是史蒂夫·賈伯斯 (Steve Jobs) 介紹多點觸控 00:05:23.897 --> 00:05:26.137 並開了個有前瞻的玩笑 NOTE Paragraph 00:05:26.137 --> 00:05:28.940 史蒂夫·賈伯斯: 「我們發明了一種新技術」 00:05:28.940 --> 00:05:31.200 「叫做多點觸控」 00:05:31.200 --> 00:05:33.653 「你可以用多支手指來控制」 00:05:33.653 --> 00:05:37.264 「幸好專利已經在我們手上了! 」(笑聲) 00:05:37.264 --> 00:05:41.430 KF: 是阿。接著是多點觸控的實機展示 00:05:41.430 --> 00:05:43.451 一年前，在一場TED演講裡 00:05:43.451 --> 00:05:45.919 影片上是 Jeff Han，這也是多點觸控 00:05:45.919 --> 00:05:47.670 至少是類似的東西 00:05:47.670 --> 00:05:49.437 我們聽聽 Jeff Han 怎麼看待 00:05:49.437 --> 00:05:51.263 這個新奇的科技 00:05:51.263 --> 00:05:53.431 Jeff Han: 「多點觸控不是什麼驚人之舉」 00:05:53.431 --> 00:05:55.637 「它不是全新的技術，你知道像Bill Buxton」 00:05:55.637 --> 00:05:57.286 「在80年代已經玩過這個概念了」 00:05:57.286 --> 00:06:00.485 「這項技術本身不是最讓人興奮的」 00:06:00.485 --> 00:06:03.547 「讓人期待的是應用方式的新發現」 00:06:03.547 --> 00:06:05.480 KF: 他很坦白地告訴你這不是新玩意兒 00:06:05.480 --> 00:06:08.023 這項技術整體來說並不能申請專利 00:06:08.023 --> 00:06:10.160 而是技術的部分衍生 00:06:10.160 --> 00:06:11.464 從這些細節裡 00:06:11.464 --> 00:06:14.582 可以看到專利權法案的矛盾之處： 00:06:14.582 --> 00:06:17.743 "推動技術的演進" NOTE Paragraph 00:06:17.743 --> 00:06:20.927 這是史無前例的滑動解鎖功能 (slide-to-unlock) 00:06:20.927 --> 00:06:23.796 就這樣。蘋果為此申請了 00:06:23.796 --> 00:06:26.608 28頁的軟體專利，讓我總結一下它的重點 00:06:26.608 --> 00:06:30.544 注意有雷: "要解鎖你的電話 00:06:30.544 --> 00:06:33.481 請用手指滑動此圖示" (笑聲) 00:06:33.481 --> 00:06:36.498 我只是稍微誇張了點。這份專利涵蓋範圍很廣 NOTE Paragraph 00:06:36.498 --> 00:06:39.347 問題來了，這個概念能不能被擁有？ 00:06:39.347 --> 00:06:41.777 回到80年代，那時還沒有軟體專利 00:06:41.777 --> 00:06:44.938 全錄 (Xerox) 是圖形使用介面的先驅 00:06:44.938 --> 00:06:47.856 若是全錄把彈出式選單 (pop-up menu)、 00:06:47.856 --> 00:06:52.280 捲軸條 (scroll bar)、桌面上文件夾和紙張的圖示 00:06:52.280 --> 00:06:54.267 全都拿去申請專利？ 00:06:54.267 --> 00:06:56.616 當時年輕，缺乏經驗的蘋果 00:06:56.616 --> 00:06:59.485 會抵擋得住龐大而成熟的全錄 00:06:59.485 --> 00:07:03.565 組織的法律攻勢嗎？ NOTE Paragraph 00:07:03.565 --> 00:07:06.012 "一切都是混搭" 這個概念像是老生常談 00:07:06.012 --> 00:07:10.139 但當你是被借用的一方時就沒那麼簡單了 00:07:10.139 --> 00:07:11.789 例如... 00:07:11.789 --> 00:07:13.028 賈伯斯: 「畢卡索 (Picasso) 曾說過」 00:07:13.028 --> 00:07:16.585 「"優秀藝術家總是抄來抄去， 偉大藝術家直接拿來當自己的"」 00:07:16.585 --> 00:07:18.907 「所以我們總是」 00:07:18.907 --> 00:07:22.035 「忝不知恥的剽竊好點子」 00:07:22.035 --> 00:07:23.933 KF: OK，那是在96年，到了2010年 00:07:23.933 --> 00:07:26.842 「我要毀了Android，因為它是抄來的產品」 00:07:26.842 --> 00:07:28.384 (笑聲) 00:07:28.384 --> 00:07:32.023 「就算引發第三次世界大戰也在所不惜」 (笑聲) 00:07:32.023 --> 00:07:35.527 換句話說，偉大的藝術家...可別抄到我頭上 00:07:35.527 --> 00:07:37.878 (笑聲) NOTE Paragraph 00:07:37.878 --> 00:07:41.486 行為經濟學家會說這種行為是厭惡損失 00:07:41.486 --> 00:07:43.705 我們有強烈的防衛本能 00:07:43.705 --> 00:07:45.634 以保護自己的東西 00:07:45.634 --> 00:07:47.552 但我們倒是不怎麼介意借用 00:07:47.552 --> 00:07:50.285 別人的東西，因為抄襲隨處可見 NOTE Paragraph 00:07:50.285 --> 00:07:52.760 看看如下的方程式 00:07:52.760 --> 00:07:55.417 我們有把創意視為財產的法律 00:07:55.417 --> 00:07:58.202 侵權官司裡大量的罰鍰與賠償 00:07:58.202 --> 00:08:00.399 各式各樣的規費 00:08:00.399 --> 00:08:02.062 用來保護你法庭上的權益 00:08:02.062 --> 00:08:05.566 再加上主觀認定受到侵害的損失 00:08:05.566 --> 00:08:07.709 結果看來像這樣 00:08:07.709 --> 00:08:10.532 這張圖表顯示過去四年來 00:08:10.532 --> 00:08:13.098 智慧手機產業相關的訴訟案 00:08:13.098 --> 00:08:18.869 這樣真的能促進技術的進展？ NOTE Paragraph 00:08:18.869 --> 00:08:24.637 1983年，巴布·狄倫42歲 00:08:24.637 --> 00:08:27.963 他的文化光環早已褪色許久 00:08:27.963 --> 00:08:30.572 他錄製了一首歌叫 "Blind Willie McTell" 00:08:30.572 --> 00:08:32.758 曲名和那位知名藍調歌手相同 00:08:32.758 --> 00:08:36.428 歌曲本身是一段回溯過去的旅程，不堪回首 00:08:36.428 --> 00:08:39.578 卻簡單直接，那時 Willie McTell 一類的音樂家 00:08:39.578 --> 00:08:42.098 對自己作品的本質還瞭然於心 00:08:42.098 --> 00:08:44.348 「我從其他作者汲取靈感」 00:08:44.348 --> 00:08:46.913 「但用自己的風格來組合」 NOTE Paragraph 00:08:46.913 --> 00:08:48.630 我認為這才是常態 00:08:48.630 --> 00:08:51.996 創意應是來自外界的激發，而非閉門造車 00:08:51.996 --> 00:08:54.917 沒有人是從零開始，我們都仰賴彼此的貢獻 00:08:54.917 --> 00:08:57.742 承認這點並不代表我們會淪為 00:08:57.742 --> 00:09:00.576 平庸之輩、人云亦云 00:09:00.576 --> 00:09:03.209 而是將我們從迷思中解放出來 00:09:03.209 --> 00:09:06.292 並激勵我們 --不對個人過度期待-- 00:09:06.292 --> 00:09:09.027 而是單純去嘗試創新 NOTE Paragraph 00:09:09.027 --> 00:09:11.977 謝謝大家。很榮幸能來這裡 00:09:11.977 --> 00:09:14.754 謝謝 (掌聲) 00:09:14.754 --> 00:09:18.138 謝謝，謝謝 (掌聲) 00:09:18.138 --> 00:09:21.479 謝謝 (掌聲)