Shazam, parodies, and the three-step test

Emmanuel Kolawole  Oke

Shazam, parodies, and the three-step test

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract / Description of output

This article focuses on the application of the parody and pastiche exceptions in Shazam v Only Fools. The article contends that the court’s assessment should have focused solely on whether the defendants’ actions could be regarded as fair dealing for purposes of parody or pastiche. It explains why it was unnecessary for the court to apply the three-step test.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	91-96
Journal	European Intellectual Property Review
Volume	47
Issue number	2
Publication status	Accepted/In press - 5 Nov 2024

Cite this

@article{853713362581448b9ea1bfb4644b5690,

title = "Shazam, parodies, and the three-step test",

abstract = "This article focuses on the application of the parody and pastiche exceptions in Shazam v Only Fools. The article contends that the court{\textquoteright}s assessment should have focused solely on whether the defendants{\textquoteright} actions could be regarded as fair dealing for purposes of parody or pastiche. It explains why it was unnecessary for the court to apply the three-step test.",

author = "Oke, {Emmanuel Kolawole}",

year = "2024",

month = nov,

day = "5",

language = "English",

volume = "47",

pages = "91--96",

journal = "European Intellectual Property Review",

issn = "0142-0461",

publisher = "Sweet & Maxwell",

number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Shazam, parodies, and the three-step test

AU - Oke, Emmanuel Kolawole

PY - 2024/11/5

Y1 - 2024/11/5

N2 - This article focuses on the application of the parody and pastiche exceptions in Shazam v Only Fools. The article contends that the court’s assessment should have focused solely on whether the defendants’ actions could be regarded as fair dealing for purposes of parody or pastiche. It explains why it was unnecessary for the court to apply the three-step test.

AB - This article focuses on the application of the parody and pastiche exceptions in Shazam v Only Fools. The article contends that the court’s assessment should have focused solely on whether the defendants’ actions could be regarded as fair dealing for purposes of parody or pastiche. It explains why it was unnecessary for the court to apply the three-step test.

UR - https://www.sweetandmaxwell.co.uk/Product/Intellectual-Property/European-Intellectual-Property-Review/Journal/30791410

M3 - Article

SN - 0142-0461

VL - 47

SP - 91

EP - 96

JO - European Intellectual Property Review

JF - European Intellectual Property Review

IS - 2

ER -

Shazam, parodies, and the three-step test

Abstract / Description of output

Other files and links

Embargoed Document

Fingerprint

Cite this