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 rap group 2 Live Crew and their parody of Roy Orbison's song 'Oh, Pretty Woman.' The Court's decision clarified that transformative use, particularly in the context of parody, can qualify as fair use even if the original work is commercially successful, which highlighted the balance between protecting creators and allowing creative expression.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of 2 Live Crew, determining their parody was transformative enough to qualify for fair use.
2. This case emphasized that commercial nature does not automatically negate fair use; the purpose and character of the use are critical.
3. The Court established a four-factor test for fair use that includes purpose, nature, amount used, and effect on the market for the original work.
4. The ruling contributed to ongoing discussions about intellectual property rights in the digital age, particularly with respect to music and media.
5. This case set a precedent for future copyright cases involving parody and commentary, influencing how courts analyze fair use.

Review Questions

• What were the main arguments presented by both sides in Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. regarding the concept of fair use?
  • In Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 2 Live Crew argued that their parody of 'Oh, Pretty Woman' was transformative and offered social commentary, thus qualifying as fair use. They maintained that their work did not harm the market for the original song and served a different purpose. On the other hand, Acuff-Rose contended that the rap group's version was too similar to the original and undermined its commercial value. The Supreme Court ultimately sided with 2 Live Crew, emphasizing that transformative uses can justify fair use even when used commercially.
• How did the Supreme Court's decision in this case redefine the understanding of transformative use in copyright law?
  • The Supreme Court's decision in Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music redefined transformative use by affirming that parodies could be considered transformative even if they are commercially profitable. The ruling highlighted that a work does not need to change every aspect of the original to be transformative; it must add new expression or meaning. This broader interpretation allowed for more creative freedom while still respecting copyright law, encouraging artists to explore parody and commentary without fear of infringement.
• Evaluate the implications of Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music for future cases involving copyright and fair use in a digital context.
  • The implications of Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music for future copyright cases are significant, especially in a digital context where creative works are easily accessible and remixing is common. The case established a precedent that supports artists’ rights to create parodies and commentaries without facing excessive legal barriers. This encourages innovation and creativity while also balancing the rights of original creators. As digital media continues to evolve, this ruling serves as a guiding principle for courts addressing fair use claims related to new forms of expression, such as memes, mashups, and other derivative works.

Related terms

Fair Use: A legal doctrine that allows limited use of copyrighted material without permission from the rights holders under certain conditions, such as commentary, criticism, or parody.

Transformative Use: A type of use that adds new expression or meaning to the original work, often considered a key factor in determining fair use.

Copyright Infringement: The unauthorized use of copyrighted material in a way that violates the copyright holder's exclusive rights.