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

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	Published - 30 Jan 2025

Keywords / Materials (for Non-textual outputs)

copyright
dramatic works
EU law
fair dealing
fictional characters
infringement
parody

Access to Document

OkeE2024EIPRThreeStepTestAccepted author manuscript, 323 KBLicence: Creative Commons: Attribution (CC-BY)

https://uk.westlaw.com/Document/IC62D7B60D40111EFAB99DED7D7BD761E/View/FullText.html

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.",

keywords = "copyright, dramatic works, EU law, fair dealing, fictional characters, infringement, parody",

author = "Oke, \{Emmanuel Kolawole\}",

year = "2025",

month = jan,

day = "30",

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 - 2025/1/30

Y1 - 2025/1/30

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.

KW - copyright

KW - dramatic works

KW - EU law

KW - fair dealing

KW - fictional characters

KW - infringement

KW - parody

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

Keywords / Materials (for Non-textual outputs)

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this