Ignoring the facts that may claim the photograph in the Fjord advertisement is not sufficiently original and that there is not a substantial similarity between the photograph and sculpture, we can assume that Stilton’s artwork is protected under the fair use defense after looking at its four factors.
The fair use defense allows a defendant to make limited use of the copyrighted work of another. In this case, Stilton is making limited use of Fjord’s print advertisement through her sculpture. Fair use can be allowed to a number of non-exhaustive sources, including criticism (which the sculpture, which expresses contempt for the Fjord advertisement, falls under). To award the fair use defense, the court doesn’t look at whether the defendant paid
…show more content…
In this case, Stilton’s artwork is commercial since she sold it to a museum for $750,000. While a commercial use of copyrighted material is harder to defend, Stilton passes the first fair use factor because her work is transformative. Her work doesn’t simply copy down the Fjord advertisement. Her sculpture transforms it dramatically. The blue Fjord Expire is now a red and blue Chevrolet and the stuffed pink Pegasus is now a sculpture of a brown horse with wings. Not only where the details transformed, but the message as well. Fjord’s advertisement, created by the advertisement agency Marx-Engles-Marcuse, was created to advertise its car and sell its products. Stilton’s work is a criticism on the advertisement and an artistic representation on how classical themes, longstanding myths and beliefs could triumph over the superficiality of consumer culture, and with a message that mocks the advertisement’s …show more content…
It asks if the defendant needed to use the copyrighted material to illustrate the point they were making, and the answer is yes. As stated above, the message and criticism relayed through Stilton’s sculpture wouldn’t have been as effective if she had criticized a lesser-known advertisement or copyrighted material. The simplified version also asks if the defendant uses only as much as needed to make the point, and the answer is once again yes. Stilton had to use enough of the advertisement for her audience to recall the original, but all in all her work was transformative and stands on its own. Lastly, the simplified fair use asks whether the connection between the material the defendant used and the point they’re making is clear to the average person without further explanation. The answer to this would be yes. Both the Fjord advertisement and the work of Stilton are extremely well-known and famous, which lets us assume that the average person would make the connection between the advertisement and the sculpture’s
Patterson, Lyman Ray. "Statute of Anne: Copyright Misconstrued, The."Harv. J. on Legis. 3 (1965): 223.
The advertisement for Grolsch beer, taken from the May 28, 1998 issue of Rolling Stone features Vincent Van Gogh’s Self-portrait. Grolsch beer uses three important components of argument (ethos, pathos, logos) to support their claim. However, logos is the most important because the audience must be able to logically interpret the ad. The advertisement connects with the audience by appealing to the reader’s logic of art history, while establishing a reputation of quality and credibility with the Grolsch name.
Issue: The Lawrence Wilson Art Gallery is proposing an exhibition for the Perth International Art Festival. An artwork is being proposed that pushes ethical boundaries. This said artwork is ‘Helena’ by Marco Evaristti. Imagine you are a member of a UWA human or animal ethics committee and have to decide whether the artwork can be exhibited at UWA.
One of my art professors told the class about Richard Prince, who is a collage artist. He was sued by the photographer Patrick Cariou. Prince took Cariou’s photo and drew on them or pieced them together with other images to create his works. Some pieces were major transformation and other were minimal. Some of the artwork was deemed as falling under fair use while others were determined to be copyright infringement.
Congress passed the Copyright Act of 1976 to protect individuals and organizations under the fair use doctrine from being held liable for copyright infringement. A natural health organization with a stated goal of protecting consumers from destructive biochemical medication has produced a parodic advertisement that is critical of a rival pharmaceutical company. Under the fair use doctrine does the Copyright Act of 1976 protect health companies from producing parodic advertisements that criticize the negative effects of a pharmaceutical brand’s product?
Comparing different works of art from one artist can help a person gain a better understanding of an artist and the purpose of their artwork. An artist’s works of art usually have similarities as well as differences when compared together. Sandy Skoglund is a photographer that stages entire rooms to create a scene for her photographs. Skoglund uses painting, sculpture, and photography to create her artwork. Due to the fact that most of her photographs are created in similar ways, almost all of her photographs have similar components represented throughout the photographs. Differences can be found in her artwork as well. Skoglund’s Revenge of The Goldfish, 1981 (Figure 1), is a popular work of art that is represented at the Akron Art Museum
The video describes how our society may not even care about the product being advertised, but we still read the billboard or watch the commercial. Also mentioned was the use of colors in a commercial, the marketing effects in politics, and even market research obtained by studying different cults. Frontline takes an in-depth look at the multibillion-dollar “persuasion industries” of advertising and how this rhetoric affects everyone. So whether this is in the form of a television commercial or a billboard, pathos, logos, and ethos can be found in all advertisements.
enough for it to be classed as art? To understand this we have to look
Copyright law confers upon the owner of the work a bundle of exclusive rights in respect of the reproduction of the work and other acts which enables the owner to get financial benefits by exercising such rights. If any of these acts relating to the work is carried out by a person other than the owner without a license from the owner or a competent authority under the act, it constitutes infringement of copyright in the work. Since copyright is granted only for a limited period, there will be no infringement if the reproduction of the work or other acts concerned is carried out after the term of copyright is expired. Accordingly, the type of acts which will constitute infringement will also depend upon the nature of the work. The exclusive rights granted under the act extend also to a translation or adaptation of the work or to substantial part thereof. Thus copyright will be infringed if a substantial part of the work is reproduced. What amounts to a substantial part of the work will depend upon the circumstances of the case.
As Shields said, he believes in copyright, but he also believes in fair use. The main purpose behind the Copyright Act of 1976 was to allow Congress to address issues in American copyright law that had arisen in reference to the technological and societal changes. The last major changes happened in 1909, making the 1976 act an important revision because of the technology advance. Another reason was to insure authors that their work would be protected by the government. The act wanted to promote the intellectual and artistic activity for the good of the society as a whole. Therefore, the act was created in purpose of helping the authors out and to encourage others to become writers. This act also gave Congress permission to regulate applications and use enforcement. The act allows them to see more of what was going on and it let them be more in control. With this act a “fixed” work could now be accessible, meaning instead of going public domain, they just had to make sure the work could be found in one media source. This was making it easier for the authors that didn’t want their work out in the media world, but still wanted some credit. The ultimate goal
...ot so successful when they attempt to do it. Although to some artists, copyright isn’t an issue. But how much changes do we have to make to appropriate an art piece, for it to be considered complying with the copyright law. The copyright law protects an artist’s exclusive right to reproduce or authorize others to reproduce the artist’s work. But the copyright law isn’t as strict as we look at it to be because there isn’t such a thing as international copyright law because in different countries, there are different agreements on what a copyright law should be about.
McFall, E. (2004). Advertising: A Cultural Economy, London: Sage, Page 3, Page 110, Page 111
The first image I have chosen to discuss is a smoking advert from the 1950’s. It features John Wayne smoking a Camel cigarette. It is a commercial advert, because it is trying to sell a product. Conversely, the advert that I will be comparing with is an advocacy advert, because it is trying to persuade you not to smoke. It is giving you advice about an activity which is considered controversial. It is an advert from ‘Alghanim Medical services 2000’. It uses a very formal font and adds formal authenticity.
In the case of McDonald’s advertising the texts used are effective. They have contributed in attracting targeted clients to the company. The wordings are aesthetically pleasing and successful at getting the consumers to buy the product. The phrase ‘I’m Lovin’ it’ which is used in one the advertisements, indicates a piece of advertising that is particularly striking. According to Cross “propagandas is simply a means of persuasion”, which they have applied that to their place because it is evidently an artistic expression, yet is trying to sell something to the consumers.(Cross,149) The company has had to face are numerous. The company has been involved in quite a number of lawsuits, most of which entail trademark disputes. MacDonald’s has threatened many food production industries with legal action unless the companies drop their trading name.
“The average family is bombarded with 1,100 advertisements per day … people only remembered three or four of them”. Fiske’s uses an example of kids singing Razzmatazz a jingle for brand of tights at a woman in a mini skirt. This displayed to the reader that people are not mindless consumers; they modify the commodity for their use. He rejects that the audiences are helpless subjects of unconscious consumerism. In contrast to McDonald’s, Fiske’s quoted “they were using the ads for their own cheeky resistive subculture” he added. He believed that instead of being submissive they twisted the ad into their own take on popular culture (Fiske, 1989, p. 31)