Fair Use: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
| Line 32: | Line 32: | ||
* 2 Live Crew recorded a parody of Roy Orbison's "Oh, Pretty Woman" and released it on their album ''Clean As They Wanna Be'' despite being refused permission by the copyright owners Acuff-Rose Music to actually do so. In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court found that parodying copyrighted work, even if the parody is of a commercial nature, is a sufficient defence for fair use. This is why [["Weird Al" Yankovic]] can release so many parodies (but gets permission to stay friendly with artists). It's also the go-to citation for anyone who receives DMCA threats. ''Campbell'' v. ''Acuff-Rose Music, Inc.'', 510 U.S. 569 (1994) |
* 2 Live Crew recorded a parody of Roy Orbison's "Oh, Pretty Woman" and released it on their album ''Clean As They Wanna Be'' despite being refused permission by the copyright owners Acuff-Rose Music to actually do so. In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court found that parodying copyrighted work, even if the parody is of a commercial nature, is a sufficient defence for fair use. This is why [["Weird Al" Yankovic]] can release so many parodies (but gets permission to stay friendly with artists). It's also the go-to citation for anyone who receives DMCA threats. ''Campbell'' v. ''Acuff-Rose Music, Inc.'', 510 U.S. 569 (1994) |
||
** Weird Al attempted to obtain permission to parody "You're Beautiful" by James Blunt as "You're Pitiful"; Blunt's record company bluntly refused. The track was released on Weird Al's website under fair use, but was never pressed as a physical record. |
** Weird Al attempted to obtain permission to parody "You're Beautiful" by James Blunt as "You're Pitiful"; Blunt's record company bluntly refused. The track was released on Weird Al's website under fair use, but was never pressed as a physical record. |
||
** Other parodies like "Bomb Iran" (recorded by various people, using the Beach Boys' tune "Barbara Ann") have received radio airplay but are impossible to find as physical discs. Fair use should provide some level of protection, but no record company wants to |
** Other parodies like "Bomb Iran" (recorded by various people, using the Beach Boys' tune "Barbara Ann") have received radio airplay but are impossible to find as physical discs. Fair use should provide some level of protection, but no record company wants to risk the cost of pressing physical media. |
||
* Eveready Battery Co. (as of 2000, Energizer Holdings Inc.) had been running a set of television commercials using its pink bunny to walk through [[Parody Commercial|parody commercials]] of fictional products. Adolph Coors Brewing Co. decided to do a beer commercial in which [[Leslie Nielsen]] wore a pink bunny costume, as a parody of Eveready's own parodies. Eveready didn't like this and sued. In deciding that Coors' parody was fair use, the court pointed out that there's no competition between the sale of batteries (or their uses) and the sale of beer. In comparing the Energizer Bunny and a man in a pink rabbit suit, the judge pointed out that "Mr. Nielsen is not a toy..., does not run on batteries, is not 15 inches tall... [and] is not predominantly pink." ''Eveready Battery Co.'' v. ''Adolph Coors Co.'', 765 F. Supp. 440 (N.D. Ill. 1991). |
* Eveready Battery Co. (as of 2000, Energizer Holdings Inc.) had been running a set of television commercials using its pink bunny to walk through [[Parody Commercial|parody commercials]] of fictional products. Adolph Coors Brewing Co. decided to do a beer commercial in which [[Leslie Nielsen]] wore a pink bunny costume, as a parody of Eveready's own parodies. Eveready didn't like this and sued. In deciding that Coors' parody was fair use, the court pointed out that there's no competition between the sale of batteries (or their uses) and the sale of beer. In comparing the Energizer Bunny and a man in a pink rabbit suit, the judge pointed out that "Mr. Nielsen is not a toy..., does not run on batteries, is not 15 inches tall... [and] is not predominantly pink." ''Eveready Battery Co.'' v. ''Adolph Coors Co.'', 765 F. Supp. 440 (N.D. Ill. 1991). |
||
* While J.K. Rowling was able to stop a man who was developing an encyclopedia on her [[Harry Potter]] series after having creative differences, she was less successful in getting a court in India to stop someone from using a name similar to Harry Potter in his book. She was, however, cleared of an accusation of infringement by [[The Legend of Rah and the Muggles|another author]] who [[Blatant Lies|supposedly]] used the term "muggles" to refer to people who are not wizards. |
* While J.K. Rowling was able to stop a man who was developing an encyclopedia on her [[Harry Potter]] series after having creative differences, she was less successful in getting a court in India to stop someone from using a name similar to Harry Potter in his book. She was, however, cleared of an accusation of infringement by [[The Legend of Rah and the Muggles|another author]] who [[Blatant Lies|supposedly]] used the term "muggles" to refer to people who are not wizards. |
||