Comics, Copyright and Academic Publishing

Ronan Deazley

doi:10.5334/cg.ap

Abstract

This article considers the extent to which UK-based academics can rely upon the copyright regime to reproduce extracts and excerpts from published comics and graphic novels without having to ask the copyright owner of those works for permission. In doing so, it invites readers to engage with a broader debate about the nature, demands and process of academic publishing.

Highlights

The Comics Grid: Journal of Comics Scholarship is one of a small but growing cohort of scholarly publications dedicated to the study of comics that has emerged in recent years
Will these proposed reforms make a difference? Will the new quotation exception make it easier for academics writing about comics – or any academic working in the digital humanities – to reproduce copyright-protected work within their published research without needing to
The mainstay of academic publication lies in books, book chapters, and journal articles, with journal publication firmly established as the predominant format across all disciplines, including the arts and humanities (RIN 2009: 13–27)

Summary

Introduction

The Comics Grid: Journal of Comics Scholarship is one of a small but growing cohort of scholarly publications dedicated to the study of comics that has emerged in recent years. Let us assume, that one can confidently identify the ‘work’ with which one is dealing; that being the case, there are three obvious strategies that an academic or researcher might rely upon when reproducing material from that work without the need for permission from the copyright owner They concern: (i) insubstantial copying; (ii) fair dealing for the purpose of non-commercial research; and, (iii) fair dealing for the purpose of criticism and review. It is often said that the issue of substantiality depends upon the quality of what has been taken rather than the quantity (Sillitoe v McGraw 1983: 545), and courts of late have demonstrated a marked willingness to find infringement so long as the part used is not ‘insignificant’ or de minimis (per Lord Bingham, Designers Guild v Russell Williams 2001: 11) This would seem to militate against the likelihood of successfully relying upon an argument of insubstantial copying when reproducing any material – even a single panel – from a comic without permission. Let us consider our remaining two strategies, based on specific exceptions set out within the

Exceptions to copyright

Current proposals for reform

Conclusion

Findings