Parody has been a staple of political discourse from time immemorial. At its best, it can add an invaluable dimension to debate on matters of public concern, albeit at the psychic expense of the parody’s target. In modern times, that expense occasionally translates into lawsuits, and the sharper the parody the spicier the legal controversy.
Just last week the New York Court of Appeals heard arguments in a case arising out of an academic debate over the Dead Sea Scrolls that spiraled into an absurdist Internet jihad and led to a prosecution for some acts the defendant has claimed were intended to be parody. When it comes to First Amendment parody claims, the seminal decision is a 1988 U.S. Supreme Court case addressing a Hustler Magazine liquor ad featuring an “interview” with Moral Majority founder Jerry Falwell talking about having had drunken sex with his mother in an outhouse. And between the bygone era of the Hustler print parody and the current Dead Sea Scrolls dispute lies a controversy involving a parody website of the White House that prompted a censorial effort by the Bush administration that predictably backfired.
Jerry Falwell’s Plight
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
