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. This case revolved around the rap group 2 Live Crew's parody of Roy Orbison's song 'Oh, Pretty Woman,' which was challenged by the copyright holder Acuff-Rose Music. The Supreme Court ruled that the parody constituted fair use, significantly impacting how copyright law is interpreted in relation to transformative works and the balance between protecting intellectual property and fostering creativity.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Campbell, stating that 2 Live Crew's parody was protected under fair use because it was transformative and added new expression.
2. The ruling emphasized that the commercial nature of a work does not automatically negate its eligibility for fair use; this was a significant clarification in copyright law.
3. The case set a precedent for how courts evaluate fair use claims by establishing a four-factor test that considers purpose, nature, amount, and effect on the market for the original work.
4. Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. highlighted the importance of artistic expression and creativity in determining what constitutes fair use, especially in the realm of parody and satire.
5. This decision has influenced numerous subsequent cases involving fair use, shaping the legal landscape for creators who wish to build upon existing works.

Review Questions

• How did the Supreme Court's ruling in Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. redefine the interpretation of fair use in copyright law?
  • The Supreme Court's ruling in Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. redefined fair use by establishing that transformative works, such as parodies, can be considered fair use even if they are commercially oriented. The Court emphasized that the key factor is whether the new work adds new expression or meaning to the original rather than merely copying it. This decision has had lasting implications on how courts evaluate cases of fair use and has encouraged creative reinterpretations of existing works.
• Discuss the four-factor test established by the Supreme Court in evaluating fair use and how it was applied in this case.
  • The four-factor test established by the Supreme Court evaluates fair use based on: 1) purpose and character of the use, 2) nature of the copyrighted work, 3) amount and substantiality of the portion used, and 4) effect of the use on the market for or value of the original work. In Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., the Court determined that 2 Live Crew's parody served a different purpose from Roy Orbison’s original song and was transformative in nature. The commercial aspect did not outweigh these factors since it still provided critical commentary through humor.
• Evaluate how Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. impacts future creative works and their relationship with copyright protections.
  • Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. impacts future creative works by affirming that artists can create transformative parodies without fear of infringement lawsuits as long as they meet the criteria for fair use. This case encourages innovation by allowing creators to build upon existing works while balancing intellectual property rights with artistic freedom. The precedent established by this ruling influences how courts interpret subsequent cases regarding parody and satire, ultimately shaping a more flexible approach to copyright protections that supports creativity in various artistic fields.

Related terms

Fair Use: A legal doctrine that allows limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights holders, typically for purposes like criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research.

Transformative Use: A type of fair use that refers to a work that adds new expression or meaning to the original, thereby transforming it rather than merely copying it.

Copyright Infringement: The unauthorized use of copyrighted material in a way that violates the copyright holder's exclusive rights, which can lead to legal action.