Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc.

Definition

Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. is a landmark Supreme Court case from 1994 that addressed the issue of fair use in copyright law. The case involved the hip-hop group 2 Live Crew and their parody of Roy Orbison's song 'Oh, Pretty Woman.' The ruling clarified the scope of fair use by determining that a commercial parody can qualify as fair use under certain circumstances, emphasizing the importance of transformative use in creative expression.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of 2 Live Crew, stating that their parody was a transformative use that did not infringe on the original copyright.
2. This case emphasized that commercial intent does not automatically disqualify a work from being considered fair use if it meets other criteria for transformation.
3. The Court provided guidance on how to evaluate fair use by establishing factors such as purpose and character of the use, nature of the copyrighted work, amount used, and effect on the market for the original.
4. The ruling reinforced the idea that creativity can thrive in an environment where parody and satire are allowed to coexist with existing copyrighted works.
5. Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music established a significant precedent for future cases involving fair use and the balance between copyright protection and freedom of expression.

Review Questions

• How did the Supreme Court's decision in Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music impact the understanding of transformative use in copyright law?
  • The Supreme Court's decision in Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music clarified that transformative use plays a critical role in determining fair use. The Court ruled that 2 Live Crew's parody was transformative because it added new expression and meaning to Orbison's original song. This ruling shifted the focus towards how a work changes or comments on the original, rather than merely its commercial nature, thereby encouraging creative reinterpretations under fair use.
• Discuss how the ruling in Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music differentiates between commercial use and fair use.
  • The ruling in Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music highlighted that commercial intent does not negate the possibility of a work being considered fair use. The Court acknowledged that while 2 Live Crew's parody was made for profit, it still qualified as fair use due to its transformative nature. This differentiation allows for an understanding that even commercially driven works can contribute positively to cultural discourse and fall within fair use protections when they creatively engage with original material.
• Evaluate the broader implications of Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music for future creative works and copyright considerations.
  • The broader implications of Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music are significant for both artists and copyright holders. The case set a precedent for evaluating fair use based on transformation rather than solely on commercial intent. This encourages artists to create parodies and other transformative works without fear of infringement claims as long as their work contributes new meaning or perspective. It fosters an environment where innovation can thrive while balancing the rights of original creators with societal benefits from creative expression.

Related terms

Fair Use: A legal doctrine that allows limited use of copyrighted material without permission from the rights holder, often for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research.

Transformative Use: A concept in copyright law where a work is considered transformative if it adds new expression, meaning, or message to the original work, thus potentially qualifying for fair use.

Parody: A humorous or satirical imitation of a particular work or genre, often used as a form of social commentary and can fall under the umbrella of fair use if it is transformative.