2017/2 - Copyright Law

Browsing 2017/2 - Copyright Law by Subject "Copyright"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Article
    Referencing in Academia. Videoessay, Mashup, Copyright
    Voigts, Eckart; Marshfield, Katerina (2017) , S. 113-134
    Eckart Voigts and Katerina Marshfield focus on videographic essays as a genuine form of scientific or intellectual performance. They report from a student project entitled “Producing and Podcasting Film Analytical Audio Commentaries” and characterise these productions as a new form of learning and a possibility to appropriate a certain degree of multiliteracy. Especially mashups allow for mixing texts, footage, images, and sounds without having to create substantial semiotic expressions. Mashups and videographic essays are becoming increasingly important as a multi-channel cultural technique for constituting, exchanging, and presenting meanings, ideas, and materials, both for establishing amateur media studies as well as for emerging professional and academic approaches. In their contribution, they discuss the lack of established criteria for such kind of audio-visual student work as well as the lack of clarity regarding copyright issues when referencing audio-visual material.
  • Article
    Transformative Works and German Copyright Law as Matters of Boundary Work
    Kempfert, Kamila; Reißmann, Wolfgang (2017) , S. 65-91
    Drawing on the basic assumptions and mechanisms of German Copyright law and the main problems concerning transformative works, Kamila Kempfert and Wolfgang Reißmann introduce “boundary work” as a praxeological perspective to grasp translations and transformations of copyright law within different social worlds. Using the example of fan fiction practices and the lawsuit of “Metall auf Metall“, they attempt to approach law-in-practice and demonstrate different modes and forms of boundary work. In the case of fan fiction authors, boundary work consists of (unconsciously) translating elements of basic assumptions of copyright law to their own works as well as distancing themselves from commercial exploitation, while simultaneously almost ignoring the factual legal situation. In the “Metall auf Metall” lawsuit, boundary work was performed by changing the balance between ancillary copyright law and artistic freedom and by emphasizing commercial effects as important evaluation criteria. The different boundary works partly converge, partly they are contradictious.