Daniel writes "http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?story Id=4582190I wonder if this could have been defended under the parody exemption?"
Well, it didn't "bite the copyright dust," because no legal challenge was ever made.
The artist apparently knew there could be a challenge since last June..see this Salon articlesalon.com>... but once he was challenged he just gave up. Boo!
Like the JibJab people this past election season, he should have contacted EFF or some other group to represent him, but instead let the "threat" of lawyers win.
There are a number of considerations such as
--does this work use the parodic device of contrast and juxtaposition to comment on the original?
--do other people view the work as a parody even if the original artist does not?
--does this work harm the market for the original?
--is it a transformative work?
--is there a noncommercial nature of the work?
The copyright owner of the movie The Wizard of Oz is threatening to sue Pink Floyd.
Get LISNews via email! Enter Your Email Address: