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, particularly in relation to parody. The case involved the rap group 2 Live Crew, which created a parody of Roy Orbison's song 'Oh, Pretty Woman.' The Court ruled that parody could qualify as fair use, emphasizing the importance of freedom of expression while balancing it against the rights of copyright holders.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. The Supreme Court's decision in Campbell v. Acuff-Rose established that parody is a valid form of fair use under copyright law.
2. The ruling emphasized that the transformative nature of a work is key in determining fair use; if the new work adds new expression or meaning, it is more likely to be protected.
3. The case highlighted the balance between protecting intellectual property and allowing for freedom of speech and artistic expression.
4. The Court rejected the notion that commercial intent alone could negate a claim of fair use, recognizing that even commercially driven parodies can qualify as fair use.
5. This case is often cited in discussions about intellectual property rights, especially in the context of music and the arts.

Review Questions

• How did the Supreme Court's ruling in Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. redefine the concept of fair use in relation to parody?
  • The Supreme Court's ruling in Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. redefined fair use by affirming that parody can be considered transformative and thus eligible for fair use protection. The Court emphasized that if a new work alters the original enough to add new meaning or expression, it is likely to be protected under fair use. This was significant because it allowed artists greater freedom to create parodies without fear of infringing copyright laws.
• Discuss how the outcome of Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. impacts creators who wish to produce parodies of existing works.
  • The outcome of Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. significantly impacts creators by providing a clearer pathway for producing parodies without facing copyright infringement claims. The ruling allows artists to engage in satire and commentary through parody while asserting that commercial intent does not automatically negate fair use protection. This decision encourages creativity and innovation among artists who wish to critique or reinterpret existing works while balancing their rights against those of copyright holders.
• Evaluate the implications of Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. on future copyright cases involving artistic expression and intellectual property rights.
  • The implications of Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. on future copyright cases are profound, as it sets a precedent for evaluating the balance between artistic expression and intellectual property rights. Future cases will likely reference this decision when considering whether a work qualifies as fair use, particularly in contexts involving parody and satire. As artists continue to push boundaries and explore new forms of expression, this ruling will serve as a benchmark for protecting creative works while allowing for critical commentary and transformation within artistic communities.

Related terms

Fair Use: A legal doctrine that permits limited use of copyrighted material without obtaining permission from the rights holders, under certain circumstances.

Copyright: A form of protection grounded in the U.S. Constitution and granted by law for original works of authorship, giving creators exclusive rights to their works.

Parody: A humorous or satirical imitation of a particular writer, artist, or genre, often used as a form of commentary or critique.