Copyright

Street Art & Advertising

Yesterday I saw this poster.

Its an advert for an energy substitute. The basic premise is that many people have a banana in their training bags but the banana is not good enough to help the body get the amounts of carbohydrates and proteins it needs after a workout. Therefore bananas are for monkeys.

While I could argue about the eating habits of monkeys (not that many bananas) that is not what I want to do. The point of this post is to talk about advertising.

The inspiration for this poster has been taken from grafitti – this can be seen by the imitation of stencils and the mock access paint running down the poster. The ad-company has obviously been inspired by street artists, such as Banksy. This is one of Banksy’s works below.

My question is wouldnt it be nice if the commercial use of art in advertising was openly recognised and acknowledged?
Advertisers tend to rely on the outside world for their inspiration but see no need to admit the fact that they are borrowing from a wider culture. I realise that this is asking a lot but shouldnt advertisers acknowledge these sources?

Posted on by mklang

Copyright Europe

A proposed ammendment in German copyright will remove the small scale copying for private home consumption. If this proposal is accepted all copying of copyrighted material (in Germany) will be illegal. (via Suburbia)

The French Parliament supported a stricter implementation of copyright (nicknamed the Vivendi-Universal Amendment). The change sets the fine for each downloader/filesharer at 38 euro per download and 150 euro per upload. Spreading software “obviously” intended for illegal file sharing can be punishable by three years imprisonment and up to 300 000 euros in fines. (via Free the Mind)

Not a good week for the file sharers…

Posted on by mklang

Art Plagiarising Life

The Modern Museum in Stockholm is being involved in an interesting plagiarism case. The artist Markus Andersson has painted a picture containing an image of Christer Pettersson. This image seems to be based upon a photograph taken by Jonas Lemberg. The photographer has demanded that the picture be removed from its exhibition at the Modern Museum.

The Modern Museum states it will not remove the picture and also defends Markus Andersson by stating he has used his right to quote other works (citaträtten). This right to quote other works has been discussed in Sweden and when it refers to works of art it is legitimate only (1) if it is a newspaper reporting on current events, or (2) that it is carried out in a critical or academic setting. At first glance it would seem that the right to quote does not adequately help unless the artist can claim that he is conducting a critical, academic (whatever that would mean in this situation) debate.

A news article from Dagens Nyheter (in Swedish) contains both the photo and the painting.

What I find very interesting is the fact that the discussion is focused on plagiarism and not copyright violation. Legally the question is one of copyright violation. Therefore the question is one of whether copyright violation becomes the more plagiarism when it involves the higher cultural institutions?

Footnote on the image: “Christer Pettersson (April 23, 1947 – September 29, 2004) was a suspect in the assassination of Olof Palme, the Prime Minister of Sweden. He was tried and acquitted in Swedish court, although Palme’s widow insisted that he was the man she saw commit the crime.” (From Wikipedia)

Posted on by mklang

Public Domain Comic

Law books are traditionally text heavy with little or no pictures. Very rarely including humor or light entertainment. Therefore it is great to see what law professors can do when they want to change this!

The Center for the Public Domain have created a cool comic explaining copyright and the public domain. It takes the form of classic horror comics and describes the adventures (or misadventures) of the hero Akiko, the documentary film maker. I thought it was geat! So go look at “Tales from the Public Domain: Bound by Law” by Aoki, Boyle & Jenkins

Read it online or download it here.

Posted on by mklang

Reading tip

In an chapter entitled “Exploring Creative Commons: A Skeptical View of a Worthy Pursuit” Niva Elkin-Koren writes:

It may well be that there is nothing wrong with copyright per se, but only with the way these rights were exploited by copyright owners in recent years. Changing social practices may have a powerful signalling effect, the importance of which could not be overstated. Yet, establishing a workable and sustainable alternative to the current copyright regime would require enforceable legal measures that would restrain the power of copyright owners to govern their works. To achieve this goal it would not be sufficient to facilitate self-restraint and encourage copyright owners to treat their copyright as guardians, protecting it from any attempt to restrict access and reuse. In the long run, creating an alternative to copyright would require a copyright reform.

The chapter is part of the book The Future of the Public Domain, (P. Bernt Hugenholtz & Lucie Guibault, eds.)
Kluwer Law International, forthcoming 2006. It is also available at SSRN.

Posted on by mklang

Da Vinci Code in Court

Two of the three authors of “The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail” are suing the publisher of Dan Brown’s “The Da Vinci Code” for for breach of UK copyright in the UK editions of the book. Today through a series of takeovers Random House is the publisher of both books.

“The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail” was published in 1982 and claimed that Jesus did not die on the cross, but married Mary Magdalene and had a child by her.

The legal problem is that an idea for a book is not itself protected, but the actual content of a book is. So its not copyright infringement if two books appear with the same idea as long as they dont directly copy or adapt the earlier text.

So both books are about the same thing – not copyright violation. But what about the architecture of the book? It may be plagiarism but is it copyright violation to describe a similar scene in two different books?

Posted on by mklang

Cookyright

Georg at Freedom Bits writes about the proposed copyright for culinaric art – thats food to you and me…

German star-cook Heinz Beck of the restaurant “La Pergola” in Rome asks to introduce a copyright on cooking recipes. His argument is based on cooking also being a creative form of art.

Now Giorgio Assuma considers “culinaric art a serious issue” and asks for a EU directive to introduce a kind of cookyright. One can only marvel at the horrors of a European Cookyright Directive.

Posted on by mklang

Vad säger han?

Det börjar bli lite för enkelt att tycka Bodström har tappat verklighetsuppfattningen. Ett Bodströmcitat frÃ¥n en artikel i DN. Läs dom lÃ¥ngsamt och glöm inte att mannen är din Justitieminister…

Tanken är förstås inte att man ska bugga tidningsredaktioner. Men en tidning är rätt så lätt att starta. Därför behöver vi en särskild bestämmelse. Annars skulle det kunna få till följd att människor som ägnar sig åt människohandel och bedriver en bordell bestämmer sig för att starta en tidning och kalla bordellen för tidningsredaktion för att värja sig mot buggning.

Vad säger han? “kalla bordellen för tidningsredaktion”????? Snälla är vi medborgare sÃ¥ dumma att han inte behöver anstränga sig med att komma med bättre argument?

Posted on by mklang

JEP is back

The return of a scholarly journal…

We are pleased to announce that JEP is back. As of today The Journal of Electronic Publishing (JEP) is back in business with a February 2006 issue, the first in more than three years. The online journal, renowned for its articles analyzing and forecasting the e-publishing industry, has a new home with the University of Michigan University Library Scholarly Publishing Office.

The first new issue includes, amongst others, articles by Bilder “In Google we Trust” and Downes “New Media Economy: Intellectual Property and Cultural Insurrection“.

So what are you waiting for? Get JEP here!

Posted on by mklang