If some remixes and mashups should be legal, even using copyrighted works, can we define what’s ‘remix’ and what’s just copying? Does remix involve fundamental changes in form, in length, in meaning or something else? If you had to offer a legal boundary between a legitimate remix, and an authorised copy, could you? Should the intention of a remixed work matter? For example, in the US, ‘fair use’ means that political expression is largely protected, even using material under full copyright. Australia, however, doesn’t recognise the same right of political expression. Do you think intention matters (and if so, how do you ‘prove’ the intent of a piece of media)?
Can “remix” be defined separate to copying? Yes, I think it can, or at least copying can be defined as different to a remix. Continue reading