Monday, March 3, 2008

Satire, parody, fair use, or what?

Satire, parody, fair use, or what?

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Hmm. I want to answer Yes AND No to each. Yes, this is a parody/satire of sorts, but not really of the author's original work (Guthrie's song). The point of this is to parody Bush and Kerry, and JibJab just used a Guthrie song to do so. In the Campbell case, the Court stated that, essentially, a parody for fair use purposes uses an old work to make a new work that comments on the original author's work. This clip comments on Bush and Kerry, not on "This Land." So it is a parody, but it does not parody the copyrighted material. Therefore . . .no fair use?

Anonymous said...

I believe it comments on the original song quite well.

A parody's purpose need not be limited to one point. This work did take an old work and made an arguably new one. The lyrics have all but completely changed. Saved from the chorus, arguably the 'heart of the work' every line is different.

Furthermore the song demonstrates that regardless of which side of the political isle you stand on, this land is no longer yours.

It completely destroys the image conjured by the original work. Taken as a whole this song can be seen as a satire, but since the original work is a least targeted by the new work it can qualify for parody.

Anonymous said...

Sure it comments on the original work, but does that make it a parody entitled to the fair use defense under Campbell? Any work of appropriation art comments on the original which it appropriates. But it usually does so in the course of making another point. So if the JibJab video is a parody of This Land is Your Land, it would seem to me any piece of appropriation art would be considered a parody of any work it had appropriated.