Non-Conventional Copyright
Show Less

Non-Conventional Copyright

Do New and Atypical Works Deserve Protection?

Edited by Enrico Bonadio and Nicola Lucchi

This book draws a picture of possible new spaces for copyright. It expands on whether modern copyright law should be more flexible as to whether new or unconventional forms of expression - including graffiti, tattoos, land art, conceptual art and bio art, engineered DNA, sport movements, jokes, magic tricks, dj-sets, 3D printing, works generated by artificial intelligence, perfume making, typefaces, illegal and immoral works - deserve protection. The contributors offer authoritative, coherent and well-argued essays focusing on whether copyright can subsist in these unconventional subject matters.
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Chapter 12: Copyright protection of sport moves

Péter Mezei

Abstract

Creativity is at the very heart of sports. Creativity denotes individuality, and that individual moment of brilliance often is the fine line that separates the extraordinary athletes from the ordinary. If one takes the sensational rise of Connor McGregor as a recent example: a creative punch from an unexpected angle in an unexpected moment secured him victory in his championship bout in under 13 seconds. Equally, individual expression is encouraged and rewarded with higher scores in sports such as rhythmic gymnastics, pommel horse and ice skating. This notion of creativity is also at the very heart of copyright law. It is well established that original works of expressions deserve economic and – where available – moral rights protection. Now, of course these two types of creativity are of a seemingly different nature. Nevertheless, the question arises: at what juncture do sporting moves and/or choreographies become creative pieces in their own right and thus protectable as an author’s unique artistic expression? Should Krisztián Berki receive copyright protection for the move named after him in pommel horse? Bob Cousy for his behind-the-back pass in basketball? Anton'n Panenka for his penalty kick in football? Werner Rittberger for his loop jump in ice skating? Dick Fosbury for his flop in the high jump; or even the Yawgoons for their unique incorporation of the everyday into their snowboarding environment? Some commentators remain at odds with the idea of sports being capable of artistic expression, with one suggesting ‘the idea of a quarterback spinning in ballet slippers to the sound of Beethoven seems more ripe for a comedy than a football game’. The relevance of copyright protection is, however, significant. As sports have grown to a global multi-billion-dollar business, whether these forms of expression shall be protected for decades, even after the death of the original athletes, is not irrelevant. Accordingly, this chapter analyses whether sports moves and choreographies fit into the concept of originality and thus whether they are copyrightable.

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.


Further information

or login to access all content.