Artistic Appropriation, Copyright and Creativity Literature review

Artistic Appropriation, Copyright and Creativity - Literature review Example Collage is a type of appropriation. Different parts of copyrighted works are incorporated in a random manner to form a totally different and new work not previously existed. Aim This literature review aims to explore the different scholars’ views in the favor of the statement that modern scope of copyright restricts the culture of collage and visual arts appropriation as well as the views of scholars against this notion. Objectives 1. What is the concept of appropriation? 2. What is the modern interpretation of a copyright? 3. What is the impact of copyright on the creativity and advancement of artistic knowledge? 4. How practice of appropriation can survive in the technological age? 5. What are the alternative approaches to use copyrighted works without resorting to an infringement? 6. What works are appropriated and are considered enforceable in the courts of law? 7. Are there any theories for copyright and fair use? 8. Is there any case law available related to appropriatio n and copyrights? 9. Who are the authors in favor of the statement and against it? Literature Review Lankford (2011) explored the history of the practice of appropriating visual arts. He argued that this practice dates back to Greeks period who invented the technique of appropriation. ... The author further observed that as a result, the artist freely appropriated other works to form a collage work (Cohen, 2011; p.89). The modern copyright law has its roots in the Statute of Anne of 1710 that recognized author rights in a certain but limited manner (Pedley, 2005). Hampel (1992) argued in the favour of artist’s appropriation. He postulated that the appropriation does not deprive the copyright holders of their copyrights and any of their financial benefits. Therefore, Hampel (1992) required that they should be free to use the other artist’s works without seeking authorization or licensing. Furthermore, Meyers (2006) highlighted that the copyrights law discourages the artists to expand and innovate in their works. The author forcefully disagreed with the licensing and authorization requirements to initiate an appropriation of visual arts, which drags on the time frame for its completion. Davies (2010) an advocate of copyright law provides that the term copy right literally means the right to copy. He postulated that the appropriation of visual arts in the form of a collage work is a copyrightable subject matter as it is an expression in physical form instead of a mere idea that has no physical form for claiming intellectual property rights over it. He provided that when a work is applied for copyright registration, the Intellectual Property Office of United Kingdom examines the work in terms of its originality, degree of labour, skill or judgement exhibited by the work. Davies (2010) provided that the work has to be original and should not be similar to others copyrighted work otherwise it will become an infringement of other’s copyright. The