Join NCAC Now

» art» media» literature» science» internet» education» entertainment

EXPRESS YOURSELF!

 in support of free expression



NCAC File Room


The information presented here by the National Coalition Against Censorship (NCAC) may be freely redistributed in its entirety, provided that readers are informed that the information was obtained from NCAC's World Wide Web site and that credit is given to the appropriate source of whatever information is used. Permission is expressly granted for the information obtained to be made available for file transfer from installations offering unrestricted anonymous file transfer on the Internet. Information found here may not be sold for profit or incorporated in commercial documents without the written permission from the National Coalition Against Censorship.

©Copyright 2005 NCAC
WEB DESIGN
Jeanne Criscola Criscola Design

free speech first amendment censorship

  
CASE NAME: Leibovitz v. Paramount Pictures Corp.
CITATION: 137 F.3d 109 (2d Cir. 1998)
Topics: Copyright and Fair Use

Photographer Annie Leibovitz owned copyright in her photograph of Demi Moore, pregnant and naked, which appeared on the cover of the August 1991 Vanity Fair. In 1993, Paramount promoted the release of Naked Gun 33 1/3 by superimposing the face of the movie’s male star on a pregnant female image modeled after Leibovitz’s photograph. Here Leibovitz sued Paramount for copyright infringement.

The court held the advertisement was a parody. As parody is a fair use defense to copyright infringement, the use was deemed permissible. The court found three elements cutting against a finding of fair use: the advertisement promoted a commercial product, the original work was creative, and the copying was extensive. Yet the court concluded these problems were remedied by the fact that the advertisement transformed and commented upon the original work. The court believed the ad could reasonably be perceived to comment upon the seriousness, or even the pretentiousness, of the original photograph. Also, the new work did not interfere with any potential market for the original photograph. The court balanced these five factors to conclude the advertisement was a fair use.

These materials are not intended, and should not be used, as legal advice. They necessarily contain generalizations that are not applicable in all jurisdictions or circumstances. Moreover, court decisions may be superceded by subsequent rulings, and may be subject to alternative interpretations. Corrections, clarification, and additions are welcome. Please send to ncac@ncac.org.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Action Alerts

» National

» Eastern

» Central

» Mountain

» Pacific


» email alert sign-up


» report censorship!

 

275 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001 » Phone (212) 807-6222 Fax (212) 807-6245 » ncac@ncac.org