This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
copyright infringement disputes, such as bootleg movies or MP3s, as the up-cycler is not really making a copy of the original work. This does not mean that the up-cycler has free rein. Rather, that up-cycling could constitute the creation of a “derivative work” - which, as the term implies, is a work deriving from some other person’s work.

Under the Act, derivative works fall under the category of “adaptations”. Section 21 of the Act states that, making adaptations of works is restricted by copyright. However, this section only applies to literary, musical and dramatic works. Artistic works are not mentioned at all. By implication, the Act does not explicitly prohibit adapting artistic works.

58 | ukhandmade | Summer 2010

Does this mean that the up-cycler is safe? It depends on how much of the copyright work is taken. Imitating an artistic work may not infringe copyright, but actually copying or using that artistic work is likely to involve the reproduction of the work (or a substantial part), if not also infringe the creator’s exclusive right to show or communicate the work.

Substantial Part - In UK copyright law, people are permitted to use copyright works so long as they use less than a “substantial part” of the copyright work. The use of a copyright work in an upcycling project - such as a collage - is highly likely to constitute a “substantial part”, especially as courts have regarded relatively small portions as “substantial”. Indeed, the portion in question need only be “qualitatively”

significant, rather than quantitatively significant.

The wholesale use of an artistic work, as protected by the Act, in an up-cycling project is very likely to constitute the taking of a “substantial” part. The up-cyclers who use copyright materials in their pieces are, therefore, likely to be involved in copyright infringement.

Fair Dealing - One possible defence is to claim fair dealing, which (under the name “fair use”) is particularly significant in US law, where free speech and freedom of expression are legally recognised principles. In the UK, however, fair dealing is much harder to establish, as it is limited to only a few categories, such as research and private study, or criticism and review. It is unlikely Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126
Produced with Yudu - www.yudu.com