Cariou v. Prince (1994)
derivativeness → transformativeness
Cambell vs. Acuff-Rose Music Inc, established that parody, like other commentary and criticism, may claim fair use. "The enquiry focuses on whether the objects of the original creation, or whether and to what extent it is 'transformative,' altering the original with new expression, meaning, or message. The more transformative the new work, the less will be the significance of other factors, like commercialism, that may weigh against a finding of fair use."
"At stake here is not an argument about derivative versus original forms of creativity but instead the observation that this type of curatorial sensibility is one of the hallmarks of digital technology and "remix culture."^1 The incursion of the digital is therefore a crucial factor driving the recombinatory logic of contemporary art since the 1990s: its cut-and-paste methods of research, its accumulative techniques of composition, and its numerous circuits of distribution."
– Claire Bishop, Reformatting, pg. 52
1) Lawrence Lessig, "Remix: Making Art and Commerce Thrive in the Hybrid Economy. Lessig's persuasive argument against current copyright law differentiates what he calls RO ("read only") culture, characteristics of most of the 20th c, from RW ("read/write") culture, which has been facilitated by digital technology and is now the most commonplace form of creativity for a younger generation.
"At least since Duchamp, it has been the case that selecting an artwork is the same as creating an artwork... The creative act has become the act of selection."
– Boris Groys, Art Power, "Multiple Authorship", p.93
"[Harold Szeemann's Documenta 5: Museen von Kunstlern, 1972] was first attempt to curate artists as curators. [...] The artist here is a curator, in the sense of "caring for" (curare) objects..."
– Claire Bishop, Reformatting, p51