Rethinking the Authorship of Contemporary Art in Copyright Law: Chance·Indeterminacy Music as a Case Study

{"title":"Rethinking the Authorship of Contemporary Art in Copyright Law: Chance·Indeterminacy Music as a Case Study","authors":"","doi":"10.30582/kdps.2023.36.1.55","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study focuses on the concept of the ‘author’ in copyright law, particularly in the context of chance and indeterminacy music, where the composer intentionally excludes their authorship from the work. In copyright law, ‘creation’, required to become an author is generally understood as the act of “concretizing a particular idea or emotion into a creative external expression.” Applying this concept to chance and indeterminacy music, it caused the legal problem of denying the work’s copyrightability or destabilizing the traditional status of the author. Re-examining this through the theory of copyright justification, it was pointed out that the legal problem cannot be merged with the justification of the copyright system. Fundamentally, the limitation of the “idea-expression dichotomy” principle, a premise to the concept of the creator, was identified. Raising doubts as to whether it is truly valid for this principle to play a major role in the concept of the creator, this study proposed the application of Balganesh’s copyrightable causation theory as an alternative, and concluded that a normative judgment criterion must be used to determine whether a work qualifies as “creation” in order for law and art to be harmonized.","PeriodicalId":350441,"journal":{"name":"Korea Copyright Commission","volume":"43 1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korea Copyright Commission","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30582/kdps.2023.36.1.55","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study focuses on the concept of the ‘author’ in copyright law, particularly in the context of chance and indeterminacy music, where the composer intentionally excludes their authorship from the work. In copyright law, ‘creation’, required to become an author is generally understood as the act of “concretizing a particular idea or emotion into a creative external expression.” Applying this concept to chance and indeterminacy music, it caused the legal problem of denying the work’s copyrightability or destabilizing the traditional status of the author. Re-examining this through the theory of copyright justification, it was pointed out that the legal problem cannot be merged with the justification of the copyright system. Fundamentally, the limitation of the “idea-expression dichotomy” principle, a premise to the concept of the creator, was identified. Raising doubts as to whether it is truly valid for this principle to play a major role in the concept of the creator, this study proposed the application of Balganesh’s copyrightable causation theory as an alternative, and concluded that a normative judgment criterion must be used to determine whether a work qualifies as “creation” in order for law and art to be harmonized.
著作权法对当代艺术作者身份的再思考——以《偶然·不确定性音乐》为例
本研究侧重于版权法中“作者”的概念,特别是在偶然性和不确定性音乐的背景下,作曲家故意将其作者身份排除在作品之外。在版权法中,成为作者所需的“创作”通常被理解为“将特定的想法或情感具体化为创造性的外部表达”的行为。将这一概念应用于偶然性和不确定性音乐,就会产生否认作品的版权性或破坏作者传统地位的法律问题。通过著作权正当性理论重新审视这一问题,指出法律问题不能与著作权制度正当性混为一谈。从根本上确定了创造者概念的前提——“思想-表达二分法”原则的局限性。对于这一原则在创作者概念中发挥主要作用是否真的有效提出质疑,本研究提出将Balganesh的版权因果关系理论作为一种替代,并得出结论,必须使用规范的判断标准来确定作品是否符合“创作”的条件,以使法律与艺术协调一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信