Dissent

CAMPBELL, aka SKYYWALKER, et al. v. ACUFF ROSE MUSIC, INC.

Dissent – if the case wasn’t decided 9-0, what did the justices who ruled against the majority think about their case?

The Courts ruling was a unanimous decision. Both Justice Kennedy and Justice Souter from the Supreme Court agreed with one another that the song was a parody and it claimed as Fair Use. The case was also ruled reversed and remand. It was sent back for the District Courts to rule on the case. The source found on page 56 can be found here.

Your Own Argument

CAMPBELL, aka SKYYWALKER, et al. v. ACUFF ROSE MUSIC, INC.

Did you agree or disagree with the ruling. Provide some authority for your argument

I definitely was skeptacle about the argument. I mean, 2 Live Crew pratically copied their whole song. I listened to the song myself and I didn't think it was funny. I didn't think it was a parody of the original. The 2 Live Crew Version sounded like it was directed towards a particular person. It didn't sound like it was trying to make fun of the original in anyway. "Judge Nelson, dissenting below, came to the same conclusion, that the 2 Live Crew song "was clearly intended to ridicule the white bread original" source I disagree, I think that the song was intended for a remix, or maybe for filler space on 2 Live Crew's album. I don't think they inteded to have a parody at all. As stated by Justice Kennedy:

"On July 5, 1989, 2 Live Crew's manager informed Acuff Rose that 2 Live Crew had written a parody of "Oh, Pretty Woman," that they would afford all credit for ownership and authorship of the original song to Acuff Rose, Dees, and Orbison, and that they were willing to pay a fee for the use they wished to make of it. Enclosed with the letter were a copy of the lyrics and a recording of 2 Live Crew's song. See Appendix B, infra, at 27. Acuff Rose's agent refused permission,"

Originally they asked Acuff-Rose for permission to use the song but they had said no. But yet they still published the song on their records anyways?

"Nonetheless, in June or July 1989, [n.2] 2 Live Crew released records, cassette tapes, and compact discs of "Pretty Woman" in a collection of songs entitled "As Clean As They Wanna Be.""stating that "I am aware of the success enjoyed by `The 2 Live Crews', but I must inform you that we cannot permit the use of a parody of `Oh, Pretty Woman.' " App. to Pet. for Cert. 85a." source

And sold it as well? I think there should be some repercussions for that. I think they just claimed "Parody" or "Fair Use" to save them from the courts. They copied someone's hard earned work. In my eyes, I don't find that morally right. The supreme court ruled that it was Fair Use and that it qualified as a parody. I think Roy Orbison and Acuff-Rose deserve more dignity for their music. I don't think its right for them to be infringed upon and their culprit let free.

Rule of Law

CAMPBELL, aka SKYYWALKER, et al. v. ACUFF ROSE MUSIC, INC.

Rule of law -- a concise summary of the main precedent established.

To base their decisions they refered the U.S. Copyright Acts.

"(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work."

source

"The Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit reversed and remanded. 972 F. 2d 1429, 1439 (1992). Although it assumed for the purpose of its opinion that 2 Live Crew's song was a parody of the Orbison original, the Court of Appeals thought the District Court had put too little emphasis on the fact that "every commercial use . . . is presumptively . . . unfair," Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc., 464 U.S. 417, 451 (1984), and it held that "the admittedly commercial nature" of the parody "requires the conclusion" that the first of four factors relevant under the statute weighs against a finding of fair use." source

Reasoning of the Court

CAMPBELL, aka SKYYWALKER, et al. v. ACUFF ROSE MUSIC, INC.

Analysis of the thinking process and logic used by previous judges.

The judges of this supreme court case were Justice Kennedy and Justice Souter. Both Justices concurred with one another. Justice Kennedy found reason that a parody qualifies as Fair Use. "..parody may qualify as fair use regardless of whether it is published or performed for profit. " "..parody may qualify as fair use only if it draws upon the original composition to make humorous or ironic commentary about that same composition." What Kennedy basically said is that a parody is considered Fair Use if it is humorous. In order for a song to have been a parody it would have used some of the orginal song to comment upon. A parody may also sound similar if it is specifally targeting a particular genre of style of music. "The parody must target the original, and not just its general style, the genre of art to which it belongs, or society as a whole (although if it targets the original, it may target those features as well)." source Some of Justice Kennedy's reasoning was refered to Rogers v. Koons. That case can be found here.

Justice Souter had commentary as well. In a parody, a song has taken the heart from another song to create the new one. All parody's created from an original song comment on the author's work. "For the purposes of copyright law, the nub of the definitions, and the heart of any parodist's claim to quote from existing material, is the use of some elements of a prior author's composition to create a new one that, at least in part, comments on that author's works. See, e. g., Fisher v. Dees, supra, at 437; MCA, Inc. v. Wilson, 677 F. 2d 180, 185 (CA2 1981)." source

What I think of Illicit Trade

source

I think the whole process of illicit trade is sickening. It's hard for me to fathom the idea that people take these businesses to the next level. What's even more unimaginable is that ordinary people like me and you would actually purchase a fake bag, shoes, sunglasses or medicine -knowingly. How hard is it to save up money and buy that purse you've been wanting? In my personal opinion it means more to me, that I busted my ass to buy a genuine product. It has more value to know it's real and I earned it. The seller's of these products should be ashamed of themselves. To use the excuse, "I'm doing this for my family" is a load of bull. That is no excuse whatsoever. Don't get me wrong, people gotta do what they gotta do to put food on the table; but I don't wanna hear any crying when they get caught. They knew what they were getting themselves into. How long do people really think they can get away with this kind of stuff? It's so immoral, for you to copy or steal a company's original idea and mass market it for a fraction of the cost. The buyers of these products are just as bad; trying to cheat life and get a good deal. People shoudl have pride for themselves and never settle for less than the best. The karma is going to catch up to these people. It's just not good mojo.

Decision of the Court

CAMPBELL, aka SKYYWALKER, et al. v. ACUFF ROSE MUSIC, INC.

Decision of the court – how was the case decided, including an analysis of any concurring or dissenting opinions in previous case precedent

The case was originally decided by The District Court that 2 Live Crew was a parody and was Fair Use. The case was then taken to the Court of Appeals where it was said it was an infringement on Acuff-Rose. The Court of Appeals believed they had taken the heart of the song. It was then taken further to the Supreme Court where it's final decision was made. The Supreme Court found that the Court of Appeals had made a mistake. The "heart" of the song is was makes a parody, an parody.

(e) The Court of Appeals erred in holding that, as a matter of law, 2 Live Crew copied excessively from the Orbison original under the third §107 factor, which asks whether "the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole" are reasonable in relation to the copying's purpose. Even if 2 Live Crew's copying of the original's first line of lyrics and characteristic opening bass riff may be said to go to the original's "heart," that heart is what most readily conjures up the song for parody, and it is the heart at which parody takes aim. Source

The Court of Appeals had also made a mistake in how the song effected the market. The two songs were intended for different markets. 2 Live Crew's version would not infringe on the market of Acuff-Rose.

"As to parody pure and simple, it is unlikely that the work will act as a substitute for the original, since the two works usually serve different market functions. The fourth factor requires courts also to consider the potential market for derivative works." Source

It was error for the Court of Appeals to conclude that the commercial nature of 2 Live Crew's parody of "Oh, Pretty Woman" rendered it presumptively unfair. No such evidentiary presumption is available to address either the first factor, the character and purpose of the use, or the fourth, market harm, in determining whether a transformative use, such as parody, is a fair one. The court also erred in holding that 2 Live Crew had necessarily copied excessively from the Orbison original, considering the parodic purpose of the use. We therefore reverse the judgment of the Court of Appeals and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Justice Souter delivered the opinion of the court. A concurrence was made by Justice Kennedy. The Supreme Court later reversed and remanded further hearings of the court.

Issues of the Case

CAMPBELL, aka SKYYWALKER, et al. v. ACUFF ROSE MUSIC, INC.

Issue of the case -- what specific concepts and terms were involved – in other words, why is the case before the Court

The case is before the Court because a Tort was committed against Acuff Rose Music, Inc. Some of the terms used in the case were "Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair Use" and "Parodies". This case has become an issue becuase Acuff Rose Music, Inc. believes 2 Live Crew infringend upon their copyrights. This is an issue becuase Roy Orbison worked hard on his music. Acuff Rose Music, Inc is defending his legacy by saying it wasn't okay to sample his music without permission. This infraction violates the moral honor of Roy Orbison. They believed 2 Live Crew's version defiled the song and it meaning. The lyrics and rythym sound similar but have very different meanings. The version shown here is the original by Roy Orbison

"Pretty woman, walking down the street
Pretty woman, the kind I like to meet
Pretty womanI don't believe you,
you're not the truth
No one could look as good as you
Mercy

Pretty woman, won't you pardon me
Pretty
woman, I couldn't help see
Pretty womanThat you look lovely as can be
Are you lonely just like me

Pretty woman, stop a while
Pretty
woman, talk a while
Pretty woman, give your smile to me
Pretty woman,
yeah yeah yeah
Pretty woman, look my way
Pretty woman, say you'll stay
with me'

Cause I need you,
I'll trear you right
Come with me
baby,
be mine tonight

Pretty woman, don't walk on by
Pretty
woman, make me cry
Pretty woman, don't walk away, hey...
okay

If
that's the way it must be, okay
I guess I'll go on home, it's late
There'll be tomorrow nigh,
but waitWhat do I see
Is she walking back
to me
Yeah, she's walking back to me
Oh, oh,
Pretty woman" Source

Roy Orbison's original work was created with good intentions. It was creativity at its finest. Unfortunately another version was replicated by 2 Live Crew. It was almost as if 2 Live Crew was stealing Orbison's creative content and claiming it as their own. The lyrics are similar but for someone who has never heard Orbison's original it could have been believed that this was 2 Live's creation. The lyrics shown here are 2 Live Crew's Version:

"Verse 1: [Luke]
Pretty Woman, walking down the street,
Pretty Woman, girl, girl you look so sweet,
Pretty Woman, you, you bring me down to that knee,
Pretty Woman, you make me wanna beg please,
Oh, Pretty Woman.

Verse 2: [Fresh Kid Ice]
Big hairy woman, you need to shave that stuff,
Big hairy woman, you know I bet it's tough.
Big hairy woman, all that hair ain't legit,
'Cause you look like Cousin It.
Big hairy woman

Verse 3: [Brother Marquis]
Bald headed woman, girl your hair won't grow,
Bald headed woman, you got a teeny weeny afro.
Bald headed woman, you know your hair could look nice,
Bald headed woman, first you got to roll it with rice.
Bald headed woman, here let me get this uncle bens for ya,
Ya know what I'm saying, its' better than Rice a Roni
Oh, Bald headed woman

Bridge: [Mr. Mixx]
Big hairy woman, come on in,
[Brother Marquis]
And don't forget your bald headed friend
[Luke]
Hey Pretty Woman, let the boys jump in.

Verse 4: [Mr. Mixx]
Two timin' woman, girl you know you ain't right,
Two timin' woman, you's out with my boy last night
Two timin' woman, that takes a load off my mind,
Two timin' woman, now I know the baby ain't mine
Oh, Two timin' woman

[All]
Oh, Pretty Woman. " Source

As you can see the lyrics are quite similar. The meaning of the two are very differenet. That is the main issue of this case.