지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Parody can contribute to development of culture and related industries, stimulating people to make use of existing works. However, it can also create conflicts over copyright infringement. The issue of concern is whether the copyright law permits a parodist to change original works without the permission of an author.
The U.S. courts have adjudicated upon cases of copyright infringement for parody by invoking the fair use principle that permits people to use existing works freely without permission of the copyright owners. In Korea, copyright infringement for parody has been related to the right of integrity of authorship and the legal principle of quotation. However, a case of copyright infringement for parody had been adjudicated by using legal standards similar to the U.S. fair use principle. In terms of the facts and the legal principles, the judgment of the Korean court on the case of Seo Tai-Ji, a Korean musician, is similar to the judgment of the U.S. federal court on the Campbell case.
Various theories about copyright infringement for parody have been proposed. One of them is that the newly created works using parody may not avoid disputes related to copyright infringement under the current copyright law. A different opinion holds that it may be possible to interpret the copyright law with reference to the U.S. fair use principle.
Parody has been used as a critical expression technique in almost all areas including literature, movies, plays, advertisement and politics. It is necessary to protect parody under the copyright law when it contributes to improvement of cultural industries. However, we also need to contemplate the legal protection of parody, because very extensive latitude could weaken motivation for creation. If parodists completely newly interpret or critically adapt original works with their own values, parody can be considered a new creative work separated from the original work. Parody can contribute to the improvement of cultural industries when a parodied work has its own values as a newly created work and is fairly used by people.
The Korean copyright act sets a provision related to the fair use of copyrighted works, and there is a precedent established by which to consider various facts and judge whether to permit a parody. So it is possible to protect parody under the interpretation of Korean law with reference to the U.S. fair use principle. Ultimately, it is necessary to establish legislative measures to protect parody which is acknowledged a creative work.
The U.S. courts have adjudicated upon cases of copyright infringement for parody by invoking the fair use principle that permits people to use existing works freely without permission of the copyright owners. In Korea, copyright infringement for parody has been related to the right of integrity of authorship and the legal principle of quotation. However, a case of copyright infringement for parody had been adjudicated by using legal standards similar to the U.S. fair use principle. In terms of the facts and the legal principles, the judgment of the Korean court on the case of Seo Tai-Ji, a Korean musician, is similar to the judgment of the U.S. federal court on the Campbell case.
Various theories about copyright infringement for parody have been proposed. One of them is that the newly created works using parody may not avoid disputes related to copyright infringement under the current copyright law. A different opinion holds that it may be possible to interpret the copyright law with reference to the U.S. fair use principle.
Parody has been used as a critical expression technique in almost all areas including literature, movies, plays, advertisement and politics. It is necessary to protect parody under the copyright law when it contributes to improvement of cultural industries. However, we also need to contemplate the legal protection of parody, because very extensive latitude could weaken motivation for creation. If parodists completely newly interpret or critically adapt original works with their own values, parody can be considered a new creative work separated from the original work. Parody can contribute to the improvement of cultural industries when a parodied work has its own values as a newly created work and is fairly used by people.
The Korean copyright act sets a provision related to the fair use of copyrighted works, and there is a precedent established by which to consider various facts and judge whether to permit a parody. So it is possible to protect parody under the interpretation of Korean law with reference to the U.S. fair use principle. Ultimately, it is necessary to establish legislative measures to protect parody which is acknowledged a creative work.
목차
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 패러디의 유형과 실례
Ⅲ. 패러디의 저작권 침해 여부
Ⅳ. 결론
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (30)
참고문헌 신청
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
저작권법상 패러디의 공정이용 항변에 관한 고찰
법과정책
2017 .01
-
현행 저작권법상 패러디 항변의 문제점
콘텐츠재산연구
2011 .11
-
아동 문학에서의 패러디(Parody)의 교육적 활용
유아교육학논집
1997 .12
-
저작권법상 패러디에 관한 일 고찰
동아법학
2012 .11
-
Political parody and its limitation
언론과법
2004 .06
-
저작권의 침해 및 구제
경영법률
2007 .01
-
저작권침해의 구제에 관한 연구
법학연구
2005 .10
-
일본판 공정이용조항의 도입 논의
경영법률
2011 .01
-
교육정보화를 위한 저작권법의 과제 -미국, 일본, 독일 저작권법상의 교육관련 규정을 중심으로-
法學論文集
2009 .01
-
P2P와 저작권 보호
법학연구
2002 .12
-
패러디 글쓰기의 서사 전략과 발상의 전환
교양학연구
2020 .07
-
프랑스에서의 상표패러디 문제에 관한 연구 - 판례를 중심으로 -
원광법학
2008 .01
-
표현의 자유와 저작권
경영법률
2008 .01
-
P2P 방식의 파일교환에 있어서 인터넷 서비스 제공자의 著作權 侵害 責任
인터넷전자상거래연구
2006 .12
-
전자출판 저작물의 적정보호 수준 : 법적, 경제학적 분석을 중심으로
한국언론학보
2000 .07
-
상표패러디의 법적위상과 그 허용기준에 관한 비교법적 고찰
비교사법
2019 .08
-
인터넷上의 著作權保護 및 著作權法 제25조의 問題點
법학연구
2008 .02
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2013-360-000498722