EU judges rule on what is allowed to be considered as political parody


Locutus
#1


Flemish cartoon Suske en Wiske


EU courts rule against a political parody using well-known Belgian cartoon characters to make a point about public spending on immigrants

European Union judges have ruled that parody is not acceptable when it goes beyond "an expression of humour or mockery" and contains a “discriminatory message.”

EU courts, not known for a sense of humour, have made a judgement under European copyright law after a far-Right Belgian party used a parody of cult comic characters to make a political point about immigration.

“If a parody conveys a discriminatory message, a person holding rights in the parodied work may demand that that work should not be associated with that message,” said the European Court of Justice.

Three years ago, a member of the Vlaams Belang, a Flemish anti-immigration party, handed out calendars with a cover page based Suske en Wiske, Spike and Suzy, cartoon characters that have been as famous as Herge's Tintin in Belgium for almost 70 years.

The far-Right parody took a Suske en Wiske book cover, the “Wild Benefactor,” showing a character scattering coins from a helicopter to the delight of people on the street, to depict the mayor of Ghent throwing money to Muslims wearing burkas and Arabic looking turbaned men.

Several heirs to Willy Vandersteen, the creator of the comics, and other holders of the rights to the cartoon characters brought a breach of copyright action against Vlaams Belang, which claimed an exception under rules allowing political caricature and parody.

In a ruling for the Belgian courts, EU judges declared freedom of expression did not override copyright when being used for politics aimed at discriminating against groups of people.

“If a parody conveys a discriminatory message (for example, by replacing the original characters with people wearing veils and people of colour), the holders of the rights to the work parodied have, in principle, a legitimate interest in ensuring that their work is not associated with such a message,” said the EU court... (external - login to view)

Blazing Cat Fur: EU judges rule on what is allowed to be considered as political parody (external - login to view)

EU judges rule on what is allowed to be considered as political parody - Telegraph (external - login to view)
 
taxslave
No Party Affiliation
#2
More proof the PC crowd has no sense.
 
Blackleaf
#3
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

More proof the PC crowd has no sense.


It's not necessarily PC.

Just like its attempts to ban "bent" bananas 20 years ago, and now its more recent attempts to ban powerful vacuum cleaners in order to "save energy", which will leave the EUSSR's 506 million people with crappy, weak vacuum cleaners which will not save energy because people will have to use them for longer in order for them to suck up all the dust properly, this is just yet another power grab for the EUSSR. It's not interested in "saving energy" or banning cartoons because they contain "discriminatory messages". It just wants to keep grabbing more and more power in all aspects of the EUSSR citizens' lives.

I'll be voting Ukip in the 2015 General Election as part of my demand for Britain to secede from the EUSSR.
 
taxslave
No Party Affiliation
#4
Probably a smart move on Brittain's part. EU has become little more than a giant money sucking bureaucracy. Too bad really since the basic concept is good.
 
Blackleaf
#5
If Scotland becomes independent on 24th March 2016 and waits in the queue to join the EU as a brand new Member State I'll laugh my head off should the people of Britain vote to leave the EU in the 2017 referendum. Just as Scotland joins that sclerotic, sinking, declining organisation and makes itself even more irrelevant on the world stage (it would have already made itself irrelevant by deciding to leave the most successful nation the world has ever known to make itself a tiny country with an economy the size of the West Midlands) Britain would just be LEAVING the EU and becoming, once more, a sovereign, independent state ruled by elected Britons rather than unelected foreigners (and Scotland will not be an independent nation state. It would merely have swapped London rule for Brussels rule, as as the Republic of Ireland has done).

Britain would boom as a fully sovereign state once more, whereas Scotland will find itself as a mere EU region with no influence whatsoever in the world and outvoted in the EUSSR Parliament by countries like Czech Republic.

Bloody hilarious....
 

Similar Threads

no new posts