「장소특정적 미술」에 대한 동일성유지권
The Right of Integrity on Site-specific Art
2
조회
0
다운로드
5
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Art has continuously evolved and site-specific art is one product during this process. Art is site-specific, where the surrounding environment or its location plays an integral role in the meaning and interpretation of the work. Since site-specific art is designed and arranged for particular locations,removal from a specific location arguably mutilates or destroys the integrity of the work. This article will explores the protection scope and content of site-specific art in the context of moral right, specifically the right of integrity and analyze the relevant provisions of Korean Copyright Act,focusing the problems in Phillips v. Pembroke Real Estate, Inc., which raised the public awareness in the U.S.. Part II will address the meaning and movement of the site-specific art to give a better understanding of related legal issues and 'contextual integrity'which is the cruel clue for solving legal disputes. Part III will cover the legal treatment of site-specific art under Korean and foreign legal systems,focusing on the Visual Artists Rights Act of U.S. Part IV will look into the limitation of protection of site-specific art through VARA and do analysis of the court decision in Phillips and subsequently the future of site-specific art in the wake of Phillips decision. Further this article will specifically consider the right of integrity and its exceptions under the Korean Copyright Act and will conclude with the suggestion for legal alternative.
Abstract
Art has continuously evolved and site-specific art is one product during this process. Art is site-specific, where the surrounding environment or its location plays an integral role in the meaning and interpretation of the work. Since site-specific art is designed and arranged for particular locations,removal from a specific location arguably mutilates or destroys the integrity of the work. This article will explores the protection scope and content of site-specific art in the context of moral right, specifically the right of integrity and analyze the relevant provisions of Korean Copyright Act,focusing the problems in Phillips v. Pembroke Real Estate, Inc., which raised the public awareness in the U.S.. Part II will address the meaning and movement of the site-specific art to give a better understanding of related legal issues and 'contextual integrity'which is the cruel clue for solving legal disputes. Part III will cover the legal treatment of site-specific art under Korean and foreign legal systems,focusing on the Visual Artists Rights Act of U.S. Part IV will look into the limitation of protection of site-specific art through VARA and do analysis of the court decision in Phillips and subsequently the future of site-specific art in the wake of Phillips decision. Further this article will specifically consider the right of integrity and its exceptions under the Korean Copyright Act and will conclude with the suggestion for legal alternative.
참고문헌 (24)
- 오승종, "저작권법" (2009), 박영사
- 송영식, "지적재산법" (2010), 세창출판사
- 유정아, "1970-90년대 뉴욕의 공공미술:장소와 관람자의 인식변화를 중심으로", 석사, pp.2005
- 이지희, "장소특정적 미술(Site-Specific Art)에 대한 담론적 연구:1960년대~1990 년대를 중심으로", 석사, pp.2009
- 정은선, "장소특정적 미술의 관점에서 본 다니엘 뷔렌(Daniel Buren)의 ‘인 시튜(in situ)' 작업연구", 석사, pp.2009
- 김대희, "건축물 미술장식 법제도개선 토론회 열려 기금 출연제 도입, 국가 및 공공 기관의 의무 강화 방안 등 논의" (2009), CNB 저널
- Fred S. Kleiner, "Gardner's Art Through the Ages(11th ed.)" (2000), Wadsworth Publishing
- John Henry Merryman, "LAW, ETHICS AND THE VISU AL ARTS (5th)" (2007), Kluwer Law International
- Amy M.Adler, "Against Moral Rights", California Law Review, 97, pp.263~ (2009)
- Christopher J. Robinson, "Note, The “Recognized Stature” Standard in the Visual Artists Rights Act", Fordham L. Rev, 68, pp.1935~ (2000)
- Carrie Jones, "Site-Specific Art Parks on Moral Ground: Distilling Old Whine in New Battles over the Visual Artists Rights Act", Comp. Law Rev. & Tech. J, 9, pp.335~ (2005)
- Eric M. Brooks, "Comment, “Tilted” Justice: Site-Specific Art and Moral Rights After U.S. Adherence to the Berne Convention", CAL. L. REV, 77, pp.1431~ (1989)
- Francesca Garson, "Note, Before That Artist Came Along, It Was Just a Bridge: The Visual Artists Rights Act and the Removal of Site-Specific Artwork”", Cornell J. L. & Pub. Pol’Y, 11, pp.203~ (2001)
- Jill R.Applebaum, "Comment,The Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990:An Analysis Based on the French Droit Moral", Am. U. J. Int’'L L. & Pol’Y, 8, pp.183~ (1992)
- John Henry Merryman, "The Public Interest in Cultural Property”, 77 Calif Hughes, “The Line Between Work and Framework, Text and Context”", Cardozo Arts & Ent. L.J, 19, pp.20~ (2001)
- Kristin Robbins, "NOTE:Artists Beware:The Effect of the First Circuit's Refusal To Apply VARA to Site-Specific Art", Tul. J. Tech. & Intell. Prop, 9, pp.395~ (2009)
- Lauren Ruth Spotts, "Phillips Has Left VARA Little Protection for Site-Specific Artists", J. Intell. Prop. L, 16, pp.297~ (2009)
- Rachel E.Nordby, "NOTE & COMMENT: Off of the Pedestal and into the Fire: How Phillips Chips Away at the Rights of Site-Specific Artists", Florida State University Law Review, 25, pp.167~ (2007)
- Rebecca J. Martel, "The Should-it-Stay or Should-it-Go Spotlight: Protection of Site Specific Art Under VARA", Depaul-LCA J. Art & Ent. L, 13, pp.101~ (2003)
- "The Vagaries of VARA: Can the Law Save Your Art?” (Committee on Intellectual Property of the College Art Association, Session Paper, 2002)"[URL]
- Barbara Isenberg, "NY Public Art Turns a Corner, and Some Heads" (2006), L.A. Times
- Christina Michalos, "Hiss off! My snake is a work of art, so it stays" (2005), The Times
- Elizabeth Langton, "Students Create Art from Nature at Arboretum: Organic Sculptures Use Material from Site" (2006), Dallas Morning News
- "Making Art Public: Artists, the Law, and the Making of Art in Public Spaces, Art and the Olympics Workshop Series"[URL]