In the obscene parody cases plaintiffs have shown no affect on the market for their copyrighted works. These potential markets distinctly differ from markets for obscene parody. No conflicts result between the two markets as owners of copyrighted works neither seek to parody their properties through the use of obscenity nor sell in the obscenity markets. The nature of obscene parody requires a reexamination of the community obscenity standard in order to promote uniform application of copyright laws throughout the country. Without a uniform standard, judicial treatment of obscene parody and the copyright laws will suffer from variations in moral viewpoint, causing an increase in litigation determining the status of obscene parody in fair use cases.
Obscene parody requires broad interpretation of three of the four fair use guidelines.
The third fair use factor, amount and substantiality of the portion used, should be applied as in other fair use cases. But differences between obscene parody and other parodic uses highlight how little application the first, second and fourth fair use factors have in cases of obscene parody. For these reasons obscene parody should be given the benefit of the doubt whenever possible. Today's unprotected expression may become tomorrow's work of art. Let the market place of ideas determine the acceptability of obscene parody.