home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- <text id=94TT0315>
- <title>
- Mar. 21, 1994: Parodies Regained
- </title>
- <history>
- TIME--The Weekly Newsmagazine--1994
- Mar. 21, 1994 Hard Times For Hillary
- </history>
- <article>
- <source>Time Magazine</source>
- <hdr>
- SUPREME COURT, Page 46
- Parodies Regained
- </hdr>
- <body>
- <p>Ruling on a Roy Orbison send-up, Justice Souter alights elegantly
- on the side of satire
- </p>
- <p>By David Van Biema--Reported by Greg Aunapu/Miami, Patrick E. Cole/Los Angeles and
- Kristen Lippert-Martin/Washington
- </p>
- <p> Could it have happened this way? It is dusk at the Supreme
- Court chambers. Portraits of Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. and Felix
- Frankfurter gaze from the walls. A 54-year-old Justice from
- a rural white state cues up the official Supreme Court CD player,
- and we hear...Luther Campbell's bawdy, silly rap parody
- of the Roy Orbison classic, Oh, Pretty Woman: "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.'" Slowly, almost imperceptibly, Justice
- David Souter's foot begins to tap.
- </p>
- <p> The scene is imaginary, but it captures the spirit of a fascinating
- Supreme Court decision last week to affirm the borrowing rights
- of parody, an artistic form that has long suffered in copyright
- limbo. Normally, artists are entitled to payment for use of
- their words, tunes or images. A 1976 law lists some exceptions
- to this rule, including scholarship and commentary, whereby
- unpaid excerpting (known as "fair use") is allowed. Parody,
- however, goes unmentioned. Should send-up artists, whose ranks
- have included everyone from Lewis Carroll to "Weird Al" Yankovic,
- be included too? More specifically, can Campbell, best known
- for his group 2 Live Crew's 1990 victory over obscenity charges,
- appropriate Orbison's famous bass intro, his drumbeat and his
- first line without permission from the song's publisher?
- </p>
- <p> Souter, writing for all nine Justices, said yes. Although a
- lower court must rule on whether Campbell appropriated too much
- or hijacked potential profits from a nonparodic rap version
- of the song, Souter held that a careful satirist can borrow
- from his victim without permission.
- </p>
- <p> Souter's opinion is intellectually frisky as well as legally
- timely. Parody's legitimacy, he ventures, lies in its "transformative"
- character, the same alchemy of turning the known into the new
- that informs all art. Campbell deserves credit both for "shedding
- light on an earlier work, and...creating a new one." Souter
- then makes an excursion into the social roots of humor: part
- of the parody's kick, he says, is its explosion of Orbison's
- unlikely premise of sidewalk romance, which the judge notes,
- "...ignores the ugliness of street life and the debasement
- that it signifies." Rebutting the argument that the ditty's
- commercial intent moots its artistic value, Souter playfully
- enlists Samuel Johnson: "`No man but a blockhead ever wrote,
- except for money.'" Finally, the court's Latin scholar scores
- head-banger points for using the phrase "opening bass riff"
- without quotation marks.
- </p>
- <p> Satirists welcomed the decision, which should aid not only musical
- lampoonists but also those who work in prose, video and the
- visual arts. So did rap artists, some of whom, embroiled in
- controversies regarding obscenity and violence, worry about
- the racial evenhandedness of the American justice system. Says
- Courtney Branch, producer of the top-selling acts D.J. Quik
- and Mad Flava: "I was skeptical of the Supreme Court at first.
- But I would say to Souter that I thank him for being able to
- look past the color line to the art and musicians' freedom to
- say what they would like to say."
- </p>
-
- </body>
- </article>
- </text>
-
-