The Court held that while “Jimmy Smith Rap” promoted the elitism of jazz music, “Pound Cake” criticized it. Drake’s “Pound Cake,” however, sent the message that all music reigned supreme, regardless of genre. It proposed that jazz would stand the test of time, where other types of music would not. “Jimmy Smith Rap” was one about the greatness of jazz, and painted a negative view of all other types of music. A transformative work is one that uses copyrighted material for a purpose that differs from that for which it was created. The Court held that the first factor supported fair use because Drake’s use of the copyrighted material was transformative. The statutory framework for analyzing fair use includes (1) the purpose and character of use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes (2) the nature of the copyrighted work (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. In affirming the District Court, the Second Circuit considered four well known non-exclusive factors in determining the work constituted fair use.
In 2017, the District Court ruled that the portion of “Jimmy Smith Rap” used in Drake’s song was fair use because Drake’s objective was “sharply different from the in creating it.” Estate of Smith v.
#Drake pound cake court case license
In April 2014, the estate of Jimmy Smith filed suit against Drake, alleging infringement of the copyright of “Jimmy Smith Rap.” It is worthwhile to note that Drake had actually obtained a license to the sound recording, but not the composition. The original lawsuit alleged Drake violated a copyright by sampling a 1982 word recording, “Jimmy Smith Rap,” in his own song, “Pound Cake.” Drake scored a big win as the Second Circuit affirmed his use of another work in one of his songs as “fair use.” Estate of Smith v.
0 kommentar(er)
