The valley of the dolls: Brand protection and artistic parody

In the case of Mattel Inc v Walking Mountain Productions, the toy doll manufacturer Mattel sought to prohibit a Utah photographer called Thomas Forsythe from producing and selling a series of 78 photographs entitled "Food Chain Barbie". The work had strong social and political overtones. The artist said that he chose to parody Barbie in his photographs because he wanted to challenge the beauty myth and the objectification of women. He observed: "Barbie is the most enduring of those products that feed on the insecurities of our beauty and perfection-obsessed consumer culture." The company Mattel argued that the photographs infringed its copyrights, trade marks, and trade dress. It was concerned that the artistic works would erode the brand of Barbie by wrongfully sexualising its blonde paragon of womanhood. However, Lew J of the Central District Court of California granted summary judgment for the photographer. The Court of Appeals upheld this verdict. Pregerson J held that the use of the manufacturer's copyrighted doll in parodic photographs constituted a fair use of copyright works. His Honour held that the use of manufacturer's "Barbie" mark and trade dress did not amount to trade mark infringement or dilution. This article provides a case commentary upon the Court of Appeals decision in Mattel Inc v Walking Mountain Productions, and its wider ramifications for the treatment of artistic parody under copyright law and trade mark law. It contends that the decision highlights the need for reform in Australian jurisprudence and legislation in respect of artistic parody.

The development and piloting of the ISPCAN child abuse screening tool-parent version (ICAST-P)

Objective Child maltreatment is a problem that has longer recognition in the northern hemisphere and in high-income countries. Recent work has highlighted the nearly universal nature of the problem in other countries but demonstrated the lack of comparability of studies because of the variations in definitions and measures used. The International Society for the Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect has developed instrumentation that may be used with cross-cultural and cross-national benchmarking by local investigators. Design and sampling The instrument design began with a team of expert in Brisbane in 2004. A large bank of questions were subjected to two rounds of Delphi review to develop the fielded version of the instrument. Convenience samples included approximately 120 parent respondents with children under the age of 18 in each of six countries (697 total). Results This paper presents an instrument that measures parental behaviors directed at children and reports data from pilot work in 6 countries and 7 languages. Patterns of response revealed few missing values and distributions of responses that generally were similar in the six countries. Subscales performed well in terms of internal consistency with Cronbach's alpha in very good range (0.77–0.88) with the exception of the neglect and sex abuse subscales. Results varied by child age and gender in expected directions but with large variations among the samples. About 15% of children were shaken, 24% hit on the buttocks with an object, and 37% were spanked. Reports of choking and smothering were made by 2% of parents. Conclusion These pilot data demonstrate that the instrument is well tolerated and captures variations in, and potentially harmful forms of child discipline. Practice implications The ISPCAN Child Abuse Screening Tool – Parent Version (ICAST-P) has been developed as a survey instrument to be administered to parents for the assessment of child maltreatment in a multi-national and multi-cultural context. It was developed with broad input from international experts and subjected to Dephi review, translation, and pilot testing in six countries. The results of the Delphi study and pilot testing are presented. This study demonstrates that a single instrument can be used in a broad range of cultures and languages with low rates of missing data and moderate to high internal consistency.

Displaying and celebrating the "other": A study of the mission, scope, and roles of ethnic museums in Los Angeles

In the last thirty years, ethnic museums have mushroomed in American cities. Although this is certainly a national phenomenon, it has been particularly evident in Los Angeles. In this paper we examine the genesis and evolution of these emerging institutions. We survey the mission, scope, and role of ethnic museums in Los Angeles, and we contrast them with the stated mission and scope of “mainstream” museums in the city. We further present case studies of three Los Angeles ethnic museums. The museums vary considerably in the ways they perceive their role in the community, the city, and the nation and in the preservation and display of ethnic culture. At their best, ethnic museums serve to make new art and histories more accessible and visible and provide a forum in which to debate contemporary issues of politics and identity. The paper highlights some of the tensions faced by ethnic museums as they seek to define their audience and role(s) in multi-ethnic, twenty-first century Los Angeles.

Illuminating the glass box: The lighting designs of Richard Kelly

A promotional brochure celebrating the completion of the Seagram Building in spring 1957 features on its cover intense portraits of seven men bisected by a single line of bold text that asks, “Who are these Men?” The answer appears on the next page: “They Dreamed of a Tower of Light” (Figures 1, 2). Each photograph is reproduced with the respective man’s name and project credit: architects, Mies van der Rohe and Philip Johnson; associate architect, Eli Jacques Kahn; electrical contractor, Harry F. Fischbach; lighting consultant, Richard Kelly; and electrical engineer, Clifton E. Smith. To the right, a rendering of the new Seagram Tower anchors the composition, standing luminous against a star-speckled night sky; its glass walls and bronze mullions are transformed into a gossamer skin that reveals the tower’s structural skeleton. Lightolier, the contract lighting manufacturer, produced the brochure to promote its role in the lighting of the Seagram Building, but Lightolier’s promotional copy was not far from the truth.