The European Journal of Humour Research

Vol 8, No 3 (2020)

The dangers of controlling memes through copyright law

Joao Paulo Capelotti


Intertextuality plays a great role in the production and comprehension of various forms of humorous expressions, such as parodies and memes. The latter often rely on previous facts, images, videos, statements etc., to express a certain comic idea. Nowadays, memes and parodic videos are not just made by comedians, but also by ordinary people on social networks, mostly using images, videos and gifs found in search engines like Google. However, attempts at regulating the use of such materials, particularly from the point of view of copyright, threaten the freedom of this sort of humorous expression. The article discusses a case from Brazil in 2017, when the then President Michel Temer tried to stop the unauthorised use of his image in the creation of memes, stating that the pictures in the Presidency’s website were available for journalistic purposes only, and any other use needed the government’s consent. This strange situation, that could give the president the power of approving the satire made at his expense, was itself the subject of various memes, which ultimately forced the government to step back. The article then discusses similar risks of a directive recently approved by the European Parliament, which, under the flag of protecting copyright, may have a controversial chilling effect in the creation of memes and satiric videos.



Allen, G. (2000). Intertextuality. New York: Routledge.

Avedaño, T. (2017). ‘Fora meme? Como o Governo Temer virou inimigo da indústria das piadas na Internet’ [‘Out memes? How Temer administration became enemy of the internet joke industry’]. El País Brasil, 27.05.2017. Retrieved October 4, 2017 from

Basso, M. (2017). ‘As exceções e limitações aos direitos do autor e a observância da regra do teste dos três passos (three-step test)’ [‘Copyright: exceptions, limitations and the three-step test’]. Revista da Faculdade de Direito da Universidade de São Paulo 102, pp. 493-503.

Branco, S. (2007). ‘Brazilian copyright law and how it restricts the efficiency of the human right to education’. English translation by Barney Whiteoak. Sur: Revista Internacional de Direitos Humanos 6, pp. 121-141. Retrieved March 19, 2019 from

Capelotti, J. P. (2016). ‘Defending laughter: An account of Brazilian court cases involving humour, 1997–2014’. Humour: International Journal of Humour Research 29 (1), pp. 25-47.

Caputo, V. (2017). ‘Temer proíbe o uso de suas fotos para memes’ [‘Temer forbids the use of his pictures for memes’]. Superinteressante, 26.05.2017. Retrieved October 4, 2017 from

Condren, C., Davis, J. M., McCausland, S. & Phiddian, R. (2008a). ‘Defining parody and satire: Australian copyright law and its new exception (Part 1)’. Media and Arts Law Review 13, pp. 273-292.

Condren, C., Davis, J. M., McCausland, S. & Phiddian, R. (2008b). ‘Defining parody and satire: Australian copyright law and its new exception: Part 2 — Advancing ordinary definitions’. Media and Arts Law Review 13, pp. 401-421.

Council of the European Union. Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on Copyright in the Digital Single Market. Interinstitutional File 6637/19. Brussels, 20.02.2019. Retrieved March 1, 2019 from

David, R. (1969). Les grands systémes de droit contemporains (droit comparé). 3rd ed. Paris: Dalloz.

Davies, C. (2011). Jokes and Targets. Bloomington-Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.

Falardeau, M. (2015). Humour et liberté d’expression: Les langages de l’humour. Québec: Presses de l’Université Laval.

Hale, A. (2018). ‘There is an after-life (for jokes, anyway): The potential for, and appeal of, “immortality” in humour.’ Humour: International Journal of Humour Research 31 (3), pp. 507-538.

Hare, I. (2009). ‘Extreme speech under international and regional human rights standards’, in Hare, I. & Weinsten, J. (eds.), Extreme Speech and Democracy, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 62-80.

Harries, D. (2000). Film Parody. London: BFI Publishing.

Hollanda, S. B. (2006 [1936]). Raízes do Brasil. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras.

Jacques, S. (2016). ‘A parody exception: Why trade mark owners should get the joke’. European Intellectual Property Review 38 (8), pp. 471-481.

Jacques, S., Garstka, K., Hviid, M. & Street, J. (2018). ‘Automated anti-piracy systems as copyright enforcement mechanism: A need to consider cultural diversity’. European Intellectual Property Review 40 (4), pp. 218-229.

Kale, S. (2019). ‘Life beyond the meme: What happens after you go viral’. BBC, 07.03.2019. Retrieved March 8, 2019 from

Kaye, D. (2019). ‘EU must align copyright reform with international human rights standards, says expert’. Interview to News and Events, from the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights’ website, 11.03.2019. Retrieved March 30, 2019 from

Laineste, L. & Voolaid, P. (2016). ‘Laughing across borders: Intertextuality of internet memes’. The European Journal of Humour Research 4 (4), pp. 26-49.

Lee, T. B. (2019). ‘European governments approve controversial new copyright law’. Ars Technica, 21.02.2019. Retrieved March 6, 2019 from

Milner, R. M. (2013). ‘Pop polyvocality: Internet memes, public participation, and the Occupy Wall Street movement’. International Journal of Communication 7, pp. 2357-2390.

Nimmer, D. (2003). ‘“Fairest of them all” and other fairy tales of fair use’. Law and Contemporary Problems 66, pp. 263-288. Retrieved March 17, 2019 from

Reda, J. (2018). ‘Article 13 will kill the internet by mistake’. Wired, 23.09.2018. Retrieved February 10, 2019 from

Reynolds, M. (2019). ‘What is Article 13? The EU’s divisive new copyright plan explained’. Wired, 21.01.2019. Retrieved February 10, 2019 from

Sanfelice, S. (2017). Capinaremos meme factory. Post on Facebook on 22.05.2017. Retrieved February 18, 2019 from

Siao-Sun, H. (2015). ‘Would you pay for a meme? Getty claims copyright licence fees for Socially Awkward Penguin’. Lexology, 16.09.2015. Retrieved March 31, 2019 from

Shifman, L. (2014). Memes in Digital Culture. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

Stokel-Walker, C. (2019). ‘The gloomy saga of Article 13 just got a whole lot worse’. Wired, 13.02.2019. Retrieved March 8, 2019 from

Stolton, S. (2019). ‘Copyright directive faces further setback as final trilogue postponed’. Euractive, 21.01.2019. Retrieved February 1, 2019 from

Tsakona, V. (2018). ‘Intertextuality and/in political jokes’. Lingua 203, pp. 1-15.

United Nations. Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Retrieved March 29, 2019 from

Vecchioli, D. (2017). ‘Governo nega censura ao notificar blogs sobre uso de imagens em memes de Temer’ [‘Government denies censorship after notifying blogs on Temer memes’ image use’]. Universo Online, 23.05.2017. Retrieved October 4, 2017 from

Visser, C. (2005). ‘The location of the parody defence in copyright law: Some comparative perspectives’. The Comparative and International Law Journal of Southern Africa 38 (3), pp. 321-343.

Volpicelli, G. (2018). ‘The EU has passed Article 13, but Europe’s meme war is far from over’. Wired, 14.09.2018. Retrieved January 20, 2019 from

Voss, A. (2018). ‘Axel Voss on copyright reform: “We want to protect the rights of creatives”’. Interview to News from the European Parliament’s website, 12.09.2018. Retrieved January 31, 2019 from

Wojcicki, S. (2018). ‘YouTube chief says EU copyright plan could lead to blocked access’. Financial Times, 12.11.2018. Retrieved December 7, 2018 from

YouTube. ‘Save your internet’. Retrieved December 8, 2018 from