Re: Supreme Court on Parody

From: James N. Myers <booksrus[_at_]astro.ocis.temple.edu>
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 1994 11:56:22 -0500 (EST)

On Sat, 12 Mar 1994, Seth Greenstein wrote: 

>

> So, in your view, whether a work is a parody cannot be determined by its
> content? And it has to be determined, under the fourth factor, by its
> impact on the _potential_ market for the work?
> How come the Court knows pornography when it sees it, but not parody?

I'm no expert here -- a lawyer, but one of no special expertise on this. Without going back and rereading the case, I would say that the court does know parody, but would not say that just any parody would do. If the parody was actually just a slightly changed takeoff on the original with strong possibility that it would compete with the original in a confused market, it wouldn't fly. So, if a rap-version parody might diminish the market for a rap version non-parody, it won't fly either.

James N. Myers
<booksrus[_at_]astro.ocis.temple.edu> Received on Mon Mar 14 1994 - 17:05:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Mar 26 2007 - 00:35:11 GMT