Talk:Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc.
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on March 7, 2004. |
Page Organization
editBesides the lead, the article has one, long block of page labeled 'history'. In order to make more coherent structure, it should be broken down into subtopics like 'Background', 'Supreme Court Ruling', 'Precedents', etc. --Tateharsh (talk) 22:33, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
Eventual outcome
editWhat was the eventual outcome after the case was remanded? Tempshill 18:38, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
They settled. Terry Carroll 21:11, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Is the nature of the settlement still secret? Has anybody close to the action made a comment yet? 216.99.198.72 (talk) 08:24, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
Page Merger
editPlease procedd with merging these two pages. Design 13:03, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
Grammatically questionable
editAt the top, the sentence "That money is made does not make it impossible for a use to be fair; it is merely one of the components of a fair use analysis." appears. The first part of the sentence (before the semicolon) appears to be grammatically ambiguous, and I can't even figure out what it's trying to say. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.38.89.214 (talk) 14:56, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
- Would you prefer a comma after "made"? If you added a comma, it would read: That money is made, does not make it impossible for a use to be fair[.] The only difficulty here is the first four words being a dependent clause, and this serves as a subject to the verb does. The word order, if that is your complaint, is not so unusual that you, a native speaker of English, would never have seen it before. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.99.198.72 (talk) 08:17, 8 May 2011 (UTC)