The Badvertising Institute * Welcome

Laws and Regulations

The copyright laws in the US are designed to protect the owners of copyrighted material, however the are some exceptions that allow for parody, satire, social comentary, criticism, comment, news reporting, literary and eductional uses, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, research, etc.

These are not considered infringements of copyright.

BADvertising and other forms of counter-advertising that make use of tobacco ads to show the truth about tobacco fall into several of the above categories.

The fact is that anybody can sue anyone for anything at any time. The question is: is it in their best interest to do so?

Realistically speaking, a lawsuit over the BADvertising art work, or any counter-advertising campaigns, would immediately turn the dishonesty of their ads and their sleazy tactics into front page news for months on end.

They can't afford that, at any price.

more on the Copyright or Fair Use Laws...

Thanks to John Polito of WhyQuit for the following info:

17 U.S.C. Section 107 lists the exceptions to U.S. copyright law.

Section 107 reads:

Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a

copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or

phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes

such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple

copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an

infringement of copyright.

In determining whether the use made of a work in any

particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include-

(1) the purpose and character of the 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.

The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair

use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.

The below link gives an analysis of the four section 107 exception, is written by attorneys versed in intellectual property law and confirms the legal use of ads to convey a new message ,or simply cataloging and sharing the ads for educational purposes.

http://www.isaacsonraymond.com/fair_use_doctrine.html

B. The Four Fair Use Tests

The following four statutory factors are applied in determining

whether the use of a copyrighted work in a particular case is a fair use:

(1) The purpose and character of the use, including

whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational

purposes.[4] The focus of this first prong is twofold: (a) whether a use

is "transformative" or "merely supersedes" the original[5] and (b) whether

it is commercial or noncommercial. A "transformative" use is one which

"adds something new, with a further purpose or different character,

altering the first with a new expression or meaning." In other words, the more

transformative a use, the more likely it is to survive fair use scrutiny.[6]

Noncommercial uses are also generally afforded more fair use

protection.[7]

Commercial uses, while not presumptively unfair, are treated by the courts

with "less indulgence" than uses with a noncommercial purpose.[8] For

instance, a parody is less likely to be considered a fair use if it is part of a

commercial advertisement or marketing gimmick as opposed to a genuine

literary, theatrical or musical work. A legitimate parody, on the other

hand, would probably be considered a fair use even if it ultimately

destroyed the market for and value of the original through its

disparagement.[9]

(2) The nature of the copyrighted work.[10] This

factor centers on whether a copyrighted work is creative or informational,

and whether it is published or unpublished.[11] The scope of fair use is

greater when the copyrighted work is informational because it is generally

recognized that there is a greater need to disseminate factual material

than works of fiction or fantasy.[12] A work that is unpublished is given

greater copyright protection than a published work and is, therefore, less

likely to be subject to a valid assertion of fair use.[13]

(3) The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the

copyrighted work as a whole.[14] The application of this factor requires the

court to examine both the quantity of the original work that has been copied

and the importance of the copied portion to the original work as a whole, that

is, whether the appropriated portion "constitutes the 'heart'" of the original

work.[15] The greater the quantity or qualitative value of the copied portion,

relative to the original work as a whole, the less protection it will merit as

a fair use.

Substantial verbatim copying has been viewed as evidence of the

qualitative value of the copied portion to both the copyright owner and the

subsequent user.[16]

(4) The effect of the use upon the potential market

for the value of the copyrighted work.[17] The last factor addresses the

likelihood that the copying has had, or will have, a detrimental effect on

the copyright owner's exclusive right to reproduce, distribute, perform or

display the original work or to prepare derivative works based on it.

Courts must also consider not only the extent of actual market harm but

also whether continued unauthorized use of the copied work will likely result

"in a substantially adverse impact on the potential market" for that work.[18]