“准备工作，拼贴，找到艺术或发现的文本，互文，合并，撤销和挪用 – 所有这些术语代表剽窃的探索”（“CAE”85）。要了解CAE意味着什么，有必要定义之前和现在如何看待艺术。根据CAE艺术曾经被认为是由精英提出的文化。这意味着艺术不应该被复制。然而在更近的时代，知识爆炸。人们几乎可以访问精英所拥有的一切，而人们则希望用文字和非文本的方式进行实验。 CAE通过说明任何创作不具有其自身的内在价值来验证这种剽窃的观念。一个文本，一张图片或一首歌曲只有当它连接到物理世界中的一个过程时才会有某种意义。这个过程的联系是对过程的定义，因此重新混合或者重组可能适合不同意义的重组决不应该被认为是剽窃，因为现在意义已经发生了变化 – 环境已经发生了变化。
This over democratization or plagiarism introduced by the technological revolution would lead to nothing more than a cacophony of sounds according to some of the artists. Some artists in fact critique that not all are born to be artists and some simply don’t have it, so to pretend otherwise by mixing music and pictures and more would actually lead to a general decline on culture, one which people would be ashamed of when they think of it later (“PressPausePlay”). This form of exaggerated reasoning’s is present in both the article and the movie and although there is an established element of logos in both, there is also much pathos.
(2) “Readymades, collage, found art or found text, intertexts, combines, detournment, and appropriation—all these terms represent explorations in plagiarism” (“CAE” 85). To understand what CAE implies it is necessary to define for how art was viewed before and now. According to CAE Art was once considered culture as presented by the elite. This meant that art should not be copied. However in more current times there is a knowledge explosion. People have access to almost everything that the elite have and people want to experiment with art-text and non-textual. CAE’s validates this plagiaristic notion by stating that any creation does not hold an inherent value of its own. A text, a picture or a song will hold some sort of meaning only when it is connected to a process in the physical world. This connection to the process is what defines it, and hence to remix or to make a recombinant that would probably suit a different meaning should in no way be considered plagiarism, as the meaning has now changed-the context has changed.