Tales from the Public Domain: Bound By Law? Trapped in a Struggle She Didn't Understand
Authored by Keith Aoki, James Boyle, and Jennifer Jenkins
This blog post is some thoughts I had after reading this comic. I have to admit I still do not completely understand the rules and regulations of copyright, appropriation, and Public Domain. For that I think I would have to stop reading comics and read some law text books...
The topic of fair use, copy right, and appropriation in the context of art is pretty foreign to me, so this article/comic book was very informative. I also loved that this information was presented in a comic rather that a dull textbook reading students are used to suffering through. While I was a fan of this comic, the topic does not seem completely cleared up. Fair use is a great idea because like the comic said if everything was controlled and copy righted, then creativity could not exist.
Personally, I have a pretty pessimistic view of corporate intuitions, I worry that what some see as fair use they will make a case against that artist. Then you are at the will of what a judge deems fair or not. I don’t have much confidence that the little guy will be dealt justice when fighting these corporate monsters. The story that comes to mind about a person taking on a major corporation was a couple of years ago when the comedian Nathan Fielder opened “Dumb Starbucks” as a part of his television show Nathan for You.
This story got a lot of buzz because people did not know if this attack on a brand that most people are aware about was in violation of copyright or under parody law. Luckily there was not legal action taken because this was considered a parody but Starbuck did consider looking into its own copyright to protect their brand from future insistences like this. This small comedy central show changed how a major company thought about protecting its name.
With an increase of art being posted online, there are positives and negatives to this new platform. This digital art can be seen by a much larger audience that if it was in one place to be viewed. However, with more people being able to see the art, there is a chance that it could be stolen. With the internet, in just a couple of clicks, people can remake your original idea or completely steal in the form of piracy. Trying to eliminate piracy is something I am really big on, and it is so frustrating when I hear my friends talk about the new movie they saw on their laptop before it has even come out in theaters. As a film studies minor I was thinking mainly with film in mind but there are all kinds of art that can be stolen off the internet. My cousin actual had a picture of hers taken from her social media account that a local news station used in one of their stories. This is an example that the news took advantage of their access to free content use through social media as long as they gave credit.
One of my favorite parts about watching a film is when you see references in the scenes or form from a different film. Seth MacFarlane’s Family Guy is notorious for referencing other pieces of art in the half an hour episodes. Just the other night I was watching an episode where they were referencing the Hitchcock classic, North by Northwest.
They even portrayed the iconic plane running down Roger Thornhill, with Peter Griffin being run down. Many of this shows episodes are not just inspired by other movies and television but they directly reference where they are getting this parody content.
Some of Family Guy’s most famous episodes involve their spin on fanboy’s favorite films Star Wars.
With many of my examples involving social media or the film medium, appropriation is in no way a new concept. There are so many examples throughout history of artists using others concepts to create a work of art of their own. Think of how many rederings of the Last Supper there has been, or Mona Lisa. If you'd like to see a few more examples here is a link to an article of 10 Famous Artworks Inspired by Other Famous Artworks. All in all, the idea of fair use still concerns me due to my personal pessimism, and confusion on exactly what is legal but I appreciate the concept and understand the importance and necessity.