Opinion ID: 781
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Purpose and Character of the Infringing Use

Text: When evaluating the purpose and character of the use, one must consider whether the new work merely `supersede[s] the objects' of the original creation or instead adds something new, with a further purpose or different character, altering the first with new expression, meaning, or message; it asks, in other words, whether and to what extent the new work is `transformative.' Id. at 579, 114 S.Ct. 1164. Although transformative use is not absolutely necessary for a finding of fair use, the goal of copyright, to promote science and the arts, is generally furthered by the creation of transformative works. Such works thus lie at the heart of the fair use doctrine's guarantee of breathing space within the confines of copyright. Id. (citation omitted). The Court of Federal Claims concluded that this factor weighed heavily in favor of fair use because the stamp was transformative. Gaylord, 85 Fed.Cl. at 69. The court determined that while both the Stamp and `The Column' are intended to honor veterans of the Korean War, the Stamp is transformative, providing a different expressive character than `The Column.' Id. at 68. It explained that Mr. Alli transformed the three-dimensional sculpture with his photograph by creating a surrealistic environment with snow and subdued lighting where the viewer is left unsure whether he is viewing a photograph of statues or actual human beings. Id. at 68-69. The court determined that the Postal Service further transformed The Column by making it even grayer, creating a nearly monochromatic image. This adjustment enhanced the surrealistic expression ultimately seen in the Stamp by making it colder. Id. at 69. The Court of Federal Claims concluded that the stamp was a transformative work, having a new and different character and expression than Mr. Gaylord's `The Column.' Id. We disagree. As a preliminary matter, we note that the inquiry must focus on the purpose and character of the stamp, rather than that of Mr. Alli's photograph. The stamp does not reflect any further purpose than The Column. See Campbell, 510 U.S. at 579, 114 S.Ct. 1164. As the Court of Federal Claims found, both the stamp and The Column share a common purpose: to honor veterans of the Korean War. Works that make fair use of copyrighted material often transform the purpose or character of the work by incorporating it into a larger commentary or criticism. For example, in Blanch v. Koons , an artist incorporated a copyrighted photograph of a woman's feet adorned with glittery Gucci sandals into a collage commenting on the `commercial images ... in our consumer culture.' 467 F.3d 244, 248 (2d Cir.2006). The court determined that this was fair use in part because the collage was transformative. Id. at 252-53. It reasoned that the collage and the photo had sharply different purposes and that the collage was intended to be a commentary on the social and aesthetic consequences of mass media. Id. Such transformation of a copyrighted work into a larger commentary or criticism fall squarely within the definition of fair use. The government points to Lennon v. Premise Media Corp., 556 F.Supp.2d 310 (S.D.N.Y.2008), as an example of a case where a secondary use was deemed transformative fair use without commenting on the original. In Lennon, defendants-filmmakers used a 15-second clip of John Lennon's Imagine that they believed envisioned a world without religion. Id. at 322 (Nothing to kill or die for/And no religion too). The filmmakers played this audio clip while showing Cold War-era images of marching soldiers and an image of Stalin, express[ing] the filmmakers' view that the song's secular utopian vision `cannot be maintained without realization in a politicized form' and that the form it will ultimately take is dictatorship. Id. at 323. The court concluded that [t]he movie thus use[d] the excerpt of `Imagine' to criticize what the filmmakers see as the naïveté of John Lennon's views. Id. This use appears clearly transformative, and (as in Blanch ) falls safely within the definition of fair use. By contrast, here the stamp did not use The Column as part of a commentary or criticism. [3] We conclude that the stamp does not transform the character of The Column. Although the stamp altered the appearance of The Column by adding snow and muting the color, these alterations do not impart a different character to the work. To the extent that the stamp has a surreal character, The Column and its soldiers themselves contribute to that character. Indeed, the Penn State Team suggested that the Memorial have a dream-like presence of ghostly figures. Capturing The Column on a cold morning after a snowstormrather than on a warm sunny daydoes not transform its character, meaning, or message. Nature's decision to snow cannot deprive Mr. Gaylord of an otherwise valid right to exclude. Analysis of the purpose and character of the use also includes whether the use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes. 17 U.S.C. § 107. The Postal Service acknowledged receiving $17 million from the sale of nearly 48 million 37-cent stamps. An estimated $5.4 million in stamps were sold to collectors in 2003. The stamp clearly has a commercial purpose. The Court of Federal Claims did not address how the commercial purpose of the stamp affected this factor of the fair use analysis. Because the stamp did not have a further purpose or different character, and because it had a commercial use, we conclude that this factor weighs strongly against fair use.