Defining parody and satire: Australian copyright law and its new exception: Part 2 - Advancing ordinary definitions

Condren, C., Milner Davis, J., McCausland, S. and Phiddian, R. (2008) Defining parody and satire: Australian copyright law and its new exception: Part 2 - Advancing ordinary definitions. Media and Arts Law Review, 13 4: 401-421.

Author Condren, C.
Milner Davis, J.
McCausland, S.
Phiddian, R.
Title Defining parody and satire: Australian copyright law and its new exception: Part 2 - Advancing ordinary definitions
Journal name Media and Arts Law Review
ISSN 1325-1570
Publication date 2008
Sub-type Article (original research)
Volume 13
Issue 4
Start page 401
End page 421
Total pages 21
Editor A. T. Kenyon
Place of publication Melbourne, Australia
Publisher LexisNexis Butterworths
Collection year 2009
Language eng
Subject C1
180115 Intellectual Property Law
220209 History of Ideas
950504 Understanding Europe's Past
970118 Expanding Knowledge in Law and Legal Studies
Formatted abstract
In Part 1 of 'Defining Parody and Satire' we sought to show that, for the purposes of the new exception to infringement of the Copyright Act in ss41A and 103AA (the 'new exception'), it is unsafe to construe parody and satire according either to US law on the matter or to available dictionary definitions. In this part we propose working definitions for parody and satire which, we suggest, are more congruent with both the intention of the Act to protect the free speech of Australian humorists and with the ordinary meanings of the words. There are four categories of artistic practice that the new Australian exceptions would seem designed to protect. The largest two groups combine the two terms: (1) satirical parodies in which copyright material is reused and distorted for the satirical effect of ridiculing that material. These are the staple of many literary, theatrical, video and digital media. We propose a metaphor of the satirical fist of critical intent animating the parodic glove of formal reuse to help comprehend this group particularly. (2) A group of satirical parodies where the target is not the artistic form parodied, but where the parody, for example of a popular song, provides a vehicle for satirical comment of some other person, group, or event. (3) Pure parody - formal play without discernible satirical intent either towards the vehicle text or any other potential target. This is, perhaps, most common these days in the visual arts, where a layering of pre-existing images creates juxtapositions which defy rhetorical purpose; there is also an established tradition of affectionate literary and dramatic parody. (4) Straight or pure satire, which may be independent of parody, but which may also quote its object so that the audience can know what the target is, without distorting the form of that object (text or image) in parodic ways. This category would include the use of excerpts of television broadcasts which became the subject of Australian copyright litigation in the well known 'Panel' case, decided before the introduction of the new exception. We submit that unlicensed use of copyright material in all of these categories should enjoy the protection of the new Austrlaian exception, subject to the issues of 'fairness' and possibly also moral rights in particular instances - a consideration of which is beyond the scope of this article. The definitions of parody and satire we will propose are: Parody: the borrowing from, imitation, or appropriation of a text, or other cultural product or practice, for the purpose of commenting, usually humorously, upon either it or something else; Satire: the critical impulse manifesting itself in some degree of denigration, almost invariably through attempted humour; the artistic results (usually humorous) of expression of such a critical impulse.
Keyword Intellectual property
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Confirmed Code

Version Filter Type
Citation counts: Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Tue, 10 Mar 2009, 17:03:07 EST by Lesley Colling on behalf of Faculty of Arts