Campbell vs. Acuff-Rose Music Inc. (1994)

Fair Use: Application of Parody Doctrine in Philippines

The US Supreme Court in its decision in the case of Campbell vs. Acuff-Rose Music Inc. (1994), pronounced that a work of parody is not a violation of any copyright. Applying the four tests for copyright infringement, such as the purpose and character of the use, the nature of the copyrighted work, the amount and the substantiality of the portion used, and the effect of the use upon the potential market, the High Court ruled that the parody song “Pretty Woman” composed by 2 Live Crew did not violate the copyright granted to Acuff-Rose Music Inc. This new ruling significantly affected the application of the concept of “fair use” with regards to the utilization or copying of the copyrighted materials. It expounded further the principle laid down in the sec. 8 Art. 1 of the US constitution, which provides for the regulation by the State of the rights granted to authors and inventors, to promote transformative works for the further development of science and arts. This new doctrine provides for a new category to place new derivative works under the limitations on copyrights.

The case mentioned above may also happen in the Philippines. With the occurrence of some parody-like shows in the country such as Bubble Gang, Goin’ Bulilit, lspup, and other shows which have the habit of copying the ideas of other shows for the purpose of creating a comedy version or the exact parody of such show, some issues may also occur and might lead to lawsuits and litigation. However, with the pronouncement of this new doctrine, Philippines courts’ now have a guide to resolve the issues and implement the rule on fair use of copyrighted material.

This doctrine can be adapted in Philippines by the courts without tilting the balance of upholding the interest of the State while preserving the statutory rights granted to the constituents. But how can the courts can use this doctrine? With the enactment of Republic Act (RA) 8293 or known as Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines, the application of this “parody doctrine” can be made possible. Sections (sec.) 184 and 185 which provide for the limitations on copyrights are the key provisions. Specifically, the provisions under sec. 185, which provides for the rule on the fair use of a copyrighted work, is the adaptation of the rules laid down in the case Campbell vs. Acuff-Rose Music Inc. (1994). Here, under sec. 185.1, the four test used to determine fair use are intentionally included and serve as guide to help the court in resolving the issues regarding the exploitation and the use any copyrighted material. It can be noted that the ruling in the US Case (1994) has been pronounced before the enactment of the Intellectual property code (1997). This clearly shows that inclusion is the indication that the lawmakers intended to adapt the ruling and to apply it in the country.