other things one thinks about

[iceinyourmusic]

The parody clause of copyright law: is there an actual legal definition of parody somewhere out there? what is it? when the parties disagree about the parodic nature of a parody, will there be expert witnesses? must a parody be funny? what if it tries but fails miserably? what if one of the parties still subscribes to New Criticism? is my Optional season finale more legal than the Wesleyfic? what if one does a parody on material that violates copyright in itself? wouldn't it be fun to be a lawyer? Historical fiction vs. RPF: isn't there RPS in Ragtime? The US visa applications and visa waiver forms: do they expect for someone to walk up to the immigrations officials and say, why, yes, now that you ask me, I do intend to extend my stay well beyond the legally allowed three months, as well as get a job here and not pay taxes; also, in my free time, I plan to set up and run a crime ring, concentrating on smuggling nuclear weapons - in fact, if you just look into my carry-on bag here, you should be able to see the starter's pack, right there next to my kilo of heroin? to which the officials will respond, for now, we'll be putting you in jail, but rest assured, your honesty in filling out the forms will be remembered the next time you seek entry into the United States of America.

Comments

You asked for it , you got it

[mandysbitch.livejournal.com]

The parody clause of copyright law: is there an actual legal definition of parody somewhere out there? what is it?

Well. This is from an Australian source but IP is one of those things that they try to standardise internationally so it should be relavant.


[34,265] Parodies and burlesques

In wider applications the terms parody and burlesque are often used interchangeably, but in a literary, musical or artistic application they have distinct meanings. A parody is defined in the Oxford English Dictionary as a composition in prose or verse in which the characteristic turns of thought and phrase of an author are imitated and made to appear ridiculous, especially by applying them to ludicrously inappropriate subjects. The term is also applied to a burlesque of a musical work. A burlesque is defined as that species of composition or representation which aims at exciting laughter by caricature of the manner or spirit of serious works, or by ludicrous treatment of their subjects; a grotesque imitation, such as an action or performance which casts ridicule on that which it imitates, or is itself ridiculous as an unsuccessful attempt at something serious; a mockery. What is essential in both cases is imitation of another work to produce what is itself a new work recognised as an independent literary, musical or art form. Parody is the imitation of the substance and style of the particular work of an author transferred to a trivial or nonsensical subject, whereas burlesque is an imitation, distorting or mocking the original work by comic extremes. In the context of copyright, the question is at what stage, if at all, does a parody or burlesque of a work become an infringement of copyright in that work. It is essential to the parody or burlesque that the work parodied or burlesqued is evoked in the mind of the public to whom the parody or burlesque is directed. There must, therefore, be some objective similarity between the works, and causal connection is not in issue. It is true that the question of infringement is answered by the usual process of comparison to establish whether or not there has been a copying of a substantial part of the plaintiff's work, excluding from consideration appropriation of the plaintiff's ideas. But the difficulty in the parody and burlesque cases is the test to be applied in determining whether or not there has been a reproduction of a substantial part of the plaintiff's work. The approach of the courts has, as it has in the abridgment cases, tended to look at the input of the defendant in creating a new work as much as at the amount and quality of what the defendant has taken from the plaintiff. The courts in the United States, dealing with similar issues, have also failed to adopt a consistent approach. Much of the difficulty, it is suggested, lies in the failure to distinguish clearly the parody from the burlesque.



You're sorry you asked now, aren't you? ;)

Re: You asked for it , you got it

[teanna.livejournal.com]

I made the first three words... :)

I couldn't be arsed to write anything about the latest upset in JA-land. I hope some of those people never visit gatefiction, cause you know, Eeeeevil Copyright Infringement... Much Ado, I say.

Re: You asked for it , you got it

[leksa.livejournal.com]

Whee. At least that clarifies that tricky "wouldn't it be fun to be a lawyer" issue right up. :)

(Thanks! though, I was really curious about this. And now I know. Now I know something... I think I do...)