Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: MONDAY, November 8, 1993 TAG: 9311080034
SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL PAGE: A-3 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: Associated Press
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
"It's like if someone asks you if they could use the car," he said. "We said no, but they take it and paint it all different colors."
A dispute over the rap remake has reached the U.S. Supreme Court and turned into a test of copyright law's strength and the boundaries of satire.
Dolly Parton, Michael Jackson, comedian Mark Russell and the publishers of Mad Magazine are among those who have filed briefs with the court on both sides of the case, which will be argued Tuesday.
"There's plenty of money involved," said lawyer Stephen Kaye, who represents the estates of songwriters Irving Berlin, George Gershwin, Cole Porter and others battling 2 Live Crew.
The fight began in 1989, when the raunchy rappers asked Acuff-Rose Music Inc., the powerful Nashville music publisher that owns the copyright to "Oh, Pretty Woman," for permission to make changes in the song.
Straight remakes are no problem after a song is recorded, as long as writers and publishers are credited and receive royalties. But rewrites fall into murkier legal territory.
Acuff-Rose refused permission. 2 Live Crew went ahead anyway, borrowing the song's trademark guitar riff for verses that taunt a "big hairy woman," a "bald-headed woman" and a "two-timin' woman."
The publishers sued, claiming copyright infringement.
"You're not doing anything to harm the copyright. You're just having fun," said Luther Campbell, leader of 2 Live Crew.
At issue here is the concept of "fair use" of a copyright. Lawyers on both sides want to establish whether someone may freely borrow a portion of an artistic work for parody or whether the copyright owner controls such usage. Lower courts have split on the issue.
Backers of 2 Live Crew say a ruling against them would severely curtail the art of satire.
"If you wanted to do a parody, it would be like the underground performances behind the Iron Curtain. Put a guard at the door," said political satirist Russell.
But songwriters say an adverse ruling would limit their ability to make money off their work.
Hit songs like "Oh, Pretty Woman" have a financial life long after they slip down the charts. Publishers like Acuff-Rose jealously guard the use of copyrights. In neither court papers nor interviews would they reveal what the Orbison-Dees song brings in each year.
"That song is responsible for most of my income," Dees said, allowing only that he makes well over $100,000 a year. He lives in Lampe, Mo., and still writes songs.
Dees gets fees whenever the song is played and if anyone remakes it. Van Halen's heavy metal version and the Julia Roberts movie, "Pretty Woman," were big moneymakers for Dees and Acuff-Rose.
On the other hand, the copyright owners rejected a lucrative offer to license the song for use in a fast-food commercial, Dees said.
Acuff-Rose lawyers argued that 2 Live Crew's version cheapened the song and limited future income possibilities. And songwriters like Parton and Jackson say if the rappers go unpunished, it lets anyone do what they want with a song, call it parody and avoid payment.
Jackson has extensive song publishing holdings, including much of the Beatles catalog.
And Parton has an avid interest in copyright law; she tapped into a gold mine when Whitney Houston had a big hit last year with Parton's composition, "I Will Always Love You."
by CNB