Summary: Is this fair use? I. Part One of a two-part episode all about Fair Use! Instead of doing what we normally do and focusing the majority of the episode taking a deep dive into a single topic or case, we’ll be going through what fair use is, how it works, the seminal cases, how creators have gotten it right, and how creators have gotten it wrong. How exciting! II. Fair Use Dissected! A. Section 107 of the Copyright Act and the Four Fair Use factors. 1. The purpose and character of the use, and commercial use versus educational use. 2. The nature of the copyrighted work. 3. The amount of the copyrighted work used. 4. The effect of the use upon the potential market for the copyrighted work. B. Campbell v. Acuff-Rose, Inc. as a seminal fair use case – “Oh Pretty Woman” the rock ballad v. “Pretty Woman” the rap song. C. Harper & Row v. Nation Enterprises as another seminal fair use case, but this one is kind of boring so we’ll talk about it quickly. D. How to get it right: Leibovitz v. Paramount Pictures Corp – Vanity Fair’s Demi Moore photograph versus Paramount’s Leslie Nielsen photograph (posted above). A 1. Melina's loves Fievel Mousekewitz. She also cannot pronouce "Demi" Moore. E. How to get it wrong: Dr. Seuss Enterprises, L.P. v. Penguin Books USA, Inc. – The Cat in the Hat versus The Cat NOT in the Hat – an O.J. Simpson parody. III. Now that we've discussed the basics of the law, in the next episode, stay tuned for Part Two of our Fair Use episode: Two pieces of Listener Mail will be discussed: A. Tony Mast at Back Seat Producers wants to know whether a media reviewer may review fan fiction or other unlicensed copyright-protected media without liability. B. @Tresi wants to know what kinds of format shifting are allowed under US law and if there’s any interesting case law or history regarding the state of fair use for digital media. IV. We end on a terribly morose note. Melina really hates flying. She hopes to return to do Part Two of the podcast in 2 weeks!
