Copyright Protection for Parody Works: A Focus on Photographs and Video Clips on Online Platforms
Main Article Content
Abstract
Recent development in our society leading to in the digital age has resulted in many creative works on online platforms. One of the creative works that is quite popular among other works is “parody work”, especially parody works on photographs and video clips. This article aims to study copyright protection in parody works on photographs and video clips uploaded onto the online platform, with a particular focus on issues such as exception of copyright infringement, copyright ownership and copyright infringement. The study conducts a comparative analysis of legal principles and judicial decisions from Thailand and several foreign countries, namely the United States, Australia, Canada, and France, to explore how their legal frameworks could address these challenge to afford copyright protection to parody works especially those of photographs and video clips on online platforms.
The findings of this study and analysis that parodies can be transformative work but to be qualified as a copyrighted work, the work must not be created by reproduction or adaptation from another copyrighted work without permission. Consequently, parody works, being an adaptation of the original work by its nature, are not qualified as copyrighted works and satirical parodies often infringe on moral right. Both lighthearted and satirical parodies typically constitute copyright infringement under section 27 and section 28 and infringement are not exempt under section 32 paragraph 1 and paragraph 2 (3), as well as section 33 of the Copyright Act, B.E. 2537.
Nonetheless, parody works on the online platform which demonstrate originality, creative effort, and expression of idea should be entitled to protection independently the original work, to result in it does not copyright infringement in part of the content of the original work.
The author personally believes that the Copyright Act, B.E. 2537, lacks adequate provisions for addressing these issues and recommends legal reforms include exempting parody works from copyright infringement, add the definition of “creative work”, providing better protection for derivative and transformative works. This will create proper protection for parody works on online platforms, especially those of photographs and video clips, and will support the freedom of artistic expression of the creator in the digital era..
Article Details

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
-
Any opinions expressed in the CMU Journal of Law and Social Sciences are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the editorial board.
-
The editorial board of the CMU Journal of Law and Social Sciences does not claim copyright. However, proper citation of the source is required.
References
“Constitution of the United States: First Amendment.” Constitution Annotated. Accessed September 20, 2023. https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-1/.
Bulger, Allison. "Parody." LitCharts. Accessed September 2, 2023. https://www.litcharts.com/literary-devices-and-terms/parody.
Collins, Nancy. “Demi’s Big Moment.” Vanity Fair (blog). Accessed January 29, 2023. https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2018/04/demi-moore-cover-story-august-1991.
Condren, Conal, Jessica Milner Davis, Sally McCausland, and Robert Phiddian. “Defining Parody and Satire: Australia Copyright Law and Its New Exception: Part 2 – Advancing Ordinary Definitions.” Media and Arts Law Review 13, no. 4 (December 2008): 411. Accessed September 10, 2023. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/43502448.
EUIPO. “A French court of Appeal looks at the conditions under which a sculpture inspired by Tintin can be considered as a parody under copyright law.” Accessed September 5, 2013. https://euipo.europa.eu/ohimportal/en/web/guest/case-law-article/categories/12808082?p_r_p_resetCur=true&p_r_p_categoryId=12808082.
Everson, Crystal. “Parody vs. satire in copyright law.” Legal Zoom. Accessed September 2, 2023. https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/parody-vs-satire-in-copyright-law.
Film suits. “Naked Gun 33 1/3: The Final Insult.” Accessed January 29, 2023. https://filmsuits.com/naked-gun-33-1-3-the-final-insult/.
Fortunet, Edouard, Sarah Candelibes, Nicolas Andre and Jones Day. “Intellectual Property Transactions in France: Overview.” Thomson Reuters. Accessed September 20, 2023. https://ca.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/6-501-8761?transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default).
Giannopoulou, Alexandra. “Parody in France.” Best Case Scenarios for Copyright (2016): 9. Accessed September 1, 2023. https://www.communia-association.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/report-2-parody.pdf.
Hutcheon, Linda. A Theory of Parody: The Teaching of Twentieth-Century Art Forms. New York: Methuen, 1985.
Kreutzer, Till, and Felix Reda. “The Pastiche in Copyright Law-Towards a European Right to Remix.” Kluwer Copyright (blog). Accessed September 2, 2023. https://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2023/03/13/the-pastiche-in-copyright-law-towards-a-european-right-to-remix/.
Lehrmach. “Mattle v. Waiking Mountain 2003. Trademark. Copyright. Trade Dress. Tarnishment. Case Brief.” Lehrmach (blog). Accessed August 29, 2023. http://lehrmach2.blogspot.com/2017/06/mattel-v-walking-mountain-20003.html.
Lovells, Hogan. “Copyright in France.” Lexology. Accessed August 31, 2023. https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=db4300b2-84aa-4a2a-acc3-e786453798ec.
Major Cineplex. “TALK TO ME.” สืบค้นเมื่อวันที่ 15 กันยายน 2566. https://www.majorcineplex.com/news/talk-to-me-gross-top-five-a24.
Mew Me. “คิดจะจับมือเหมียว ไม่อยากหลอนก่อนสัมผัส ต้องจัด...อาหาร!!.” เฟซบุ๊ก. สืบค้นเมื่อ 15 กันยายน 2566. https://www.facebook.com/MewMeThailand/posts/pfbid0yqxHC7rbbTbVQVGwSyp2grdYs6bGGeNowwhiTgQkXjRUPCN9jzuCKcnGrsfidSqWl.
More, Adv Hemant. “Kinds of Rights.” The Legal Quotient. Accessed September 10, 2023. https://thelegalquotient.com/jurisprudence/kinds-of-rights/2265/.
Roggero, Claudia. “Freedom of panorama in France and Germany.” Dandi (blog). Accessed November 30, 2023, https://www.dandi.media/en/freedom-panorama-france-germany/.
The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. “Travesty.” Britannica. Accessed September 2, 2023. https://www.britannica.com/art/travesty-literature.
United State Copyright Office. “Copyright Registration for Derivative Works.” Accessed September 20, 2023. https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ14.pdf.
Wex Definitions Team. “Parody.” Legal Information Institute. Accessed September 20, 2023. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/parody.
จุมพล ภิญโญสินวัฒน์, และภูมินทร์ บุตรอินทร์. คำอธิบายกฎหมายทรัพย์สินทางปัญญา. พิมพ์ครั้งที่ 1. กรุงเทพมหานคร: โครงการตำราและเอกสารประกอบการสอน คณะนิติศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยธรรมศาสตร์, 2564.
ทีมพากย์กะหล่ำดอก. “Avengers: Endgame รวมพลพ่อบ้านต้านอำนาจเมีย พ่อบ้าน!! รวมพล!! ทีมพากย์กะหล่ำดอก ภูมิใจเสนอ กะหล่ำดอก Trailer!! Avengers: Endgame อเวนเจอร์ส: เผด็จศึก รวมพลพ่อบ้านต้านอำนาจเมีย กะหล่ำดอก...ให้เสียงภาษาไทย!!. ขอขอบคุณ คลิปต้นฉบับจาก Avengers: Endgame Trailer.” เฟซบุ๊ก, สืบค้นเมื่อ 3 กันยายน 2566. https://www.facebook.com/kalumdokvoiceartist/videos/573730453117337/.
ปริญญา ดีผดุง. “ปัญหาการคุ้มครองสิทธิตามกฎหมายลิขสิทธิ์.” การบรรยายโครงการอบรมหลักสูตรพิเศษประกาศนียบัตรกฎหมายทรัพย์สินทางปัญญา รุ่นที่ 3, สำนักอบรมศึกษากฎหมายแห่งเนติบัณฑิตยสภา, กรุงเทพมหานคร, 9 เมษายน ถึง 16 พฤษภาคม 2547. อ้างถึงใน พิศวาส สุคนธพันธ์ และณัฐพงศ์ สุวรรณอินทร์. “การล้อเลียนงานอันมีลิขสิทธิ์กับกฎหมายลิขสิทธิ์ไทย: กรณีศึกษาปัญหาการตีความว่าด้วยการใช้งานที่เป็นธรรม.” วารสารรามคำแหง ฉบับนิติศาสตร์ 9, ฉ.2 (กรกฎาคม-ธันวาคม 2563): 12.
มณฑล อรรถบลยุคล. พระราชบัญญัติลิขสิทธิ์ พ.ศ. 2537 (แก้ไขเพิ่มเติม พ.ศ. 2565) ฉบับอ้างอิง. กรุงเทพฯ: วิญญูชน, 2565.