tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5138246741978533316.post8718556825196508680..comments2023-12-20T09:23:39.248-05:00Comments on What is Fair Use?: Parody v. Political ExpressionPeter Friedmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16104358431718439299noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5138246741978533316.post-7749373878948956052008-03-24T13:11:00.000-04:002008-03-24T13:11:00.000-04:00And I want to emphasize two things about the comme...And I want to emphasize two things about the commercial works of appropriation art I would consider legitimate: (1) they would not exploit a market created by the original work, and (2) they would be genuinely creative.<BR/><BR/>The Seinfeld trivia book at issue in Castle Rock Entertainment, of course, fails on both counts: (1) it was an effort to exploit precisely the market the Seinfeld show Peter Friedmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12367214098614734119noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5138246741978533316.post-3730831888065908252008-03-24T13:04:00.000-04:002008-03-24T13:04:00.000-04:00There's no question the view I'm advancing (which ...There's no question the view I'm advancing (which I may or may not come to believe in) is that fair use would include any genuinely creative work of appropriation art that does not exploit the market created by the copyrighted appropriated work.<BR/><BR/>Isn't that the essence of Blanch v. Koons?<BR/><BR/>A big part of the issue here is the new material reality with which we are dealing. Fair Peter Friedmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12367214098614734119noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5138246741978533316.post-52853947973296662322008-03-24T12:48:00.000-04:002008-03-24T12:48:00.000-04:00I think both Anonymous and Peter make good points....I think both Anonymous and Peter make good points. Still, I'm troubled in many ways with the idea that any creative work is immediately and completely in the public domain (through the vehicle of fair use) for the purposes of political commentary. For one, I think the line between political commentary vs. non-political commentary is awfully hazy. Certainly presidential elections are political, Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12028097878812367506noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5138246741978533316.post-73200094074882572542008-03-21T20:28:00.000-04:002008-03-21T20:28:00.000-04:00responding to John, why does society value and wis...responding to John, why does society value and wish to protect the artist? It is because he contributes to society by adding cultural bricks that add to societies architecture, and not becuase he is some specialty of normal busnesperson or investor. When a given piece of art is particullarly good or effective, or for whatever other reason simply pervasive, it can contibute significantly to the Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5138246741978533316.post-14937997364501337992008-03-20T21:21:00.000-04:002008-03-20T21:21:00.000-04:00I don't understand why the use of better known wor...I don't understand why the use of better known works of art in creative political commentary offers them less protection than that enjoyed by lesser known works. <BR/><BR/>The creative political commentary represented by the JibJab video and K Cera Cera does not displace any market for the well known works they use (creatively, and in combination with other elements) in making their political Peter Friedmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12367214098614734119noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5138246741978533316.post-7840836028843873382008-03-20T18:29:00.000-04:002008-03-20T18:29:00.000-04:00Responding to anonymous above, the key difference ...Responding to anonymous above, the key difference between parody and political satire (as described in the comment to <A HREF="" REL="nofollow" HTTP://WHATISFAIRUSE.BLOGSPOT.COM/2008/03/SATIRE-PARODY-FAIR-USE-OR-WHAT.HTML> this post </A>) is that the law (at least as described in <I>Campbell </I>) doesn't require authors/artists to bear the burden of society's need for political commentary by Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12028097878812367506noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5138246741978533316.post-72112356929547323992008-03-20T16:50:00.000-04:002008-03-20T16:50:00.000-04:00I can't imagine a valid argument for why the law s...I can't imagine a valid argument for why the law should favor parody over political satire. Why is the artists work less justified because his inspiration and thus the effect of his work reflects outward rather than backwards towards the original. It makes no sense to say to an architect that he can only use the bricks of a an old building if he employs them in such a way as to recall the old Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com