header-logo header-logo

Parody, but only if the judge is laughing

09 October 2014
Issue: 7625 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Lawyers have predicted a rise in copyright disputes as new rules on parody came into force this month.

From 1 October, parodies of copyright-protected work are exempt from legal action. Paul Joseph, RPC partner, said: “Creative works that make the zeitgeist like Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, and Breaking Bad are likely to be a hugely popular source of further parody.”

Joseph predicts an increase in disputes in the short term as content owners test the limits of “parody”. “A key requirement for a publisher to claim that the parody exception protects their use of someone else’s copyright is that the new work is funny.

This means that UK judges will be asked to decide whether new creative arts are funny. If the judge isn’t laughing, the creator of the new work may end up on the losing side of a copyright infringement case.”

Issue: 7625 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll