CMU School of Drama

Wednesday, May 03, 2017

Parody Protection For Fair Use Is Important: Taiwanese Man Faces Jail Time Over Parody Videos Of Movies

Techdirt: Because we talk so much about fair use here, we often likewise find ourselves talking about parody. Parody is one of the forms of content protected under fair use, and that protection is responsible for the availability of a great deal of great content. Parody tends to be equal parts humor and commentary and enjoys a long history of important speech here in America.


Simone Schneeberg said...

I find it interesting that the argument against AmoGood's videos was not over source material but over content. I'm not surprised that the focus is on content, but I do find it interesting that there really doesn't seem to be any charge against pirating the film in any way for his videos. I understand that the reason film studios and filmmakers are upset is because they are worried about reputation and sales , but one would think they they would use pirating as a more concrete way of fighting against the kind of publicity that comes with parody that they do not want. Without the protection of parody by law, the case doesn't need to be made as strongly for pirating - the companies can still have an effect on AmoGood because of his content - but one would think that it would be part of the conflict nonetheless. I agree that it's important to protect parody for it's ability to make people laugh and think through commentary, but i think people have to be careful so they don't start defending things that piss off producers that are genuinely offensive.

Helena Hewitt said...

I have never seen AmoGood’s work, but I am a big fan of CinamaSins, who, as the article points out, do a similar thing for American audiences. In America, obviously, there is protection for this type of content. I found it interesting that, although the studios might have a more legitimate (at least in my eyes) claim against AmoGood in terms of his downloading his source material illegally, they have chosen to ignore that aspect of the case and focus on the complaint which many watching this story unfold might find unreasonable, that AmoGood’s work is illegal and does not fall under fair use because it is disrespectful. The studios seem to think that AmoGood is attacking their reputation and that of their filmmaker’s and furthermore, that his work is making people less inclined to see their movies. I am curious whether or not they have any data to back up that latter claim because, for myself personally, depending on the content, watching a CinemaSins video has occasionally been the reason I have either become whether of a movie I want to see or decided to watch a movie I wouldn’t otherwise.