Can you recommend articles on parody law?
There is an excellent feature article about the history of parody, "fair use," and the 2 Live Crew case and its ramifications in the April 1997 issue of "Los Angeles Lawyer" Magazine (It was the cover story.) You should still be able to order the back issue from them. Here's the where you can find that issue on their site:
In the aforementioned "Los Angeles Lawyer" magazine article, titled "Fair is Fair," attorney Joseph Von Sauers outlined the history of parody and fair use and he noted what a major impact the 2 Live Crew case had in shifting the advantage in parodies from the original artist to the parodist.
"For example, in Campbell (the 2 Live Crew Case), the Court ruled, as a matter of law, that a derivative market does not exist for parody. In holding that 'the market for potential derivative uses includes only those that creators of original works would in general develop or license others to develop,' the Court presumed that owner of original works would not want to license parodies. By its pronouncement the Court, in effect, rendered the derivative parody market unprotectable, thus eliminating any incentive for the parodist to negotiate a licensing agreement with the copyright holder."
An entertainment lawyer, Von Sauers makes good points regarding both the parodist and the original artist:
"Morally, copyright owners should not be entitled to stifle criticism of their works. This includes criticism achieved by humor through parody. The Copyright Act clearly does not include the right of censorship. But parodists should not be entitled to hijack the work of others, to profit from their creations, and to keep all the profits. Copyright owners are entitled to a share in the exploitation of their works, even if that exploitation is unwanted."
Von Sauers argues that a good compromise would be to develop a compulsory licensing system for parodies to be set up like the one that already exists for people who want to do cover versions of songs.