9
McLeod Chapter 4: Visual and Sound Collage vs.Copyright and Trademark Law

McLeod Chapter 4: Visual and Sound Collage vs.Copyright and Trademark Law

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: McLeod Chapter 4: Visual and Sound Collage vs.Copyright and Trademark Law

McLeod

Chapter 4:

Visual and Sound Collage vs.Copyright and Trademark Law

Page 2: McLeod Chapter 4: Visual and Sound Collage vs.Copyright and Trademark Law

Appropriation in the Arts

• This chapter generally validates the notion I offered earlier that IP law tends to care a lot less about protecting intellectual property than about following the money. – Art doesn’t get main stream exposure.– Art doesn’t generate the revenue stream.– So artists generally continue with traditional

patterns of intertextual appropriation, generally unfettered.

Page 3: McLeod Chapter 4: Visual and Sound Collage vs.Copyright and Trademark Law

Sound Collage

• Artists used as experimentation, since the very beginnings of recorded sound, what we would now have to call “sampling” (over which one is forced to pay extensive fees and obtain tough permissions).– By the late 1980’s artists in this genre were

targeted by intellectual-property holding companies.

Page 4: McLeod Chapter 4: Visual and Sound Collage vs.Copyright and Trademark Law

A practical problem in the law:Which infringements should we promote?

Forbid? Must we thereby silence all?• Sound collage artists.

– Snips, mixed, a “new” thang.

• Hip-hop style recording artists.– Often borrows the underlying backbone

• Not for profit thief.• For profit thief.• Cultural Garfinklers (copyright liberation fronts)

Page 5: McLeod Chapter 4: Visual and Sound Collage vs.Copyright and Trademark Law

Visual Collage and Appropriation Art

• Centuries, not decades.

• Mainstream (though avant-garde at the time)

• Satire and parody often get “art” off the IP hook.

Page 6: McLeod Chapter 4: Visual and Sound Collage vs.Copyright and Trademark Law

– “Intertextuality is central to many different practices of cultural production, but various intertextual modes of cultural production directly conflict with the logic(s) of intellectual property law (with its situated notion of authorship and ownership). p. 140

Page 7: McLeod Chapter 4: Visual and Sound Collage vs.Copyright and Trademark Law

Digital Literacy 2.0 and Media CollageIntegrating Multiple Forms of Sound, Graphics, and Images

Suzanne Pitner

• Creating New Media Leads to Understanding– People also create media collages by making mashups, a combination of sound,

graphics, words and images drawn from different places. The resulting effect may be quite disparate from the intentions of the authors of the original pieces. Creating these types of presentations lends a better understanding to the effects of editing and the media process.

• Art as a Form of Media Literacy– Digital technology has made it possible to create and manipulate art never imagined

by the masters of old. Rather than blending and mixing paint, textures, and colors, the new media allows people to combine entire images and enhance them with sound and motion. Visual literacy is integrated with the written online, and requires a knowledge of art principles to be most effective, both in presentation and interpretation.

• http://medialiteracy.suite101.com/article.cfm/digital_literacy_20_and_media_collage#ixzz09Hbay4PN

Page 8: McLeod Chapter 4: Visual and Sound Collage vs.Copyright and Trademark Law

You just can’t do that… well, sorta not

• http://techregulation.blogspot.com/2007/12/mashups-bad-covers-good-should.html

Page 9: McLeod Chapter 4: Visual and Sound Collage vs.Copyright and Trademark Law

Ch. . Ch.. Ch.. Ch.. changes

• Warming Up to User-Generated Content– Edward Lee– Ohio State University - Michael E. Moritz

College of Law– University of Illinois Law Review, Vol. 2008,

No. 5, 2008– http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?

abstract_id=1116671#