Introduction
In the field of screenwriting, understanding copyright and fair use is essential, as it directly impacts how writers and filmmakers incorporate existing materials into their work. The short film A Fair(y) Use Tale, created by Eric Faden in 2007, serves as an educational tool to explain the principles of fair use under US copyright law. Available online, the film cleverly repurposes brief clips from various Disney animated movies to construct a narrative that outlines fair use concepts, without adding new dialogue but instead editing the footage to form explanatory sentences. As a screenwriting student, I have watched this film and analysed it in the context of classroom discussions on intellectual property. This essay examines whether the incorporation of Disney footage in A Fair(y) Use Tale qualifies as fair use, focusing on the four key factors outlined in Section 107 of the US Copyright Act 1976: the purpose and character of the use, the nature of the copyrighted work, the amount and substantiality of the portion used, and the effect on the potential market. Drawing on relevant legal precedents and academic sources, I argue that the film’s use is indeed protected by fair use, as it transforms the original material for educational purposes without harming Disney’s market. This analysis not only demonstrates the film’s alignment with fair use principles but also highlights their relevance to creative practices in screenwriting.
The Purpose and Character of the Use
The first factor in assessing fair use considers the purpose and character of the new work, particularly whether it is transformative and whether it is for commercial or non-profit educational purposes. In A Fair(y) Use Tale, Faden’s film is explicitly non-commercial and educational, aiming to demystify fair use for viewers, including students and creators. The footage is not used to entertain in the same way as the original Disney films but is recontextualised to form a coherent explanation of legal concepts. This transformative quality is evident in how clips from movies like The Lion King and Pinocchio are edited to create phrases such as “copyright law” or “public domain,” turning entertainment into pedagogy.
This approach aligns with the US Supreme Court’s ruling in Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. (1994), where the Court emphasised that transformative works add new expression or meaning, thereby favouring fair use. As Aufderheide and Jaszi (2011) argue, such educational remixes contribute to public discourse on copyright without merely copying the original. In screenwriting terms, this factor is crucial because it allows for parody or commentary, which can inspire innovative storytelling. However, one limitation is that while the film is non-commercial, its online availability might indirectly promote Faden’s academic profile. Nevertheless, the primary intent remains educational, tipping this factor towards fair use. Indeed, the film’s structure as a “tale” cleverly parodies Disney’s storytelling style, further enhancing its transformative nature.
The Nature of the Copyrighted Work
The second factor evaluates the nature of the original copyrighted material, generally favouring fair use more when the work is factual rather than highly creative or fictional. Disney’s animated films, such as Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937) and Aladdin (1992), are quintessentially creative and fictional, embodying imaginative storytelling, character development, and artistic animation. These elements make them highly protected under copyright, as they represent original expressions rather than mere facts. In screenwriting, we often study Disney’s narrative techniques, which blend myth and fantasy, underscoring their creative value.
Despite this, fair use can still apply if the new work serves a public interest, as noted in the US Copyright Office’s guidelines (U.S. Copyright Office, n.d.). For instance, using excerpts from creative works for criticism or education has been upheld in cases like Bill Graham Archives v. Dorling Kindersley Ltd. (2006), where images from concert posters were deemed fair use in a historical book. In A Fair(y) Use Tale, the Disney clips are not factual but are employed to illustrate legal facts about copyright, creating a tension. Arguably, this factor leans against fair use due to the fictional nature of the originals; however, the educational override, as discussed by Patterson and Lindberg (1991), suggests that the public benefit of explaining fair use mitigates this. From a screenwriting perspective, this highlights the challenges of borrowing from iconic works, where creativity must be balanced against transformative intent. Typically, courts weigh this factor less heavily when the use is non-commercial, which supports the film’s protection.
The Amount and Substantiality of the Portion Used
The third factor examines the quantity and quality of the material taken, assessing whether it is reasonable in relation to the purpose. A Fair(y) Use Tale uses very short clips—often just a few seconds—from over 30 Disney films, amounting to less than 10 minutes total in a film that runs about 10 minutes. No single clip dominates, and none captures the “heart” of the original stories, such as key plot resolutions or memorable songs in their entirety. Instead, the snippets are fragmented words or phrases reassembled to form new sentences, ensuring that the amount is minimal and tailored to the educational goal.
This limited usage echoes the principle in Harper & Row Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enterprises (1985), where the Supreme Court ruled that even small excerpts could infringe if they take the essence of the work, but here, the clips lack such substantiality. Jaszi and Aufderheide (2018) further note that in documentary and educational contexts, borrowing brief segments for commentary is often fair, especially when no more is used than necessary. In screenwriting education, this factor reminds us to be judicious with sourced material to avoid over-reliance. Furthermore, the film’s brevity prevents viewers from experiencing the originals as substitutes, reinforcing fair use. While some might argue that aggregating clips from multiple films increases the amount, the qualitative insignificance—mere words without narrative context—counters this, making this factor supportive.
The Effect on the Potential Market
The fourth and often most critical factor assesses whether the new use harms the market for the original work or its derivatives. A Fair(y) Use Tale does not compete with Disney’s films; it neither sells as entertainment nor diminishes demand for the originals. If anything, it might encourage viewers to revisit Disney classics to identify the sources, potentially boosting interest. The film’s educational focus ensures it occupies a different market niche, as an explanatory video rather than a feature animation.
This is consistent with the Campbell decision (1994), which found that parody does not typically supplant the original market. Patterson and Lindberg (1991) emphasise that fair use protects uses that do not exploit the commercial value of the copyrighted work. In the context of screenwriting, understanding this factor is vital for creating works like fan films or critiques without infringing on studios’ revenues. However, a potential counterargument is that widespread remixing could erode Disney’s control over its intellectual property, though there is no evidence of such harm from this specific film. Indeed, since its release in 2007, Disney has not pursued legal action, arguably indicating tacit acceptance. Therefore, this factor strongly favours fair use, as the film enhances rather than detracts from the originals’ value.
Conclusion
In summary, after analysing A Fair(y) Use Tale through the lens of the four fair use factors, I believe the use of Disney footage is protected. The transformative, educational purpose, combined with minimal and non-substantial borrowing, outweighs the creative nature of the originals and ensures no market harm. This conclusion draws on key legal precedents and academic insights, demonstrating how fair use enables creative expression in screenwriting. The implications are significant for students and filmmakers: it encourages innovative reuse of materials for commentary, fostering a more dynamic creative environment. However, fair use remains a case-by-case determination, and creators must carefully balance these factors to avoid infringement. Ultimately, Faden’s film exemplifies how screenwriting can intersect with legal education, promoting informed practices in an industry reliant on intellectual property.
(Word count: 1,248 including references)
References
- Aufderheide, P. and Jaszi, P. (2011) Reclaiming Fair Use: How to Put Balance Back in Copyright. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Jaszi, P. and Aufderheide, P. (2018) Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for Documentary Filmmakers. Center for Media & Social Impact.
- Patterson, L.R. and Lindberg, S.W. (1991) The Nature of Copyright: A Law of Users’ Rights. Athens: University of Georgia Press.
- U.S. Copyright Office. (n.d.) Fair Use. U.S. Copyright Office.
