FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W225166559> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W225166559 abstract "Suggesting that the relationship between intellectual property law and legal protection for cultural authorship is a disjointed one, this paper examines how modern intellectual property law in common law systems could be adapted to remedy the cultural appropriation of early twentieth century African-American jazz music in the same way that intellectual property law remedies individual rights holders for infringements of copyrights, trademarks, and patents.The cultural appropriation of early twentieth century African-American jazz music by white American musicians is an important area of history which aligns well with modern debates about the adequacy or inadequacy of copyright law because, historically, inadequate copyright protection has increased the economic inequality in American society and shown that the African-American community has not fully reaped the benefits of its phenomenal creativity.This paper argues that some form of restitution is in order based on this inadequacy, because millions of dollars were made by white Americans from the marginalization of black Americans and then further from the music that arose from such marginalization. The paper operates from the context that it is socially and legally insufficient to simply recognize that African-Americans had their culture “stolen” from them and “culturally re-packaged” by white Americans, and that there is potentially no available legal remedy for such appropriation other than as an individual rights holder. Justice demands a remedy.Thus, the paper explores the possibility that the same ideas that govern the protection of individual invention, creation and expression could be portable to black jazz musicians who had their collective expression – including the unfixed and intangible parts of it – appropriated for profit. The paper argues that there should be a focus on judicial remedies for the appropriation or infringement of collective cultural expression because it is arguably as legitimate a form of copyrightable expression as anything else. More often than not, however, the issue of addressing remedies for cultural appropriation and “theft” is approached in determining how to protect cultures before the appropriation occurs. What makes this paper different is that the analysis is focused on legal remedies once or after the appropriation has already occurred.When all of the individual musicians’ expressions are combined, there is a body of music called jazz, which has its own uniqueness and distinctiveness. In other words, the whole body of jazz is greater than the sum of its parts. Jazz was a particular expression of ideas that was imbued with African-American experience and identity. If an individual-cum-culture’s expression is appropriated by another – an outsider, such as white America – simply because there is a desire to do so, it is easy to do so, or the individual author and his or her community is easily marginalized, the very act of appropriation is not diminished or lost. If that outside appropriator adopts that cultural expression and profits financially from it, such as with jazz, such appropriation may amount to unjust enrichment. However, drawing a straight line to this conclusion is more easily said than done and this paper delineates the journey to it.To this end, a leap in intellectual property law jurisprudence is proposed that goes from merely protecting individual authorship to viewing cultural expression as intellectual property. The paper examines modes of cultural appropriation, authenticity, and ownership as well as the common law intellectual property regime, and the appropriation of African-American music and culture through the examples of jazz, Solomon Linda (original author of the prolific “Lion King” song), Willie Dixon and Led Zeppelin. By analogizing mass restitution litigation for slavery and other class-based claims, the paper concludes by suggesting that a plausible or viable judicial remedy for the appropriation of jazz music (and other culture) may be found in the constructive trust." @default.
• W225166559 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W225166559 creator A5006436126 @default.
• W225166559 date "2008-04-07" @default.
• W225166559 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W225166559 title "The Constructive Trust as Remedy for the Appropriation of Jazz" @default.
• W225166559 hasPublicationYear "2008" @default.
• W225166559 type Work @default.
• W225166559 sameAs 225166559 @default.
• W225166559 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W225166559 crossrefType "posted-content" @default.
• W225166559 hasAuthorship W225166559A5006436126 @default.
• W225166559 hasConcept C104317684 @default.
• W225166559 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W225166559 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W225166559 hasConcept C166957645 @default.
• W225166559 hasConcept C170706310 @default.
• W225166559 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W225166559 hasConcept C185592680 @default.
• W225166559 hasConcept C190253527 @default.
• W225166559 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W225166559 hasConcept C2776899143 @default.
• W225166559 hasConcept C2776931063 @default.
• W225166559 hasConcept C2779343474 @default.
• W225166559 hasConcept C2980749 @default.
• W225166559 hasConcept C2994225426 @default.
• W225166559 hasConcept C34974158 @default.
• W225166559 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W225166559 hasConcept C52119013 @default.
• W225166559 hasConcept C55493867 @default.
• W225166559 hasConcept C56273599 @default.
• W225166559 hasConcept C95457728 @default.
• W225166559 hasConceptScore W225166559C104317684 @default.
• W225166559 hasConceptScore W225166559C138885662 @default.
• W225166559 hasConceptScore W225166559C144024400 @default.
• W225166559 hasConceptScore W225166559C166957645 @default.
• W225166559 hasConceptScore W225166559C170706310 @default.
• W225166559 hasConceptScore W225166559C17744445 @default.
• W225166559 hasConceptScore W225166559C185592680 @default.
• W225166559 hasConceptScore W225166559C190253527 @default.
• W225166559 hasConceptScore W225166559C199539241 @default.
• W225166559 hasConceptScore W225166559C2776899143 @default.
• W225166559 hasConceptScore W225166559C2776931063 @default.
• W225166559 hasConceptScore W225166559C2779343474 @default.
• W225166559 hasConceptScore W225166559C2980749 @default.
• W225166559 hasConceptScore W225166559C2994225426 @default.
• W225166559 hasConceptScore W225166559C34974158 @default.
• W225166559 hasConceptScore W225166559C41895202 @default.
• W225166559 hasConceptScore W225166559C52119013 @default.
• W225166559 hasConceptScore W225166559C55493867 @default.
• W225166559 hasConceptScore W225166559C56273599 @default.
• W225166559 hasConceptScore W225166559C95457728 @default.
• W225166559 hasLocation W2251665591 @default.
• W225166559 hasOpenAccess W225166559 @default.
• W225166559 hasPrimaryLocation W2251665591 @default.
• W225166559 hasRelatedWork W1764461168 @default.
• W225166559 hasRelatedWork W1802275462 @default.
• W225166559 hasRelatedWork W1976313969 @default.
• W225166559 hasRelatedWork W1993278092 @default.
• W225166559 hasRelatedWork W1997865033 @default.
• W225166559 hasRelatedWork W2025971218 @default.
• W225166559 hasRelatedWork W2042587296 @default.
• W225166559 hasRelatedWork W2050531508 @default.
• W225166559 hasRelatedWork W2066837256 @default.
• W225166559 hasRelatedWork W2097744872 @default.
• W225166559 hasRelatedWork W2112130964 @default.
• W225166559 hasRelatedWork W2163083448 @default.
• W225166559 hasRelatedWork W2512775893 @default.
• W225166559 hasRelatedWork W2743375506 @default.
• W225166559 hasRelatedWork W2747749668 @default.
• W225166559 hasRelatedWork W287993853 @default.
• W225166559 hasRelatedWork W3120533518 @default.
• W225166559 hasRelatedWork W594725291 @default.
• W225166559 hasRelatedWork W630499720 @default.
• W225166559 hasRelatedWork W89628460 @default.
• W225166559 isParatext "false" @default.
• W225166559 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W225166559 magId "225166559" @default.
• W225166559 workType "article" @default.