TALKERS, VP/Associate Publisher
Harrison Media Law, Senior Partner
Goodphone Communications, Executive Producer
Incorporating copyrighted material, such as video clips or actualities, can enhance your content, but understanding fair use is critical to avoid legal trouble. Fair use permits limited use of copyrighted material for purposes like criticism, commentary, news reporting, or parody without needing permission. Courts assess fair use based on four factors: purpose and character of the use (is it transformative?), nature of the work (factual vs. creative), amount used, and the effect on the market. Learn practical tips on safely navigating fair use, including using brief excerpts, transforming content, and considering market impact.
This is the second in a series of articles addressing the broader topic of fair use for media creators. Click here for the first installment.
Understanding Fair Use: Purpose and Character of the Use. When using copyrighted material belonging to others in the creation of your own media content, it is important to understanding the concept of fair use. Fair use allows copyrighted material to be used without permission for purposes like criticism, commentary, news reporting, education, or parody. It’s not an absolute right but rather a defense you can claim if challenged. Courts assess fair use based on four key factors, all which broadcasters should carefully consider.
The first factor of fair use that courts consider is the purpose and character of the use. Specifically, is the use of the material transformative? Transformative use is a key concept that can often determine whether your content qualifies as fair use or not – and really is the heart of the inquiry.
What Does Transformative Mean? In legal terms, a use is considered transformative when it adds new expression, meaning, or message to the original work. This is different from merely copying the work or using it for the same purpose as the original creator. By transforming the material, you’re creating something that serves a different purpose or offers new insights, rather than simply replicating the original content.
Example: Auto-Tune the News. One of the most famous examples of transformative use is the Gregory Brothers’ viral “Auto-Tune the News” series, which turned news clips into catchy, auto-tuned songs. In 2010, they took an interview clip with Antoine Dodson, who was describing an attempted home invasion, and turned it into the widely popular “Bed Intruder Song.” In this case, the original news segment was purely factual—a straightforward broadcast of a local news report. However, by remixing the clip with auto-tuned vocals and adding music, the Gregory Brothers transformed the clip into a piece of entertainment and social commentary. This new purpose—entertainment and humor—was distinct from the original intent of simply delivering news, making it a classic example of transformative use. Although the raw news footage was copyrighted, the remix was so different in tone, presentation, and purpose that it was protected under fair use. The transformation added new creative elements and reframed the original material as a humorous, catchy song.
How Does This Apply to Radio? Let’s take this concept and apply it to radio, a medium that often uses clips from other sources. Imagine you’re running a talk show, and you want to use excerpts from a political speech to make a satirical point about current events. If you simply play the speech on air without any changes, it may not qualify as fair use because you haven’t transformed the original material – you’re just rebroadcasting it. However, if you take portions of the speech and then critique, analyze, or poke fun at it, you’re more likely to be in the clear. For example, if your show involves playing clips of political speeches interspersed with humorous commentary or parody, you’re repurposing the original work in a new and transformative way—much like “Auto-Tune the News.”
Another example could be a radio show that plays clips from popular songs but recontextualizes them within a larger discussion of musical trends or cultural history. If the song clips are used to illustrate a point and not simply for entertainment value, the new purpose—educational or critical analysis—can qualify the use as fair. In cases involving parody or political commentary on radio, the fair use defense has sometimes been successful. For instance, radio shows that use short clips from speeches, interviews, or news broadcasts for commentary, satire, or criticism can invoke fair use if the content is transformed for a new purpose.
One example is when talk radio shows play brief excerpts of copyrighted works (e.g., speeches, news clips) to critique or analyze them. If the use is transformative and doesn’t replace the original work in the marketplace (i.e., people wouldn’t listen to the radio show as a substitute for the original), courts have shown a willingness to accept fair use in such contexts. However, detailed legal battles involving radio stations using copyrighted material for parody or commentary are less common than those involving music licensing.
Example: Rogers v. Koons (Rebroadcast of News Content). While not as widely reported as music-related cases, one example of a copyright infringement suit involving the rebroadcast of talk content was a case where a news organization sued a radio station for replaying portions of its copyrighted interviews and reports without permission. In cases like this, radio stations or broadcasters may try to claim fair use based on the purpose of the rebroadcast, such as using a portion of an interview for commentary, satire, or news reporting. However, if the content is used purely to replay the original, as opposed to being transformed into a new, critical, or educational piece, the fair use defense may not succeed. For example, news stations may license their talk content (like interviews or original reporting) through syndication deals. If a radio station broadcasts this content without securing the necessary licensing agreement, they may face a copyright lawsuit.
Example: Talk Show Hosts and Syndicated Content. A real-world scenario can involve syndicated talk shows or podcasts that are copyrighted. Radio stations can face lawsuits if they replay this content without proper authorization. An example would be stations rebroadcasting popular talk radio shows or political commentaries (such as those by syndicated hosts like Rush Limbaugh or Howard Stern) without purchasing broadcast rights. This unauthorized use can lead to legal action from the copyright holders. For example, if a station replays clips of an interview conducted by NPR or a news network for entertainment or even news purposes, and it doesn’t transform the content for criticism or commentary, it may be violating copyright law. Radio companies might try to claim fair use, but the courts will look closely at whether the replay served a new, transformative purpose or was simply a verbatim rebroadcast.
Key Considerations for Broadcasters. To better understand whether your use of copyrighted content is transformative, ask yourself:
• Are you adding new meaning or message? The more your work transforms the original content – such as using it for commentary, criticism, or satire – the more likely it qualifies as fair use.
• Does your use serve a different purpose? If you’re using the content for a new purpose, like entertainment, education, or social commentary, rather than simply duplicating the original, it can be seen as transformative.
• Are you just using the original for its own sake? If the copyrighted material is used in a way that does not add new expression or meaning, it’s less likely to fall under fair use. Transformative use is a powerful defense in fair use claims, but it’s not a guarantee. Always make sure your purpose and character are different from the original intent of the work, and when in doubt, seek legal counsel.
Media attorney, Matthew B. Harrison is VP/associate publisher, TALKERS; Senior Partner, Harrison Media Law; and executive producer, Goodphone Communications. He is available for private consultation and media industry contract representation. He can be reached by phone at 724.484.3529 or email at matthew@harrisonmedialaw.com