A recent article in the New York Times has a well-done quiz about four works of art and whether you can spot which parties were successful in their copyright infringement litigation.
From my read, it comes down to the transformative and true parodying nature of the works at issue when deciding cases under the 'fair use' doctrine. For example, an author can't just revise a book, its illustrations, scene settings, or slightly alter the plot of an already published book protected by copyright law--and legally make money by selling the revision.
This article is helpful in learning more about the 'lay of the land' in terms of how copyright infringement law is viewed by the courts especially with how they define the concepts of parody in art works and the transformative nature of them through their rulings.
The article is a short read and can be accessed at this link (though you may need a subscription to view it):
Comments
Post a Comment