In our previous blog article, we explored the concept of fair use and how courts determine whether the use of copyrighted material is permitted without the rightsholder’s permission under the Constitution’s statute.
Copyright, patents and intellectual property protection law and rights.
In our previous blog article, we explored the concept of fair use and how courts determine whether the use of copyrighted material is permitted without the rightsholder’s permission under the Constitution’s statute.
One way to decide whether the fair use law applies is to determine whether the third party engaged in the transformative use of the copyrighted material. New York’s active Second Circuit Court recently ruled on two applicable cases, elucidating the intricacies of fair use.
Who’s on First?
The Second Circuit decided a very interesting matter about the use of the classic “Who’s on first?” routine by the legendary comedy duo Abbott and Costello. TCA Television Corp. v. McCollum, 839 F.3d 168 (2d Cir. 2016).
This familiar routine revolved around the interplay of baseball players oddly named as Who, What, and I Don’t Know. Abbott and Costello would go back and forth in an exasperated attempt to understand the situation, asking questions like “Who’s on first,” which was a statement and not a question-you get the idea.
Hand to God is a stage play that included the “Who’s on first?” routine described above, but with a sock puppet telling it. The producers of the play saw the Abbott and Costello routine as something that was commonly known, and they also thought that the way that they used it-as a critique of the social norms governing a small town in the Bible Belt-would suffice and justify their use of the routine.
And the District Court agreed with them. However, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed that decision, holding that it was not transformative use because:
The play did not add any new elements, expressions, meaning or message to the classic bit.
The retelling of the “Who’s on first?” bit portrayed in Hand to Godexhausted the entire routine.
Hand to God‘s use of the routine was commercial in nature.
The use did affect a derivative market for a license for the routine.
“Who’s on first?” has been largely licensed by others.
What is perhaps most interesting about this case-and further evidence of the wisdom in hiring counsel to protect your intellectual property-is that Hand to God still (sort of) won! In a later decision, the court found that Abbott and Costello’s heirs had no legal standing to sue for infringement. It appears that after their initial 1944 copyright, Abbott and Costello never renewed it.
Redefining Labor Relations: NLRB's Pivot from Abruzzo’s Memoranda
On February 14, 2025, the Office of General Counsel (OGC) of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) under Acting General Counsel William B. Cowen issued Memorandum 25-05, “New Process for More Efficient, Effective, Accessible and Transparent Case handling.” The Memorandum rescinds nearly all of the Memoranda issued by his direct predecessor, Jennifer Abruzzo, setting the […]
If you purchase real property from a foreign person or entity, you may be required to withhold taxes from your payment to the seller under the Foreign Investment in Real Property Tax Act (FIRPTA). The federal tax law is designed to ensure that foreign sellers pay any applicable capital gains tax on profits realized from […]
Does Your Homeowners Insurance Provide Adequate Coverage?
Your home is likely your greatest asset, which is why it is so important to adequately protect it. Homeowners insurance protects you from the financial costs of unforeseen losses, such as theft, fire, and natural disasters, by helping you rebuild and replace possessions that were lost While the definition of “adequate” coverage depends upon a […]
Understanding the Importance of a Non-Contingent Offer
Making a non-contingent offer can dramatically increase your chances of securing a real estate transaction, particularly in competitive markets like New York City. However, buyers should understand that waiving contingencies, including those related to financing, or appraisals, also comes with significant risks. Determining your best strategy requires careful analysis of the property, the market, and […]
Fred D. Zemel Appointed Chair of Strategic Planning at Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC
Business Transactional Attorney Zemel to Spearhead Strategic Initiatives for Continued Growth and Innovation Little Falls, NJ – February 21, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is pleased to announce that Partner Fred D. Zemel has been named Chair of the firm’s Strategic Planning Committee. In this role, Mr. Zemel will lead the committee in identifying, […]
Novation Agreement Process: Step-by-Step Guide for Businesses
Big changes sometimes occur during the life cycle of a contract. Cancelling a contract outright can be bad for your reputation and your bottom line. Businesses need to know how to best address a change in circumstances, while also protecting their legal rights. One option is to transfer the “benefits and the burdens” of a […]
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Transformative Use Of Copyrighted Material Highly Subjective
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
In our previous blog article, we explored the concept of fair use and how courts determine whether the use of copyrighted material is permitted without the rightsholder’s permission under the Constitution’s statute.
Copyright, patents and intellectual property protection law and rights.
In our previous blog article, we explored the concept of fair use and how courts determine whether the use of copyrighted material is permitted without the rightsholder’s permission under the Constitution’s statute.
One way to decide whether the fair use law applies is to determine whether the third party engaged in the transformative use of the copyrighted material. New York’s active Second Circuit Court recently ruled on two applicable cases, elucidating the intricacies of fair use.
Who’s on First?
The Second Circuit decided a very interesting matter about the use of the classic “Who’s on first?” routine by the legendary comedy duo Abbott and Costello. TCA Television Corp. v. McCollum, 839 F.3d 168 (2d Cir. 2016).
This familiar routine revolved around the interplay of baseball players oddly named as Who, What, and I Don’t Know. Abbott and Costello would go back and forth in an exasperated attempt to understand the situation, asking questions like “Who’s on first,” which was a statement and not a question-you get the idea.
Hand to God is a stage play that included the “Who’s on first?” routine described above, but with a sock puppet telling it. The producers of the play saw the Abbott and Costello routine as something that was commonly known, and they also thought that the way that they used it-as a critique of the social norms governing a small town in the Bible Belt-would suffice and justify their use of the routine.
And the District Court agreed with them. However, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed that decision, holding that it was not transformative use because:
The play did not add any new elements, expressions, meaning or message to the classic bit.
The retelling of the “Who’s on first?” bit portrayed in Hand to Godexhausted the entire routine.
Hand to God‘s use of the routine was commercial in nature.
The use did affect a derivative market for a license for the routine.
“Who’s on first?” has been largely licensed by others.
What is perhaps most interesting about this case-and further evidence of the wisdom in hiring counsel to protect your intellectual property-is that Hand to God still (sort of) won! In a later decision, the court found that Abbott and Costello’s heirs had no legal standing to sue for infringement. It appears that after their initial 1944 copyright, Abbott and Costello never renewed it.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!
