Oh so criminal by Keir Smith. I watched this 5 times! In particular, I found the sampling of music complex, clever and highly effective. The film is an interesting and attention grabbing approach as a response to Australia's recent (2005) examination of copyright exceptions. It definitely provokes thought and discussion about copyright and issues associated.
Apparently this work is "illegal". However, assuming Australian copyright law is similar to NZ, I think he can safely get away with it:
Looking at "fair use":
- the purpose of this work is NOT for commercial gain
- the work is compiled as a 'criticism' which is apparently allowed under 'fair dealing' - the POINT of the work is about copyright and exceptions
- he has copied EXPLICITLY and is not claiming authenticity - in fact he uses clear text statements acknowledging the infringements he is making and inviting people to contest
- the segments he has copied are all very short (likely to fall within the proportions allowed by the act)
- I doubt the work has effect on the market value of any of the copied material - none of the material is degraded in anyway (none that I can detect)
- As for price - well that point defeats the purpose of the film in the first place. If he had purchased the rights to use the material then the point of the film would no longer be valid!
It is a tricky one. Peculiar and awkward to rule judgment largely because of the nature of the idea expressed in Keir's work - that being about copyright itself.
Copyright law is intended to protect the EXPRESSION of ideas. Keir Smith is actually EXPRESSING quite a unique idea, totally separate from the material he has copied to make up his film. The content of the copied material, i.e. the expressions of other people's ideas, in this work is actually COMPLETELY irrelevant to Keir's idea... so therefore, I do not consider this film illegal.
The digital age brings with it a number of associated copyright issues that need to be addressed or accommodated. I agree with both suggestions made in the written statement (go to link). Firstly, there is a need for a degree of open-endedness and assessment of each case specifically; as in this example, copyright issues are not always particularly black and white and a closer more careful assessment may be required (downside - this could be costly in both $ and time). Secondly, I also agree that some of the specific exceptions could be reviewed and amended to become more appropriate to copying issues of the digital age.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment