College of William & Mary Law School William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository

Supreme Court Preview Conferences, Events, and Lectures

1993 Section 1: Moot Court: Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. Institute of Bill of Rights Law at the William & Mary Law School

Repository Citation Institute of Bill of Rights Law at the William & Mary Law School, "Section 1: Moot Court: Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc." (1993). Supreme Court Preview. 53. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/preview/53

Copyright c 1993 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/preview ACUFF-ROSE MUSIC, INC. v. LUTHER R. CAMPBELL No. 91-6225 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

972 F.2d 1429; 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 18761; 23 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1817; Copy. L. Rep. (CCH) P26,966

May 15, 1992, Argued August 17, 1992, Decided & Filed

CHARLES W. JOINER, Senior District Judge.

In this copyright case, plaintiff appeals summary tracks on a collection entitled "As Clean As They judgment granted to defendants. The district court Wanna Be." The credits on the album' recognize held that defendants' use of a song owned by plaintiff Orbison and Dees as the writers of "Pretty Woman," was a parody and therefore constituted a fair use of and Acuff-Rose as publisher of the song. copyrighted material under section 107 of the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. @ 101 et seq. On July 5, 1989, following release of the album, Linda Fine, general manager of Luke Records, wrote The 2 Live Crew, a rap music group, released for a letter to Gerald Tiefer of Opryland Music Group commercial distribution a version of Acuff-Rose (of which Acuff-Rose is a part) to "inform [Tiefer] of Music's copyrighted song, "Oh, Pretty Woman." 'Two Live Crew's' desire to do a parody" of "Oh, Acuff-Rose sued The 2 Live Crew, its individual Pretty Woman."2 Fine stressed that a parody was members and its record company for copyright intended and that the popularity of 2 Live Crew infringement and alleged pendent state law claims of ensured substantial sales: interference with business relations and interference with prospective business advantage. Defendants filed At the time of this writing the Group has a a motion for dismissal, which was treated as a motion cut on the Billboard Rap Chart. I have for summary judgment. The district court granted enclosed a copy of the lyrics, so that you summary judgment, holding that The 2 Live Crew may see their satirical parody, very similar had created a parody and that the parody was a in vain [sic] to what Weird Al Yankovic and non-infringing "fair use" of the song as defined by other satirical artists are doing. section 107 of the 1976 Copyright Act. 17 U.S.C. 107. We reverse. We intend that all credits (writer & publisher) show your complete ownership of I. the song, and of course we intend to pay statutory rates. "Oh, Pretty Woman" was written and recorded by Roy Orbison and William Dees in 1964. Rights to the Kindly keep in mind that we present this to song were assigned to Acuff-Rose that same year, you in a humorous sense and in no way and Acuff-Rose registered for copyright protection. should this be construed as anything but a The song has become a pop music standard, and novelty record that will be heard by Acuff-Rose has realized substantial income from the hundreds of thousands of new listeners in licensing of "cover" recordings and other derivative their homes. works. Fine included a cassette tape of 2 Live Crew's Luther Campbell, lead vocalist and song writer of version of the song and a lyric sheet for Tiefer to The 2 Live Crew (2 Live Crew), wrote a version of consider. "Oh, Pretty Woman" in May 1989, which he entitled "Pretty Woman." By affidavit, Campbell stated that Tiefer responded tersely: "I am aware of the he had intended to create a parody as an attempt success enjoyed by 'The 2 Live Crews', but I must "through comical lyrics, to satirize the original work inform you that we cannot permit the use of a parody . . . ." In June 1989, Campbell's company, Luke of 'Oh, Pretty Woman.'" This refusal to grant a Records (then doing business as Skyywalker license did not dissuade 2 Live Crew from continuing Records), released "Pretty Woman" as one of ten to sell "As Clean As They Wanna Be."

51 Acuff-Rose brought suit in June 1990 and without musical training would readily discern that defendants responded by filing a motion to dismiss, "Pretty Woman" was modelled after "Oh, Pretty accompanied by affidavits, and sought to deposit $ Woman." 13,867.56. This amount was apparently calculated after reference to statutory royalty rates established The district court determined that there were no by the Copyright Act, and reflected defendants' genuine issues of fact material to the question of fair understanding of what was owed to Acuff-Rose for use in dispute, and that the case was therefore use of the copyrighted song. The district court suitable for summary judgment. Acuff-Rose Music, ordered the funds deposited with the Clerk of Court.3 Inc. v. Campbell, 754 F. Supp. 1150, 1153 (M.D. Acuff-Rose responded with affidavits, which the Tenn. 1991). The court then analyzed the factors by district court relied upon when granting summary which an alleged infringing use is tested for fairness judgment. under section 107 of the Act. Id. at 1154-59.1

Among the affidavits presented, defendants Following the district court's determination that presented that of Oscar Brand." Brand, who has "Pretty Woman" was a parody, Acuff-Rose filed himself recorded a number of songs which he terms motions to distribute the funds deposited by 2 Live "parodies, " stated his opinion that "both the words Crew with the Clerk of Court, and sought and the music of the 2 Live Crew performance are reconsideration of the fair use determination by classic parodies." Brand dissected the two songs and introducing additional evidence on the question of the found substantial similarities of musical structure impact of the parody upon the market value of the between them. The 2 Live Crew version has the same copyrighted original.' Based upon its determination 4/4 drum beat as the original and includes a "very of fair use, the district court granted summary recognizable 'bass riff,'" which "is repeated eight judgment and ordered the funds returned to 2 Live times . . . ." However, the 2 Live Crew version Crew. diverges from the original by following the recognizable riff with "an atypical scraper - a Latin II. musical device, quite antithetic to the Orbison musical styling." Further, in the 2 Live Crew We review the district court's grant of summary version, the lead vocalist sings (or raps) "in the key judgment de novo. Summary judgment is appropriate of B major, which, performed against the A major if the non-moving party fails to establish a genuine chorus, gives the song a comic aspect." issue of material fact on an element essential to its case and on which it would bear the burden of proof Lyrically, Brand found "Pretty Woman" to be at trial. In making that determination, we view the consistent with a long tradition in the United States of evidence in the record in the light most favorable to making social commentary through music. the non-moving party. African-American rap music, Brand stated, uses parody as a form of protest, and often substitutes new These general principles apply to the question of words to "make fun of the 'white-bread' originals and fair use, which is a mixed question of law and fact. the establishment . . . ." In "Pretty Woman," Brand Harper & Row Publishers v. Nation Enter., 471 U.S. concluded, "this anti-establishment singing group is 539, 560, 85 L. Ed. 2d 588 , 105 S. Ct. 2218 trying to show how bland and banal the Orbison song (1985). In reviewing the district court's determination seems to them. It's just one of many examples of of fair use, when that court has found facts sufficient their derisive approach to 'white-centered' popular to evaluate each of the factors enumerated in section music." 107 of the Copyright Act, we "'need not remand for further factfinding . . . [but] may conclude as a Acuff-Rose presented the affidavit of Ph.D. matter of law that [the challenged use] does not musicologist Earl V. Speilman. Speilman also qualify as a fair use of the copyrighted work.'" examined and compared the two songs and Harper & Row, 471 U.S. at 560 (quoting Pacific & determined that there is "a significant amount of S. Co. v. Duncan, 744 F.2d 1490, 1495 (11th Cir. similarity" between them. Speilman identified five 1984)). Our review of the record shows that no specific similarities, including the repetition of the material facts are in dispute. The parties dispute the recognizable riff, which "may have actually been ultimate conclusions to be drawn from the facts. sampled or lifted and then incorporated into the These judgments are legal in nature. recording of 'Pretty Woman' as performed by The 2 Live Crew." Speilman concluded that even a listener III.

52 Section 102(a) of the Copyright Act, adopted is a "fair use" of the copyrighted work. Traditionally, under the express authority of Section 8 of the United fair use is defined as "'a privilege in others than the States Constitution granting Congress the power to owner of the copyright to use the copyrighted give authors exclusive rights to their writings, material in a reasonable manner without his protects "musical works, including any accompanying consent.'" Harper & Row, 471 U.S. at 549 (quoting words." 17 U.S.C. @ 102(a)(2). Section 106 of the H. Ball, Law of Copyright and Literary Property, Act grants to the copyright holder a variety of 260 (1944)). Fair use is an "equitable rule of exclusive rights in the copyrighted work, including reason," Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City the right to "reproduce the copyrighted work in Studios, Inc., 464 U.S. 417, 448, 78 L. Ed. 2d 574 copies or phonorecords," and to "prepare derivative , 104 S. Ct. 774 (1984), which is used in order to works based upon the copyrighted work." 17 U.S.C. "avoid rigid application of the copyright statute when, @ 106(1) and (2). The words and music to plaintiffs on occasion, it would stifle the very creativity which song "Oh Pretty Woman" are subject to these that law is designed to foster." Stewart v. Abend, protections. However, plaintiff's exclusive rights are 495 U.S. 207, 236, 109 L. Ed. 2d 184 , 110 S. Ct. also subject to the provisions of sections 107 through 1750 (1990) (quoting Iowa State Univ. Research 118 of the Act, which create exemptions and Found., Inc. v. American Broadcasting Cos., 621 limitations on the owner's rights. F.2d 57, 60 (2d Cir 1980)). Fair use is the only exception to a copyright holder's exclusive rights in Section 107 of the Copyright Act states: his work, but section 107 explains that the overarching concept of fair use embraces use of a Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and copyrighted work for the purpose of "criticism, 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords research." or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, As the jurisprudence of section 107 has developed, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom the courts have found that the section's recognition of use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement "comment" and "criticism" as species of fair use of copyright. In determining whether the use made of also, by practical extension of those terms, includes a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors the use of a copyrighted work (or a portion thereof) to be considered shall include - as a parody or satire of that work. Rogers v. Koons, 960 F.2d 301, 309 (2d Cir. 1992). Indeed, the fair (1) the purpose and character of the use, including use formulation found in section 107 is a reflection of whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for Congress's intent to codify the common law fair use nonprofit educational purposes; doctrine,' which has long included parody. Harper & Row, 471 U.S. at 549; see also Bloom & Hamlin (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; v. Nixon, 125 F. 977 (C.C.E.D. Pa. 1903) (a parody fair use involving vaudeville impersonations). (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used Therefore, it is understandable that both the parties in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and and the district court focus on parody in their analyses of fair use. However, because the text of (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for section 107 lists specific fair uses, we find that the or value of the copyrighted work. term parody must be either subsumed within the statutory terms "criticism" or "comment," or be an 17 U.S.C. @ 107. In this case 2 Live Crew defends entirely separate category of exception. against a charge of copyright infringement by arguing that "Pretty Woman" falls within the exceptions Unfortunately, the terminology of the fair use spelled out in section 107. analysis has evolved in such a way that the popular definition of parody and the statutory definition of In determining the scope and extent of the parody as a form of criticism have become some- exceptions and limitations to copyright protection what confused. Popularly, the term parody may be carved out by section 107, it is important to focus on described as 'when one artist, for comic effect or the plain language of that section and the directions social commentary, closely imitates the style of implicit in its form. Section 107 takes from a another artist and in so doing creates a new artwork copyright owner the exclusive rights to his work that makes ridiculous the style and expression of the insofar as a derivative, or allegedly infringing work, original." Rogers, 960 F.2d at 309-10. This popular

53 definition has been used on occasion as a synonym find that the district court placed insufficient emphasis for that which is necessary to create an exception to on the command of Harper & Row, wherein the the exclusive rights in a copyrighted work. This use, Supreme Court expressly reaffirmed its earlier we find, creates confusion and should be avoided. holding that "'Every commercial use of copyrighted Much of entertainment involves parodies in the material is presumptively an unfair exploitation of the popular sense, but section 107 does not direct the monopoly privilege that belongs to the owner of the courts to conclude that all such parodies are fair uses. copyright.'" 471 U.S. at 562 (quoting Sony Corp., For the purposes of this opinion, we will assume, as 464 U.S. at 451). Therefore, in analyzing the found by the district court, that 2 Live Crew's song purpose and character of 2 Live Crew's use of the is a parody of Acuff-Rose's copyrighted song, and copyrighted song, the facts in the record require that proceed to determine whether the calculus of section we start from the position that the use is unfair. We 107 results in a determination of fair use. That are asked to then consider whether 2 Live Crew met determination requires careful application of the four its burden to rebut the presumption by a defense, we statutory factors. Harper & Row, 471 U.S. at 549; 3 note, requiring the court to be convinced that the M. Nimmer, Nimmer on Copyright, 3.05[A] at "parody does not unfairly diminish the economic 13-82.1. Although the question of fair use in the value of the original." Fisher v. Dees, 794 F.2d 432, context of musical works is one of first impression in 437 (9th Cir. 1986). this circuit, we do not write on a clean slate. Although in this case we do not set aside the Purpose and Character of Use district court's conclusion that 2 Live Crew's song is a criticism in the nature of a parody in the popular We look first to the purpose and character of the sense, we nevertheless find that the district court use of Acuff-Rose's song by 2 Live Crew. We accept erred in the process of determining that the criticism the district court's conclusion that the purpose of the constituted a fair use of the copyrighted work. We use was to parody the original.' We consider the find that the admittedly commercial nature of the character of the use separately. The use of a derivative work - the purpose of the work being no copyrighted work primarily for commercial purposes less important than its character in the Act's has been held by the Supreme Court to be formulation - requires the conclusion that the first presumptively unfair. Sony Corp., 464 U.S. 417, factor weighs against a finding of fair use. Sony 449, 78 L. Ed. 2d 574 , 104 S. Ct. 774 (1984). Corp., 464 U.S. at 449. "While commercial motivation and fair use can exist side by side, the court may consider whether the Nature of Copyrighted Work alleged infringing use was primarily for public benefit or for private commercial gain." MCA, Inc. v. The district court found that this factor weighed Wilson, 677 F.2d 180, 182 (2d Cir. 1981). The against a determination of fair use, and we agree. Supreme Court explained that "the crux of the Acuff-Rose, 754 F. Supp at 1155-56. As a general profit/nonprofit distinction is not whether the sole rule, creative works - literary works of fiction or motive of the use is monetary gain, but whether the artistic works - are afforded greater protection from user stands to profit from exploitation of the the fair use determination than are works of fact. copyrighted material without paying the customary Harper & Row, 471 U.S. at 563; New Era price." Harper & Row, 471 U.S. at 562. Publications, Int'l v. Carol Publishing Group, 904

F.2d 152, 157 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, U.S. __ In the instant case, the district court found, and we 111 S. Ct. 297, 112 L. Ed. 2d 251 (1990). The agree, that "2 Live Crew's song is included on a status of "Oh, Pretty Woman" as a creative work is commercially distributed album sold for the purpose not contested. In determining whether this factor of making a profit," and that "2 Live Crew's primary should weigh in favor of the copyright holder we also goal in releasing 'As Clean As They Wanna Be' is to ask whether the work "represented a substantial sell its music . . . ." 754 F. Supp. at 1154. investment of time and labor made in anticipation of However, the district court saw the Supreme Court's financial return." MCA, Inc., 677 F.2d at 182. The holdings in Sony Corp. and Harper & Row regarding record amply supports a finding in favor of the presumptively unfair nature of a commercial Acuff-Rose on this factor. purpose as "merely 'tending to weigh against a finding of fair use.'" Id. (quoting Harper & Row, Portion Used 471 U.S. at 562). We agree that commercial purpose is not itself controlling on the issue of fair use, but The third factor we consider is the amount and

54 substantiality of the portion of the copyrighted work find that no more was taken than necessary, the used in the derivative work in relation to the copying was qualitatively substantial. Both of copyrighted work as a whole. As applied to alleged defendants' affiants stated that 2 Live Crew's version parodies, this factor has historically turned on tracks the music and meter of the original. These analysis of the "conjure up" test. Walt Disney Prods. opinions were intended to demonstrate that the new v. Air Pirates, 581 F.2d 751, 757 (9th Cir. 1978), song is a parody. However, these opinions point out cert. denied sub nom., O'Neill v. Walt Disney the substantiality of copying. Near verbatim taking of Prods., 439 U.S. 1132, 99 S. Ct. 1054, 59 L. Ed. 2d the music and meter of a copyrighted work without 94 (1979). The test asks "whether the parodist has the creation of a parody is excessive taking. See appropriated a greater amount of the original work MCA, Inc., 677 F.2d at 183-85. Most importantly, than is necessary to 'recall or conjure up' the object defendants' affiants stated that the song is built upon of his satire." Id. The test describes a continuum of the recognizable bass or guitar riff of the original by use, and not only scrutinizes the extent of the taking, repeating that riff eight times. Acuff-Rose's but the qualitative nature of that taking. Harper & musicologist stated that the riff was probably Row, 471 U.S. at 565. A de minimis use, one that is sampled from the original, that is, simply recorded meager and fragmentary, by definition fails to verbatim and then mixed with 2 Live Crew's conjure up the original and does not constitute an additions. "The fact that a substantial portion of the infringement. Elsmere, 482 F. Supp. at 744. The 2 infringing work was copied verbatim is evidence of Live Crew, appropriately, does not attempt to the qualitative value of the copied material, both to characterize its use of the copyrighted work as de the originator and to the plagiarist who seeks to profit minimis. Uses which depart from the de minimis from marketing someone else's copyrighted level may nevertheless be fair uses, but at some point expression.* Harper & Row, 471 U.S. at 565. The on the continuum this factor militates against a qualitative degree of the copying is even more critical finding of fair use. Air Pirates, 581 F.2d at 757. than the quantitative, and we ask what degree of the Parodies are generally allowed to use more of the essence of the original is copied in relation to its copyrighted work and still fall within the rubric of whole. See Salinger v. Random House, Inc., 811 fair use than are other types of copying: F.2d 90, 98 (2d Cir.), reh'g denied, 818 F.2d 252, cert. denied, 484 U.S. 890, 98 L. Ed. 2d 177 , 108 The concept of 'conjuring up' an original S. Ct. 213 (1987). We conclude that taking the heart came into the copyright law not as a of the original and making it the heart of a new work limitation on how much of an original may was to purloin a substantial portion of the essence of be used, but as a recognition that a parody the original. The facts as developed under this factor, frequently needs to be more than a fleeting "the amount and substantiality of the portion used in evocation of an original in order to make its relation to the copyrighted work as a whole" cannot humorous point. A parody is entitled at least be used in any way to support a finding of fair use. to 'conjure up' the original. Elsmere, 623 F.2d at 253, n. 1 (citation omitted). Effect on Potential Market

The district court, having found that 2 Live Crew This factor has been characterized as "undoubtedly created a parody in the popular sense, applied the the single most important element of fair use." conjure up- test. The amount of the original work Harper & Row, 471 U.S. at 566; see also Stewart, which is appropriated is a factual issue, but the 495 U.S. at 238. This factor requires that a balance question whether the taking is excessive under the be struck "between the benefit gained by the circumstances is one of law. Fisher, 794 F.2d at 438, copyright owner when the copying is found an unfair n.4. use and the benefit gained by the public when the use is held to be fair." Rogers, 960 F.2d at 311. To The district court, operating on the assumption that demonstrate that the balance weighs in favor of a "Pretty Woman" is a parody, concluded: "In view of finding of no fair use: the fact that the medium is a song, its purpose is parody, and the relative brevity of the copying, it Actual present harm need not be shown; appropriates no more from the original than is such a requirement would leave the necessary to accomplish reasonably its parodic copyright holder with no defense against purpose." Acuff-Rose, 754 F. Supp. at 1157. predictable damage. Nor is it necessary to Clearly, the court was using the term parody in its show with certainty that future harm will popular sense. While it may not be inappropriate to result. What is necessary is a showing by a

55 preponderance of the evidence that some against a finding of fair use. One is, at best, neutral. meaningful likelihood of future harm exists. In dealing with uses popularly termed parodies, the If the intended use is for commercial gain, factors involving the commercial nature of the use that likelihood may be presumed. But if it is and the damage to the defendant are of particular for a noncommercial purpose, the likelihood significance. It is likely, for example, that an must be demonstrated. identical use of the copyrighted work in this case at a private gathering on a not-for-profit basis would be Sony Corp., 464 U.S. at 451. The focus is on a fair use. It is the blatantly commercial purpose of potential harm, and the "inquiry must take account the derivative work that prevents this parody from not only of harm to the original but also of harm to being a fair use. the market for derivative works." Harper & Row, 471 U.S. at 568. We conclude that the district court erred in In the instant case, the use of the copyrighted work granting summary judgment to defendants. The four is wholly commercial, so that we presume that a factors set forth in section 107 of the Act support the likelihood of future harm to Acuff-Rose exists. See conclusion that 2 Live Crew's use of Acuff-Rose's Rogers, 960 F.2d at 312 (the court holding that copyrighted song was not a fair use. We REVERSE "there is simply nothing in the record to support a and REMAND for proceedings consistent with this view that [defendant] produced [the derivative art opinion. work] for anything other than sale as high-priced art. Hence, the likelihood of future harm to [plaintiffs] DAVID A. NELSON, Circuit Judge, dissenting. photograph is presumed, and plaintiff s market for his work has been prejudiced"). A Second Circuit panel that included both of the cousins Hand once called the "fair use" issue "the Having determined that 2 Live Crew created a most troublesome in the whole law of copyright." parody, the district court refused to indulge the Dellar v. Samuel Goldwyn, Inc., 104 F.2d 661, 662 presumption and concluded that "it is extremely (2d Cir. 1939). It has been said, indeed, that the fair unlikely that 2 Live Crew's song could adversely use doctrine "is so flexible as virtually to defy affect the market for the original" because the definition." Time, Inc. v. Bernard Geis Assocs., 293 "intended audience for the two songs is entirely F. Supp. 130, 144 (S.D.N.Y. 1968). different." Acuff-Rose, 754 F. Supp. at 1158. In reaching this conclusion, the district court largely Perhaps the most troublesome fair use issue of all relied on the affidavit of Krasilovsky who stated, in is the question of whether a particular parody part: "I cannot see how it [the new work] can affect constitutes fair use of a copyrighted original. The the sales or popularity of the Orbison song, except to parody cases appear to be in hopeless conflict. stimulate interest in the original." Id. Although we Compare, for example, Loew's, Inc. v. Columbia have already determined that harm for purposes of Broadcasting System, 131 F. Supp. 165 (S.D. Cal. the fair use analysis has been established by the 1955), affd sub nom. Benny v. Loew's, Inc., 239 presumption attaching to commercial uses, we note F.2d 532 (9th Cir. 1956), aff'd by an equally divided that inquiry under the fourth statutory factor not only court, 356 U.S. 43, 78 S. Ct. 667, 2 L. Ed. 2d 583 considers harm to the market for the original but (1958) (Jack Benny's parody of the motion picture harm to the market for derivative works as well. Id. "Gaslight" held not to be fair use of the original), This formulation was arrived at by Professor with Berlin v. E. C. Publications, Inc., 329 F.2d 541 Nimmer, who provided an example relied upon by (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 379 U.S. 822, 13 L. Ed. 2d the Rogers court: "[A] movie adaptation is made of 33 , 85 S. Ct. 46 (1964) (Mad Magazine parodies of a book. Even though the movie may boost book Irving Berlin songs held to be fair use).' Cf. sales, it is an unfair use because of the effect on the Columbia Pictures Corp. v. National Broadcasting potential sale of adaptation rights." Rogers, 960 F.2d Co., 137 F. Supp. 348 (S.D. Cal. 1955), where the at 312 (citing 3 Nimmer, 13.05B). Krasilovsky's same district judge who rejected the fair use defense statement is irrelevant as to the fourth statutory for Jack Benny's parody of "Gaslight" accepted the factor. The record on this factor does not support a defense for a Sid Caesar parody of "From Here to finding of fair use. Eternity." In sum, whether a particular parody is entitled to the protection of the fair use doctrine is a Conclusion question likely to be dealt with by lower courts in much the same way that the Supreme Court deals Three of the factors set out in the statute weigh with more than a few questions of constitutional law;

56 we think we know fair use when we see it, even if "Author v. Parodist: Striking a we cannot do a very good job of relating what we see Compromise," ASCAP Copyright Law (or do not see) to the governing text. Symposium No. 33 (1987) at 101."

The text that is pertinent here is statutory, not Some authorities go on to suggest that if the constitutional."o Where parody is concerned, derivative work is to be treated as true parody, it however, the guidance provided by the statute is at must do more than achieve a comic effect: "It must least as Delphic as that sometimes provided by the also make some critical comment or statement about Constitution. The Copyright Act says that "the fair the original work which reflects the original use of a copyrighted work . . . for purposes such as perspective of the parodist - thereby giving the criticism, comment . . . scholarship or research, is parody social value beyond its entertainment not an infringement of copyright." 17 U.S.C. 107. function." Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer v. Showcase (The statute itself tells us that the words "such as" Atlanta Cooperative Productions, Inc., 479 F. Supp. mean what they say and "are illustrative and not 351, 357 (N.D. Ga. 1979)[additional cites ommited]. limitative." 17 U.S.C. 101.) The statute then goes on But whether or not a derivative work must "criticize" to list four factors that shall be "included" among the the original, I am not sure that I understand the factors considered by a court in determining a reservations my colleagues on the panel have question of fair use: "In determining whether the use expressed in this case about accepting the district made of a work in any particular case is a fair use court's conclusion that 2 Live Crew's "Pretty the factors to be considered shall include [the four Woman" is in fact a parody of the Acuff-Rose factors.]" Section 107. Here again, the list provided original. Under anyone's definition, it seems to me, by Congress is "nonexclusive," to borrow the term the 2 Live Crew song is a quintessential parody. used in Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enterprises, 471 U.S. 539, 549, 85 L. Ed. 2d 588 , The Second Circuit faced a similar definitional 105 S. Ct. 2218 (1985); the court is free to consider question in Berlin v. E.C. Publications Inc., 329 any other factors that may be relevant. F.2d 541 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 379 U.S. 822, 13 L. Ed. 2d 33 , 85 S. Ct. 46 (1964). One of the Where we are dealing with parody, as I shall Irving Berlin pieces on which the Mad Magazine suggest, unenumerated factors may have no less people had worked their peculiar magic was the song relevance than the four set forth in the statute -- and "A Pretty Girl is Like a Melody." (Messrs. Orbison the statutory factors are likely to have a somewhat and Dees are obviously not the first tunesmiths to different impact on our deliberations than they would have turned their attention to a comely female.) The in a non-parody situation. Before turning to these defendants, in the words of the court, "transformed matters, however, I think it would be helpful to the plaintiffs' 'A Pretty Girl Is Like a Melody,' into consider what it is we are talking about when we 'Louella Schwartz Describes Her Malady'; what was speak of "parody." originally a tribute to feminine beauty became a burlesque of a feminine hypochondriac troubled with The etymology of the word has direct relevance to sleeplessness and a propensity to tell the world of her this case. The term comes from the Greek parodeia, plight." Id. at 543. meaning "a song sung alongside another."" The musical parody is thus the very archetype of the This was "parody," the Second Circuit said - and genre. it was parody that constituted fair use of Irving Berlin's original work: One of the best definitions I have come across is the following, which appears in a prize-winning "For, as a general proposition, we believe that student essay: parody and satire are deserving of substantial freedom - both as entertainment and as a form of "A parody is a work that transforms all or a social and literary criticism. As the readers of significant part of an original work of Cervantes' 'Don Quixote' and Swift's 'Gulliver's authorship into a derivative work by Travels,' or the parodies of a modern master such as distorting it or closely imitating it, for comic Max Beerbohm well know, many a true word is [or, I would add, for satiric] effect, in a indeed spoken in jest." Id. at 545. manner such that both the original work of authorship and the independent effort of the In Fisher v. Dees, 794 F.2d 432, 434 (9th Cir. parodist are recognizable." Clemmons, 1986), similarly, the Ninth Circuit had occasion to

57 analyze a pair of songs about women named "Sunny" down the street. The man speculates on whether the or "Sonny. The first piece, recorded in the 1950s by woman is lonely too. Apostrophizing her in his mind, Johnny Mathis, was entitled "When Sunny Gets he urges her to stop and talk and give him a smile Blue." The second, released in 1985 under the title and say she will stay with him and be his that night. "When Sonny Sniffs Glue," copied the first six bars The woman walks on by, and the man resigns himself (the recognizable main theme) of the original song's to going home alone. Before he leaves, however, he 38 bars. The derivative work transformed the original sees the woman walking back to him. End of story. opening lyrics - "When Sunny gets blue, her eyes get gray and cloudy, then the rain begins to fall" - This little vignette is intended, I think, to be sort of into "When Sonny sniffs glue, her eyes get red and sweet. While it is certainly suggestive, it is also, by bulgy, then her hair begins to fall." Id. at 434. After the standards of its time, "romantic" rather than listening to tapes of both songs, the Ninth Circuit indelicate. The singer evokes a sexual theme in his panel had no difficulty at all in rejecting an argument soliloquy, but then leaves the realization of his desire that "the so-called parody is not actually a parody, or to the listener's imagination. at least is not a parody of the composer's song." Id. at 436. Said the court, "Although we have no The parody by 2 Live Crew is much more explicit, illusions of musical expertise, it was clear to us that and it reminds us that sexual congress with nameless Dees's version was intended to poke fun at the streetwalkers is not necessarily the stuff of romance composers' song, and at Mr. Mathis's rather singular and is not necessarily without its consequences. The vocal range. We reject the notion that the song was singers (there are several) have the same thing on used merely as a vehicle to achieve a comedic their minds as did the lonely man with the nasal objective unrelated to the song, its place and time." voice, but here there is no hint of wine and roses. Id. The 2 Live Crew singers - randy misogynists, not lonely Sir Lancelots - raucously address a "big hairy Like the Second Circuit panel in Berlin, the Fisher woman" and her "bald-headed friend," one or both of court affirmed a finding that the parody was entitled whom are urged to "let the boys jump in." One to fair use protection as a matter of law. Id. at 440. singer chides a woman (the big hairy one, I think) for having cheated on him ("Two timin' woman/You's I myself have no more "illusions of musical out with my boy last night"). In the end, this cloud expertise" than did the members of the court that proves to have what the singer sees as a silver lining: decided Fisher v. Dees. After listening, however, to Exhibits D and E, the tapes of the two "Pretty "Two timin' woman/That takes a load off my mind Woman" songs, I am satisfied that the 2 Live Crew Two timin' woman/Now I know the baby ain't version both imitates and distorts the original work mine." for comic or satiric effect, and does so in such a way that both the original work and the work of the This, I should say, is "criticism" with a vengeance parodist are readily recognizable. The parody (done - and the thematic relationship to the original is in an African-American dialect) was clearly intended obvious. The relationship between the copyrighted to ridicule the white-bread original - and if a higher song and the parody is every bit as patent here as was criticism is necessary to qualify the derivative work the corresponding relationship between the songs as true parody, such criticism is readily discernible. considered by the courts in Elsmere Music, Inc. v. National Broadcasting Co., 482 F. Supp. 741 The affidavit of Oscar Brand explains, as Judge (S.D.N.Y. 1980), aff'd 623 F.2d 252 (2d Cir. 1980). Joiner has noted, that "this anti-establishment singing That case involved an oft-repeated advertising jingle group [2 Live Crew] is trying to show how bland and known as "I Love New York" and a Saturday Night banal the Orbison song seems to them." The district Live take-off entitled "I Love Sodom." The parody court accepted Brand's explanation. 754 F. Supp. at was held to constitute a fair use of the original. The 1155. So do I. Whether one likes the original or not statutory factors, in my view, fully support a - and the maxim "de gustibus non est disputandum" corresponding result in the instant case. comes to mind here - the original is quite clearly being held up to criticism by 2 Live Crew. The first of the factors that we must consider is this: Consider the plot, if one may call it that, of the original work. A lonely man with a strangely nasal "(1) the purpose and character of the use, including voice sees a pretty woman (name unknown) walking whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for

58 nonprofit educational purposes. ... panel remarked in affirming the judgment in favor of Saturday Night Live, "copyright law should be In the case before us, of course, the purpose is hospitable to the humor of parody. . . Elsmere parody and the character is commercial. Does the Music Co., Inc., 623 F.2d at 253. mere fact that the parodists hoped to make money mean that their use of the original work is We should almost certainly be hospitable to the presumptively unfair? I am by no means convinced humor of parody if we allowed ourselves to be that the Supreme Court would so hold - and any guided, as the Supreme Court was guided in the such presumption would be readily rebuttable in any Betamax case, "by Justice Stewart's exposition of the event. correct approach to the ambiguities in the law of It is true that in the Betamax case, Sony Corp. v. copyright." Sony, 464 U.S. at 431. The cause that is Universal City Studios, Inc., 464 U.S. 417, 451, 78 ultimately to be served, Justice Stewart observed in L. Ed. 2d 574 , 104 S. Ct. 774 (1984), the Court Twentieth Century Music Corp. v. Aiken, 422 U.S. made the broad statement that "every commercial use 151, 156, 45 L. Ed. 2d 84 , 95 S. Ct. 2040 (1975), of copyrighted material is presumptively an unfair is "the cause of promoting broad public availability of exploitation of the monopoly privilege that belongs to literature, music and other arts." What Justice the owner of the copyright. . . ." It is also true that Stewart called the "ultimate aim" of copyright law is this statement was quoted with approval in Harper & "to stimulate artistic creativity for the general public Row, 471 U.S. at 562. But both of those cases good." Id. (footnote omitted). If we keep this involved mechanical copying, literally or figuratively, ultimate aim in mind, it seems to me, we are not without alteration of the copied material. There is likely to conclude that parody for profit is a difference, obviously, between copying and presumptively "unfair." caricaturizing. By calling into being a new and transformed work, the caricaturist exercises a type of The second statutory factor to be considered is creativity that is foreign to the work of the copyist. And the creative work of the caricaturist is surely "(2) the nature of the copyrighted work. . . ." more valuable than the reproductive work of the copyist. Thus it has been suggested that the The pertinent data in this connection are that presumption of unfairness in cases of commercial Orbison and Dees published "Oh, Pretty Woman" exploitation "is sensible and appropriate only when long before the alleged infringement occurred, and applied to commercial reproductive uses. . . ." Note, that theirs is a work of the imagination rather than a "The Parody Defense to Copyright Infringement: piece of historical reportage. Productive Fair Use After Betamax," 97 Harv. L. Rev. 1395, 1408 (1984). That the original song had long since been published is a factor which works in favor of the 2 An illustration may help. W.S. Gilbert and Sir Live Crew defendants. See Harper & Row, 471 U.S. Arthur Sullivan created comic operas that are among at 564, where the Supreme Court declared that "the the most commercially successful of all time. Gilbert scope of fair use is narrower with respect to and Sullivan certainly cannot be said to have had unpublished works." The fact that "Oh, Pretty "nonprofit educational purposes" in mind when they Woman" is a creative work might tend to offset the wrote such a work as Princess Ida, one of their publication factor, perhaps, if the work were not minor masterpieces. Princess Ida was, in Gilbert's being used for the purpose of parody. But parody words, "a respectful operatic perversion" of "The routinely sets its sights on the fictive as opposed to Princess," a lengthy poem by Tennyson. Would the the factual. If, as the Second Circuit insists, "parody world not be a poorer place if Lord Tennyson could and satire are deserving of substantial freedom," have stilled the voice of W.S. Gilbert merely because Berlin, 329 F.2d at 545, it would make no sense at Gilbert's purposes included the making of money? all to penalize the parodist for taking as his subject For anyone who loves Gilbert and Sullivan -- and precisely the sort of work that has been grist for their number is legion - the question answers itself. parodists' mills for the last two and a half millennia.

Similarly, I think, the world would be the poorer The third statutory factor is a somewhat if the holders of the copyright on "I Love New York" problematical one, where parody is concerned: had been allowed to block the Saturday Night Live rendition of "I Love Sodom." "In today's world of "(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion often unrelieved solemnity," as the Second Circuit used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole.

59 the substantiality factor.

The "portion used" test is problematical in this The last of the statutory factors is this: context because parody cannot be parody unless it allows the original work to shine through in a form "(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market which, while distorted, is recognizable. "Parody by for or value of the copyrighted work." its nature demands close imitation," Bisceglia, "Parody and Copyright Protection, " ASCAP To me, at least, it seems as clear in this case as it Copyright Law Symposium No. 34 at 17; substantial did to the Second Circuit in Berlin that "the parody usage is thus almost a given. has neither the intent nor the effect of fulfilling the demand for the original ...." 329 F.2d at 545. The Ninth Circuit has held that the fair use defense must fail when the purported parodists' copying "is The affidavit of Oscar Brand says that virtually complete or almost verbatim." Walt Disney Productions v. Air Pirates, 581 F.2d 751, 756 (9th "Parodies have never interfered with the Cir. 1978), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 1132, 99 S. Ct. popularity of the original. * * * The sales 1054, 59 L. Ed. 2d 94 (1979). I have no quarrel with graph of 'Hello, Dolly' didn't change when this formulation; near-verbatim copying is closer to it became 'Hello, Lyndon,' and 'Hello, plagiarism than it is to parody. But neither the music Nixon.' Hundreds of popular songs have nor the lyrics of 2 Live Crew's "Pretty Woman" can been 'covered' by parody performances and fairly be said to constitute near-verbatim copying of recordings without altering their popular the Orbison and Dees original. 3 appeal or interfering with their sales."

"At the very least," the Second Circuit has said, a Although Brand's assertion that parodies have parody will pass muster under the "portion used" "never" interfered with the popularity of the original factor "where the parodist does not appropriate a strikes me as dubious, there has been no showing of greater amount of the original work than is necessary any such interference here." Brand - who is to 'recall or conjure up' the object of his satire. . . ." probably on firmer ground when he sticks to the Berlin, 329 F.2d at 545. Saturday Night Live's "I specifics of this case - explains that the audiences for Love Sodom" was held to pass the "conjure up" the two songs are quite different: test," and 2 Live Crew's "Pretty Woman" does not appear to have appropriated more of the original on "There is no question in my mind that the which it was based than did "I Love Sodom." song "Oh, Pretty Woman" by Roy Orbison and William Dees was intended for Mr. The district court (Wiseman, J.) made these Orbison's country music audience and observations about the amount and substantiality of middle-America. the mimicry in the 2 Live Crew song: [ ] On the other hand, 2 Live Crew's "In this case, 2 Live Crew has not mimicked version[ ], which is unquestionably a comic so much of 'Oh, Pretty Woman' that it runs parody, is aimed at the large black populace afoul of the substantiality factor. Notable which used to buy what was once called aspects of the original song are plainly 'race' records. The group's popularity is present in 2 Live Crew's version but, unlike intense among the disaffected, definitely not Air Pirates, this is not a case of virtually the audience for the Orbison song. I cannot complete or verbatim copying. Rather this see how it can affect the sales or popularity case falls in the realm of parodies envisioned of the Orbison song, except to stimulate by Fisher and Berlin. In view of the fact that interest in the original." the medium is a song, its purpose is parody, and the relative brevity of the copying, it Brand's analysis of the market stands unrefuted. appropriates no more from the original than One month after Brand gave his affidavit, the is necessary to accomplish reasonably its plaintiffs Director of Licensing, Gerald Tiefer, parodic purpose. Fisher, 794 F.2d at 439." executed an affidavit in which there is no attempt to 754 F. Supp. at 1157. deny that the two songs are aimed at different markets. 6 Mr. Tiefer does suggest, however, that I cannot improve on Judge Wiseman's analysis of the 2 Live Crew parody could impair the value of the

60 plaintiffs right to grant licenses to parodists. And Copyright Act, merit consideration by the courts in Mr. Jerry Flowers, Executive Director of Publishing determining when parody constitutes fair use. I shall for the plaintiffs parent corporation, says in an mention only one such factor - one foreshadowed in affidavit that the licensing of parodies of established what has already been said. It is this: the social value hit songs has become extremely lucrative. of the parody as criticism.

Judge Joiner invites our attention, in this In the case at bar, it seems to me, this factor connection, to Rogers v. Koons, 960 F.2d 301, 312 militates rather strongly in favor of affirmance of the (2d Cir. 1992), where the Second Circuit observed district court's finding of fair use. The 2 Live Crew that "the inquiry considers not only harm to the "Pretty Woman" is hopelessly vulgar, to be sure,' 7 market for the original [work], but also harm to the but we ought not let that fact conceal what may be market for derivative works." In a passage a portion the song's most significant message - for here the of which was quoted with approval in Harper & vulgarity, to paraphrase Marshall McLuhan, is the Row, 471 U.S. at 568, similarly, the Nimmer treatise message. The original work may not seem vulgar, at says that "if the defendant's work adversely affects first blush, but the 2 Live Crew group are telling us, the value of any of the rights of the copyrighted work knowingly or unknowingly, that vulgar is precisely ... [including the right to license derivative works,] what "Oh, Pretty Woman" is. Whether we agree or the use is not fair even if the rights thus affected have disagree, this perception is not one we ought to not as yet been exercised by the plaintiff." 3 Nimmer suppress. on Copyrights, 13.05[B] at 13-88.19 (1992) (citations omitted).

Nimmer, however, is not discussing parody here; the quoted passage deals with a motion picture hypothetically adapted from a copyrighted novel. And neither Rogers v. Koons nor Harper & Row involved parody either. The former was a case in which a sculpture had been copied with great fidelity from a photograph - the artisans who produced the sculpture were told that the "work must be just like photo," 960 F.2d at 305 - and the latter was a case in which quotations from the unpublished manuscript of President Ford's autobiography were lifted by the defendant verbatim.

Parody, again, is different. It transforms as it copies, and it may well savage the original work in the process. In the past, at least, copyright holders have not been overly enthusiastic about agreeing to see their works parodied - and the law itself has licensed parodists, much as the law has given license to book reviewers, drama critics, and other commentators. Ours is a commercial age, to be sure, and consensual "parody licenses" may be more common now than they used to be. I confess that I am still uneasy, however, about the prospect of the courts turning copyright holders into censors of parody. Neither the history of the fair use doctrine nor the four factors enumerated in the Copyright Act compel such a result. "Permissible parody, whether or not in good taste, is the price an artist pays for success. . . ." MCA, Inc. v. Wilson, 677 F.2d 180, 191 (2d Cir. 1981) (Mansfield, J., dissenting). I said earlier in this opinion that there may be factors which, although not enumerated in the

61 ENDNOTES 7. See, S. Rep. No. 94-473, 94th Cong., 1st Sess. at 61-62 (1975); H.R. Rep. No. 94-1476, 94th 1. We use the term "album" generically; "As Clean Cong., 2d Sess. at 65 (1976). As They Wanna Be" was also released on compact disc and cassele tape. 8. We do so with considerable reservation, as the district court's parody analysis does not, in our view, 2. The parties dispute the above chronology. comport with proper analysis of that term. Defendants contend that Campbell intended all along to create a comic song and appropriately sought the The district court compared the statement of the permission of Acuff-Rose prior to doing so. parties' affiants and concluded: "Acuff-Rose may not Acuff-Rose sees Fine's letter as a effort to create a like it, and 2 Live Crew may not have created the revisionist history of legitimacy for an act of piracy. best parody of the original, but nonetheless the facts The district court found that "As Clean As They convincingly demonstrate that it is a parody." Acuff Wanna Be" was released on July 15, 1989, Rose, 754 F. Supp. at 1155. The district court subsequent to Fine's letter to Tiefer. Campbell's closely parsed the lyrics of the two songs, finding intent is not dispositive of the case, but we note that that: "Although the parody starts out with the same this finding contradicts Campbell's affidavit. The only lyrics as the original, it quickly degenerates into a support in the record for a July 15 release date is play on words, substituting predictable lyrics with found in Acuff-Rose's response to the motion for shocking ones." Id. 2 Live Crew contends that by dismissal, in which counsel asserted a release date way of the "shocking" lyrics "Pretty Woman" was "on or about July 15, 1989." Campbell's affidavit is intended to satirize the original work, as well as a better factual source than counsel's contention. society at large. Our difficulty with the district court's conclusion that this intention was realized is 3. At oral argument, counsel for 2 Live Crew stated that, even accepting that "Pretty Woman" is a that the deposit was a tactical mistake which should comment on the banality of white-centered popular not be construed as an admission that the group's music, we cannot discern any parody of the original song was something other than a fair use parody. Our song. Failing a direct comment on the original, there review of the record reveals confusion over the status can be no parody, as the "copied work must be, at of "Pretty Woman" as either a "comic" effort, such least in part, an object of the parody, otherwise there as those created by comic musician Weird Al would be no need to conjure up the original work." Yankovic, or a "parody," which purports to deliver Rogers, 960 F.2d at 310 (citing MCA, Inc., 677 social commentary within a humorous framework. F.2d at 185). Yankovic's works are licensed uses, not "fair uses" for which a license is not required. This confusion on In the copyrighted song, the singer remarks on the part of 2 Live Crew adds weight to Acuff-Rose's the beauty of a woman he sees on the street. The assertion that Campbell's intent to create a parody singer is initially disappointed when the woman was only formed after "Pretty Woman" was released. rebuffs his advances and later exults when the woman appears to change her mind. Campbell's lyrics 4. 2 Live Crew also presented the affidavit of M. involved women but aside from broadly evoking the William Krasilovsky, whose conclusions and the theme of the original in the opening line of the 2 Live reasons therefore are much the same as Brand's. Crew version: "Pretty Woman - Walkin' down the street, Pretty Woman - Girl you look so sweet," 5. The district court also determined that bear no discernible relationship to the original. Acuff-Rose's pendent state law claims were Instead, as Brand noted, the lyrics examine a series preempted by section 301 of the Copyright Act. of women with unappealing attributes: "Big Hairy Acuff-Rose Music, 754 F. Supp. at 1159-60. Woman - You need to shave that stuff, Big Hairy Acuff-Rose does not challenge this determination. Woman - You know I bet it's tough, Big Hairy Woman - All that hair it ain't legit, 'Cause you look 6. Acuff-Rose also sought leave to amend its like 'cousin it,' Big Hairy Woman," or who are not complaint to allege violations of the Lanham Act. 15 faithful: "Two Timin' Woman - Girl you know you U.S.C. @ 1125(a). The district court denied the ain't right, Two Timin' Woman -- You's out with my motion and Acuff-Rose does not allege error in the boy last night, Two Timin' Woman - That takes a denial. load off my mind, Two Timin' Woman - Now I know the baby ain't mine."

62 In our opinion, this is not a new work which 11. There are, to be sure, authorities who would makes ridiculous the style and expression of the constitutionalize copyright law. Some would treat original, although there is plainly an element of the satire as sacrosanct under the First Amendment. See, ridiculous to the new work. We cannot see any e.g., Goetsch, "Parody as Free Speech - The thematic relationship between the copyrighted song Replacement of the Fair Use Doctrine By First and the alleged parody. The mere fact that both songs Amendment Protection," 3 W. New Eng. L. Rev. 39 have a woman as their central theme is too tenuous a (1980). Others would accord constitutional protection connection to be viewed as critical comment on the to any parody a limitation on which would, in the original. We find instructive the holding in Elsmere opinion of the judge, impede "the Progress of v. National Broadcasting Co., 482 F. Supp. 741 Science" as that phrase is used in the Copyright (S.D.N.Y. 1980), aff'd per curiam, 623 F.2d 252 (2d Clause, Art. I, @ 8 of the Constitution. See Cir. 1980). The Court of Appeals for the Second Bisceglia, "Parody and Copyright Protection: Turning Circuit agreed with the district court that the the Balancing Act Into a Juggling Act," ASCAP company of the television program "Saturday Night Copyright Law Symposium No. 34 (1987) at 23. As Live" had performed a parody - entitled "I Love for me, I cannot work up much enthusiasm for Sodom" - of the then-widely known advertising 'turning every copyright case into a mini-Marbury v. jingle "I Love New York." The new work cast the Madison, 5 U.S. 137, 2 L. Ed. 60 or New York original image-polishing effort as ridiculous by Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 84 S. Ct. 710, asserting that the effort to redeem New York City's 11 L. Ed. 2d 686, 1964 U.S. LEXIS 1655 (1964). image was futile. It is this sort of direct comment, The major role in determining how to promote the comment which is expressly and unambiguously progress of science has been given, after all, to directed at the message of the original work, which Congress: "As the text of the Constitution makes constitutes a parody. Similarly, the court in Rogers plain, it is Congress that has been assigned the task found that a sculpture based upon a copyrighted of defining the scope of the limited monopoly that photograph was not a parody regardless of the should be granted to authors or to inventors. . . ." creator's alleged intention to point out the banality of Sony Corp. v. Universal City Studios, Inc., 464 U.S. the copyrighted work. Rogers, 960 F.2d at 309-10. 417, 429, 78 L. Ed. 2d 574 , 104 S. Ct. 774 (1984). The new work, the court found, could perhaps be The Ninth Circuit has rejected out of hand the notion seen as a critique of materialistic society at large, but that the First Amendment gives parodists a blanket on its face the sculpture failed to make critical protection from copyright infringement actions. comment regarding the original creative work. Id. Fisher v. Dees, 794 F.2d 432, 434 n.2 (9th Cir. We are in agreement with the Rogers court that the 1986). term parody cannot be allowed to assume too broad a definition, for if an "infringement of a 12. VII Encyclopedia Britannica (15th ed. 1975) at copyrightable expression could be justified as a fair 768. "Parodeia" joins the Greek words for "beside" use solely on the basis of the infringer's claim to a and "to sing" - the roots of our prefix "para" and higher or different artistic use . . . there would be no our word for a lyric poem, "ode." Webster's New practicable boundary to the fair use defense." Id. at International Dictionary (3d ed. 1961). 310. 13. See also Note, "The Parody Defense to 10. As Berlin points out, 329 F.2d at 544-45, Copyright Infringement: Productive Fair Use After Loew's has been widely criticized. Among the critics Betamax," 97 Harv. L. Rev. 1395 (1984): "Parody, is no less a figure than Professor (later Justice) in its purest form, is the art of creating a new Benjamin Kaplan. See Kaplan, An Unhurried View of literary, musical, or other artistic work that both Copyright (1967) at 69. The Ninth Circuit has said mimics and renders ludicrous the style and thought of that its Loew's decision "was essentially repudiated an original." The examples cited by the Harvard by Congress's recognition of parody in the notes to editors are Cervantes' Don Quixote (1614), Pope's tie Copyrights Act of 1976." Fisher v. Dees, 794 The Rape of the Lock (1712), and Austen's F.2d 432, 435 (9th Cir. 1986), citing 17 U.S.C.A @ Northanger Abbey (1818), all of which parodied 107 Historical Note. (The Note quotes House Report then-popular literary genres. Judge Yankwich No. 94-1476 as listing "use in a parody of some of provides a much longer list of well known parodies the content of the work parodied" as among "the sort in his article "Parody and Burlesque in the Law of of activities the courts might regard as fair use under Copyright," 33 Can. B. Rev. 1131 (1955). The art the circumstances.") form goes back at least as far as Aristophines, the

63 famous comic dramatist of ancient Greece, whose 16. Because parody is a special case, moreover, a play The Frogs (405 B.C.) - a work still performed drop in the popularity of the original "Oh, Pretty today - spoofed the plays of Aeschylus and Woman" would be of doubtful relevance anyway. Euripides. "We must accept the harsh truth that parody may quite legitimately aim at garroting the original, Parodies often outlast and outshine the works destroying it commercially as well as artistically." parodied. A good example is Lewis Carroll's "You Kaplan, An Unhurried View of Copyright, at 69. Are Old, Father William," a takeoff on Southey's work "The Old Man's Comforts." The texts, which 17. This case is thus different from New Line are strikingly similar in form, may be read Cinema Corp. v. Bertlesman Music Group, 693 F. side-by-side in the appendix to Bisceglia, "Parody Supp. 1517 (S.D.N.Y. 1988), where testimony and Copyright Protection: Turning the Balancing Act "unequivocally established that the songs 'Nightmare into a Juggling Act," ASCAP Copyright Law on My Street' and 'Are You Ready for Freddy?' are Symposium No. 34 (1987) at 37-38. in direct competition." Id. at 1528.

14. I recognize that the affidavit of musicologist 18. Vulgarity, in practice, probably cuts against Earl Spielman refers to a "one measure guitar lick" acceptance of the parody defense. See MCA, Inc. v. that "may have actually been sampled or lifted and Wilson, 677 F.2d 180, 185 (2d Cir. 1981), where the then incorporated into the recording of 'Pretty panel majority said this: Woman' as performed by The 2 Live Crew." But the Copyright Act "protects only those sound recordings "We are not prepared to hold that a 'fixed' on or after February 15, 1972," Note, commercial composer can plagiarize a "Digital Sound Sampling, Copyright and Publicity: competitor's copyrighted song, substitute Protecting Against the Electronic Appropriation of dirty lyrics of his own, perform it for Sounds," 87 Col. L. Rev. 1723, 1727-28 (1987), commercial gain, and then escape liability citing 17 U.S.C. @ 301(c); Orbison and Dees by calling the end result a parody or satire recorded "Oh, Pretty Woman" in 1964. It is on the mores of society." MCA, Inc. v. arguable, moreover, that a "sampling" of no more Wilson, 677 F.2d 180, 185 (2d Cir. 1981). than a few notes should be governed by the maxim de minimis non curat lex. Id. at 1735. Finally, the I have some sympathy for this attitude, plaintiffs have not shown by a preponderance of the particularly where the parties really are evidence that any sampling really occurred here - "competitors;" be the lyrics of the derivative and to my untrained ear, at least, it is obvious that work dirty or clean, it goes against the grain most of the 2 Live Crew music was not lifted to let a competitor reap where he has not electronically from the 1964 recording. sown. In the case at bar, however, there has been no showing that the parties are 15. The Second Circuit noted by way of dictum in competitors. The 2 Live Crew song, that case that "even more extensive use [than that moreover, is not just "a parody or satire on necessary to 'conjure up' the original] would still be the mores of society" - it is a parody or fair use, provided the parody builds upon the satire on the mores of Orbison's Pretty original, using the original as a known element of Woman and her admirer. modern culture and contributing something new for humorous effect or commentary." 623 F.2d at 253 n. 1. Professor Nimmer's treatise asserts that "this went too far," adding that "the Second Circuit later drew back from this extreme. . . ." 3 Nimmer on Copyright, 13.03[f] at 13-90.9-.10 (1992), citing Warner Bros., Inc. v. American Broadcasting Companies, 654 F.2d 204 (2d Cir. 1981), and MCA, Inc. v. Wilson, 677 F.2d 180 (2d Cir. 1981). I am by no means sure that the Elsmere dictum did go too far, but it makes no difference in the case at bar; the 2 Live Crew song passes the "conjure up" test in any event.

64 ACUFF-ROSE MUSIC, INC. v. LUTHER R. CAMPBELL No. 3:90-0524 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE, NASHVILLE DIVISION

754 F. Supp. 1150; 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 493; 18 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1144; Copy. L. Rep. (CCH) P26,699

January 14, 1991, Entered

THOMAS A. WISEMAN, JR., CHIEF UNITED Seven Bizzos." Both the compact disc cover and STATES DISTRICT JUDGE compact disc itself acknowledge Orbison and Dees as the authors of "Oh, Pretty Woman" and Acuff-Rose This case involves a claim by Acuff-Rose Music, as the publisher. Inc. ("Acuff-Rose") for copyright infringement of its song, "Oh, Pretty Woman." Acuff-Rose has named Almost one year later, on June 18, 1990, as defendants the members of the rap group 2 Live Acuff-Rose sued 2 Live Crew and their record Crew and Luke Skyywalker Records. The plaintiff company, Luke Skyywalker Records, for copyright contends that the defendants unfairly are trying to infringement, interference with business relations, cash in on the popularity of "Oh, Pretty Woman." and interference with prospective business advantage for the performance and distribution of a copy of For the reasons stated below, the Court finds that "Oh, Pretty Woman." Acuff-Rose contends that the no genuine issue of material fact exists regarding the lyrics of "Oh, Pretty Woman" as sung by 2 Live allegation of copyright infringement. This claim is Crew "are not consistent with good taste or would dismissed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56. The disparage the future value of the copyright." plaintiff's pendent tort claims are preempted by 17 Moreover, Acuff-Rose charges that 2 Live Crew's U.S.C. 301. music is substantially similar in melody to "Oh, Pretty Woman" and the lyrics of the first verse are I. substantially similar to that of the original version. In response, defendants have moved for summary This copyright case involves Roy Orbison's judgment. They argue that "Pretty Woman" is a musical hit "Oh, Pretty Woman" as recorded by 2 parody that constitutes fair use under 17 U.S.C. 107 Live Crew. Roy Orbison and William Dees of the Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. 101-914 (1982). co-authored "Oh, Pretty Woman" in 1964 and They also argue that the two tort claims are assigned their rights in the song to Acuff-Rose Music preempted by 17 U.S.C. 301. Pursuant to Fed. R. the same year. "Oh, Pretty Woman" was copyrighted Civ. P. 67, 2 Live Crew has deposited with the Court by Acuff-Rose in 1964. Since then the song has the $ 13,867 it maintains is due to Acuff-Rose for use continued to generate profits for Acuff-Rose. of its song as required by the Copyright Act. This decision does not address whether that sum reflects On July 5, 1989, 2 Live Crew's manager, Linda adequate compliance with the Act. Fine, wrote Gary Teifer of Opryland U.S.A., Inc. and Acuff-Rose. Fine informed Teifer that 2 Live The resolution of this motion presents two Crew was going to parody "Oh, Pretty Woman," that questions for the Court to address: first, whether Orbison and Dees would receive full credit as owners "Pretty Woman" constitutes fair use of copyrighted and authors, and that 2 Live Crew would pay material pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 107; and second, Acuff-Rose the statutorily required rate for use of the whether the plaintiff's state law claims are preempted song. Teifer responded on July 17, denying the by federal copyright law. license request and informing Fine that "we cannot permit the use of a parody of 'Oh, Pretty Woman.'" II.

On July 15, 1989, 2 Live Crew released its version B. Fair Use of "Oh, Pretty Woman" on record albums, tapes and compact discs, entitled "As Clean As They Wanna To foster the widespread dissemination of ideas, Be." The release, called "Pretty Woman," is on side the copyright system is "designed to assure B, sandwiched between "Me So Horny" and "My contributors to the store of knowledge a fair return

65 for their labors." Harper & Row Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enterprises, 471 U.S. 539, 546, 85 L. Ed. 2d Although 2 Live Crew's primary goal in releasing 588, 105 S. Ct. 2218 (1985). See Sony Corp. v. "As Clean As They Wanna Be" is to sell its music, Universal City Studios, Inc., 464 U.S. 417, 429, 78 that finding "does not necessarily negate a fair use L. Ed. 2d 574, 104 S. Ct. 774 (1984)(purpose of determination . . . ." 3 M. Nimmer, Nimmer on copyright is to create incentives for creative effort). Copyright, 13.05[A] at 13-70 (1990). In Harper & Notwithstanding the monopoly granted to the owner, Row, the Court stated that a commercial purpose fair use has been defined as the "privilege in others merely "tends to weigh against a finding of fair use." than the owner of a copyright to use the copyrighted Harper & Row, 471 U.S. at 562. "The crux of the material in a reasonable manner without his consent." profit/nonprofit distinction is not whether the sole Harper & Row, 471 U.S. at 549 (quoting H. Ball, motive of the use is monetary gain but whether the Law of Copyright and Literary Property, 260 user stands to profit from exploitation of the (1944)). copyrighted material without paying the customary price." Id. Section 107 of the Copyright Act instructs courts to balance the following four factors: Importantly for the purposes of this case, it is plain that 2 Live Crew also desired to parody the original In determining whether the use made of a work in version of "Oh, Pretty Woman."' In copyright law, any particular case is a fair use the factors to be courts have long recognized that satirical expression considered shall include - is "deserving of substantial freedom - both as entertainment and as a form of social and literary (1) the purpose and character of the use, including criticism." Berlin v. E.C. Publications, Inc., 329 whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for F.2d 541, 545 (2nd Cir.), cert. denied, 379 U.S. nonprofit educational purposes; 822, 13 L. Ed. 2d 33, 85 S. Ct. 46, (1964). Including parody within the fair use doctrine has been (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; recognized as "a means of fostering the creativity protected by the copyright law." Warner Bros., Inc., (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used v. American Broadcasting Companies, 720 F.2d 231, in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and 242 (2d Cir. 1983).

(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for Many parodies "distributed commercially may be or value of the copyrighted work. 'more in the nature of an editorial or social commentary than . . . an attempt to capitalize At a minimum, courts have indicated that evaluation financially on the plaintiffs original work.'" Fisher of these four factors is required. But they are not v. Dees, 794 F.2d 432, 437 (9th Cir. 1986)(quoting exclusive. Pillsbury Co. v. Milky Way Productions, Inc., 8 Media L. Rep. 1016, 215 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 124, 131 Since no genuine material issues of fact remain, (N.D.Ga. 1981)); Cf. Original Appalachian Artworks the Court will proceed to address the four factors v. Topps Chewing Gum, 642 F. Supp. 1031, 1034 cited by 107.' (N.D. Ga. 1986)(holding that primary purpose behind defendant's parody "is not an effort to make a social 1. Purpose and Character of the Use. The first comment but is an attempt to make money"). As factor the Court must consider is the purpose and discussed in Section II.B.4, infra, the defendant may character of the use, including whether such use is of rebut the presumption of commercial use as described a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational in Harper & Row by convincing the court that the purposes. As examples of fair use, the preamble of parody does not unfairly diminish the economic value 107 lists "criticism, comment, news reporting, of the original. Fisher, 794 F.2d at 437. teaching . . . scholarship, [and] . . . research." 17 U.S.C. 107. Congress has listed parody as one of Acuff-Rose argues that the song is not a parody. It those activities that might qualify for the fair use contends that the 2 Live Crew's version does not exception. See H.R. Rep. No. 1476, 94th Cong., 2d comment on the copyrighted work because the former Sess., 65 (1976), reprinted in 1976 U.S.Code Cong. is "primarily about the physical attributes of women" & Admin.News 5680. Obviously, 2 Live Crew's and the latter is "primarily about loneliness." song is included on a commercially distributed record album sold for the purpose of making a profit. But based on a comparison of the two songs and

66 the affidavits provided to the Court, it is apparent that to reiterate that message and subsequently at the end 2 Live Crew has created a comic parody of "Oh, of the song as well. Also at the beginning of the Pretty Woman."3 The theme, content and style of parody, the first soloist sings in a different key than the new version are different than the original. In his the chorus. In addition, four times during the parody, affidavit, Luther Campbell, also known as Luke 2 Live Crew repeats Orbison's bass riff over and Skyywalker, states that his version of "Oh, Pretty over again, double the number of times on the Woman" was written as a parody designed "through original, until the riff begins to sound like annoying comic lyrics, to satirize the original work. . . ." He scratch on a record. acknowledges that he purposefully copied selected music and lyrics from "Oh, Pretty Woman" as a Although the Court has determined that 2 Live device to help listeners identify the parody with the Crew's version parodies the original, a finding of a original version. Acuff-Rose may not like it, and 2 parody does not necessarily equate with a finding of Live Crew may not have created the best parody of fair use. Fisher, 794 F.2d at 435. "Parody was not the original, but nonetheless the facts convincingly classified as a presumptively fair use . . . . Each demonstrate that it is a parody. assertion of the 'parody defense' must be considered individually, in light of the statutory facts, reason, 2 Live Crew's lyrics provide the strongest evidence experience, and of course, the general principles of its attempt to parody "Oh, Pretty Woman." developed in past cases." Id. As a result, the Court Although the parody starts out with the same lyrics as will examine the remaining three statutory elements the original, it quickly degenerates into a play on of 107. words, substituting predictable lyrics with shocking ones." The first lyrical hint that something is amiss 2. Nature of the Copyrighted Work. The second comes when a loud, barking laugh immediately factor is the nature of the copyrighted work. In follows the first two words of the parody, "pretty addressing this element, "the court may consider, woman." (Laughter follows later in the song too.) among other things, whether the work was creative, The purpose of the laughter is soon explained as the imaginative, and original, . . . and whether it ensuing choruses respectively depict a big, hairy represented a substantial investment of time and labor woman, a bald-headed woman, and a "two-timin'" made in anticipation of financial return." MCA, 677 woman. Roy Orbison's pretty woman becomes akin F.2d at 182 (citation omitted). See also Harper & to "Cousin It," the ugly, bit character featured on the Row, 471 U.S. at 563; 3 M. Nimnmer, Nimmer on TV series "The Addams Family." The physical Copyright, 13.05[A] at 13-78. Since "Oh, Pretty attributes of the subject woman deviate from a Women" is a published work, with creative roots, pleasing image of femininity to bald-headed, hairy this factor weighs in favor of the plaintiff. and generally repugnant. To complete the thematic twist, at the end of the parody the "two-timin'" 3. Amount of Quotation. The third factor to woman turns out to be pregnant. The phrase, "the address is the amount and substantiality of the portion baby ain't mine" is completely inconsistent with the used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole. tone and story of the romantic original. In sum, 2 This element contains quantitative and qualitative Live Crew is an anti-establishment rap group and this elements and as a result the amount of protected song derisively demonstrates how bland and banal the material that a copier may take under the rubric of Orbison song seems to them. See MCA, Inc. v. fair use will vary from case to case. Wilson, 677 F.2d 180, 185 (2d Cir. 1981)(noting that "if the copyrighted [work] is not at least in part an For instance, fair use may not allow a person to object of the parody, there is no need to conjure it copy the most qualitatively "valuable" portion of the up"); Defendant's Affidavits of Oscar Brand and work, even if such portion constitutes a relatively William Krasilovsky. small amount of the entire protected material. See, e.g., Harper & Row, 471 U.S. at 565-66. In Harper The parody also employs a number of musical & Row the Supreme Court noted that a taking that is devices that exaggerate the original and help to create "insubstantial with respect to the infringing work" a comic effect. 2 Live Crew uses the same drum beat does not necessarily mean that fair use applies. Id., and bass riff to start its song. But unlike the original, 471 U.S. at 565. By contrast, "the copying of an only five seconds into the song and immediately entire work does not preclude fair use per se." following the bass riff, 2 Live Crew inserts a heavily Hustler Magazine, Inc., v. Moral Majority Inc., 796 distorted "scraper," indicating a significant disparity F.2d 1148, 1155 (9th Cir. 1986). in style. The same scraper is used four seconds later

67 Acuff-Rose argues that the portions taken from Fisher court observed that: "Oh, Pretty Woman" are both qualitatively and quantitatively significant. According to the plaintiffs Like a speech, a song is difficult to parody musicologist, Earl V. Spielman, the two works are effectively without exact or near-exact substantially similar. The copying includes the name copying. If the would-be parodist varies the of the song and key lyrics. The 2 Live Crew version music or meter of the original substantially, also includes the same guitar refrain, opening drum it simply will not be recognizable to the beat and melody and chorus. Affidavit of Earl V. general audience. This "special need for Spielman. Since the original song is so popular, accuracy," provides some license for Acuff-Rose contends that 2 Live Crew does not need "closer" parody. . . . To be sure, that to copy much of the original in order to conjure up license is not limitless: the parodist's desire its memory. to make the best parody must be "balanced against the rights of the copyright owner in But the conclusion drawn by the plaintiffs does not this original expression." address whether 2 Live Crew used more of the copyrighted work than was necessary to recall or Fisher, 794 F.2d at 439 (citations omitted). conjure up "Oh, Pretty Woman." See, e.g., Fisher, 794 F.2d at 438 n. 4 (holding that affidavits Likewise, in Berlin, the Second Circuit affirmed conflicting on question of substantiality are irrelevant the application of the fair use defense in a case where given that issue of extent of taking is a question of the defendants, publishers of "Mad Magazine," had law). No one disputes that 2 Live Crew copied "Oh, published a volume which parodied twenty-five of the Pretty Woman." But the question about substantial plaintiffs song lyrics [**19] in same meter. "The similarity cannot be divorced from the purpose for disparities in theme, content and style between the which the defendant's work will be used. original lyrics and the alleged infringements could hardly be greater." Berlin, 329 F.2d at 545. Cf. Walt It is a settled aspect of copyright law that parodists Disney Productions v. Air Pirates, 581 F.2d 751, 758 have the right to conjure up the object of the parody. (9th Cir. 1978)(holding that fair use defense cannot In Berlin, 329 F.2d 541, the court stated that where apply where the copying is virtually complete or "the parody has neither the intent nor the effect of almost verbatim and that parodist may only use what fulfilling the demand for the original, and where the is necessary to conjure up the original), cert. denied, parodist does not appropriate a greater amount of the 439 U.S. 1132, 59 L. Ed. 2d 94, 99 S. Ct. 1054 original work than is necessary to 'recall or conjure (1979); MCA, 677 F.2d at 185 (holding that where up' the object of his satire, a finding of infringement defendant's song "Cunnilingus Champion of Co. C" would be improper." Id. at 545. See Elsmere Music, did not parody plaintiff's song "Boogie Woogie Bugle Inc. v. National Broadcasting Co., 623 F.2d 252, Boy of Company B," the amount copied by 253 (2d Cir. 1980)("parody frequently needs to be defendants from the original song was so substantial more than a fleeting evocation of an original in order as to be unfairly excessive). to make its humorous point"). Indeed, the effectiveness of a parody inherently depends on its In this case, 2 Live Crew has not mimicked so ability to copy the original work. much of "Oh, Pretty Woman" that it runs afoul of the substantiality factor. Notable aspects of the original Several courts that have balanced the conflict song are plainly present in 2 Live Crew's version between the rights of the copyright owner against the but, unlike Air Pirates, this is not a case of virtually goals of the parodist have concluded that parodies of complete or verbatim copying. Rather this case falls songs require more leeway than other types of in the realm of parodies envisioned by Fisher and parodies. The Ninth Circuit reasoned in Fisher that Berlin. In view of the fact that the medium is a song, resolution of the substantiality question depends on its purpose is parody, and the relative brevity of the the medium of the respective works. In Fisher, the copying, it appropriates no more from the original plaintiffs sued for copyright infringement of a song than is necessary to accomplish reasonably its parodic entitled "When Sunny Gets Blue." As in this case, purpose. Fisher, 794 F.2d at 439. the plaintiffs previously had denied defendant Dees' request to record a parody of the original. 4. Effect on the Market. Finally, as discussed in Nonetheless, Dees released his parody song "When the first statutory factor under 107, the Court must Sonny Sniffs Glue," copying the musical theme of the examine the effect of the use upon tee potential original while changing the lyrics. Id. at 434. The market for or value of the copyrighted work. The

68 Supreme Court has referred to the fourth factor as heart of plaintiff's song, since the copying was a "the single most important element of fair use." parody it could not fulfill demand for the original Harper & Row, 471 U.S. at 566. Accord Triangle version). Cf. New Line Cinema Corp. v. Bertlesman Publications, Inc. v. Knight-Ridder Newspapers, Music Group, 693 F. Supp. 1517, 1528 (S.D.N.Y. Inc., 626 F.2d 1171, 1175 (5th Cir. 1980). 1988)(parody defense rejected where defendant's rap video would be likely to harm the value of carefully The Supreme Court reasoned that this element planned derivative use of plaintiffs movie in the rap should be weighed most heavily since "a use that has video market). no demonstrable effect upon the potential market for, or the value of, the copyrighted work need not be With respect to the parody "Pretty Woman," this prohibited in order to protect the author's incentive to fourth factor favors the defendants. As in Fisher, it create." Sony Corp., 464 U.S. at 450. As a result, is extremely unlikely that 2 Live Crew's song could fair use, "when properly applied, is limited to adversely affect the market for the original. The copying by others which does not materially impair intended audience for the two songs is entirely the marketability of the work which is copied." different. The odds of a record collector seeking the Harper & Row, 471 U.S. at 566-67 (quoting 1 original composition who would also purchase the 2 Nimmer, Nimmer on Copyright, 1.10[D] at 1-87). Live Crew version are remote. Defendant's Affidavit The Court emphasized that to deny a finding of fair of William Krasilovsky. "The group's popularity is use, one need show only that if the defendant's use intense among the disaffected, definitely not the "'should become widespread, it would adversely audience for the Orbison song. I cannot see how it affect the potential market for the copyrighted can affect the sales or popularity of the Orbison song, work.'" Harper & Row, 471 U.S. at 568 (quoting except to stimulate interest in the original." Sony Corp., 464 U.S. at 451). Defendant's Affidavit of Oscar Brand. Second, while Acuff-Rose is not required to prove damages, Marcus Neither Harper & Row nor Sony involved a v. Rowley, 695 F.2d 1171, 1177 (9th Cir. 1983), it parody. But in Fisher, which involved a copyright has not produced convincing evidence that any harm infringement claim and a parody defense, and the to any existing or potential market has occurred. Cf. Ninth Circuit held that the parody "When Sonny Harper & Row, 471 U.S. at 567 (where trial court Sniffs Glue" had no cognizable economic impact on found an actual effect on the market). On a motion the original song, "When Sunny Gets Blue." It for summary judgment, the nonmoving party cannot concluded that commercial substitution was unlikely, rest on its pleadings, but must present some "specific remarking that: facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial." Celotex Corp., 477 U.S. at 324. Acuff-Rose must "When Sunny Get Blue" is a "lyrical song concerning adduce more then a scintilla of evidence to overcome or relating to a woman's feelings about lost love and the motion. Street v. J.C. Bradford & Co., 886 F.2d her chance for ... happiness again." By contrast, the 1472, 1479 (6th Cir. 1989). parody is a 29-second recording concerning a woman who sniffs glue, which "ends with noise and laughter Plaintiffs attempt to focus on their possible future mixed into the song." We do not believe that losses and mount two different arguments. First, they consumers desirous of hearing a romantic and contend that 2 Live Crew's parody prevents them nostalgic ballad such the composers' song would be from marketing future derivative works, such as a satisfied to purchase the parody instead. Nor are rap version or even their own "burlesque" of the those fond of parody likely to consider "When Sunny Orbison original. Second, they argue that "Oh, Pretty Gets Blue" a source of satisfaction. The two works Woman" "has been tarnished by being associated with do not fulfill the same demand. these lyrics and with 2 Live Crew" and that will result in the loss of future licensing arrangements. Fisher, 794 F.2d at 438. See also Consumers Union of United States, Inc. v. General Signal Corp., 724 Since 2 Live Crew's version of "Oh, Pretty F.2d 1044, 1051 (2d Cir. 1983)("Where the copy Woman" is a parody, that release has not prevented does not compete in any way with the original . . . Acuff-Rose from recording whatever version of the concern is absent."), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 823, 83 original it desires. Likewise, plaintiffs argument that L. Ed. 2d 45, 105 S. Ct. 100 (1984); Elsmere Music it would be prevented from releasing a parody of v. National Broadcasting Company, Inc., 482 F. their work is meritless. In a world where copyright Supp. 741, 746-47 (S.D.N.Y.), aff'd, 623 F.2d 252 monopoly stretched to that great extent, parodies (2d Cir. 1980)(although defendants appropriated the would be unlikely ever to be approved by the original

69 author. See 3 Nimmer, Nimmer on Copyright, (b) Nothing in this title annuls or limits any rights or 13.05[C] at 13-90.12; Fisher, 794 F.2d at 437 remedies under the common law or statutes of any ("Parodists will seldom get permission from those State with respect to - whose works are parodied. . . . The parody defense to copyright infringement exists precisely to make (3) activities violating legal or equitable rights that possible a use that generally cannot be bought.") are not equivalent to any of the exclusive rights within the general scope of copyright as specified by Examining the latter argument, several courts have section 106. discounted attempts by copyright holders to claim infringement based on the impact of alleged criticism. A two-part test determines when 301(a) preempts "In assessing the economic effect of the parody, the a common law tort claim. "First, the work in which parody's critical impact must be excluded. Through the right is asserted must be fixed in tangible form its critical function, a 'parody may quite legitimately and come within the subject matter of copyright as aim at garroting the original, destroying it specified in [17 U.S.C. 102]. Second, the right must commercially as well as artistically'. . . . Biting be equivalent to any of the rights specified in [17 criticism suppresses demand; copyright infringement U.S.C. 1061." Baltimore Orioles v. Major League usurps it." Fisher, 794 F.2d at 437-38 (citations Baseball Players Assn., 805 F.2d 663, 674 (7th Cir. omitted). 1986), cert. denied, 480 U.S. 941, 94 L. Ed. 2d 782, 107 S. Ct. 1593 (1987). if. In this case, Acuff-Rose focuses on the second Having applied 107's four factors, the Court finds factor of the 301 analysis. It argues that the tort claim that they weigh in favor of the defendants. 2 Live is not "equivalent to" the rights set forth in 106. A Crew's "Pretty Woman" is a parody. Its purpose is right under state law is equivalent if it creates or to poke fun at the original version of "Oh, Pretty destroys any of the rights contained in Copyright Act. Woman." In so doing, the parody copies from the Id. at 676. Section 106 of the Copyright Act grants original. Notwithstanding the copying needed to plaintiffs the exclusive right to reproduce, distribute, conjure up the original song, for the foregoing perform and display the copyrighted work, "Oh, reasons the Court concludes that 2 Live Crew's use Pretty Woman." I of the original copyrighted song is protected fair use. With respect to Acuff-Rose's claim for interference IV. with business relationships, Tennessee common law provides that "One's business is entitled to protection Defendants also argue that plaintiff's state law 'from tortious interference by a third person who, in claims for interference with business relations and interfering therewith, is not acting in the exercise of interference with prospective business advantage for some right, such as the right to compete for the performance and distribution of a copy of "Oh, business.'" Lann v. Third National Bank, 198 Tenn. Pretty Woman" are preempted by 301 of the 70, 72, 277 S.W.2d 439, 440 (1955). To prevail on Copyright Act. 17 U.S.C. 301 describes the extent such a claim, the plaintiff must show malice, ill will, to which the Copyright Act preempts state law causes or wrongful motive. Id. Plaintiff alleges that it has of action based on copyright. It provides in pertinent lost benefits flowing from its copyright monopoly. part: Like the copyright infringement claim, violation of the state law claim rests on a finding of unauthorized (a) On and after January 1, 1978 all legal or equitable copying. "In both cases, it is the act of unauthorized rights that are equivalent to any of the exclusive publication which causes the violation. The enjoyment rights within the general scope of copyright as of benefits from derivative use is so intimately bound specified by section 106 in works of authorship that up with the right itself that it could not possibly be are fixed in a tangible medium of expression and deemed a separate element. . . ." Harper & Row, come within the subject matter of copyright as 723 F.2d at 201. In addition, the fact that the state specified by sections 102 and 103. . . are governed law cause of action requires proof of intent does not exclusively by this title. Thereafter no person is necessarily preclude a finding of preemption. entitled to any such right or equivalent right in any such work under the common law or statutes of any The Second Circuit concluded in Harper & Row State. that:

70 The fact that cross-appellants pleaded ENDNOTES additional elements of awareness and intentional interference, not part of a 1. No published Sixth Circuit opinion addresses this copyright infringement claim goes merely to type of copyright infringement question. Compare the scope of the right; it does not establish Pro Arts, Inc. v. Hustler Magazine, Inc., 787 F.2d qualitatively different conduct on the part of 592 (6th Cir. 1986)(percuriam)(unpublished text in the infringing party, nor a fundamental Westlaw). Accordingly, this Court relies on opinions nonequivalence between the state and federal from other circuits, notably the Second and Ninth rights implicated. Id. Since the claim is Circuits. equivalent to rights established by 106 the cause of action is preempted by 2. Dallas Cowboys Cheerleaders v. Pussycat federal law. [cites ommited]. Cinema, 467 F. Supp. 366, 376 (S.D.N.Y.), aff'd, 604 F.2d 200 (2d Cir. 1979), defines parody as "a The question about whether 301 preempts any work in which the language or style of another work Tennessee tort for interference with prospective is closely imitated or mimicked for comic effect or business advantage is trickier. The plaintiff has not ridicule." See Dorsen, Satiric Appropriation and the cited any Tennessee case in which recovery was Law of Libel, Trademark and Copyright: Remedies allowed for wrongful interference not involving a Without Wrong, 65 B.U.L. Rev. 923, 924 breach of contract, and it appears that Tennessee has (1985)(Parody "is a potent form of social not developed any significant body of law in this commentary which attempts to expose the foibles and area. follies of society in direct, biting, critical, and often harsh language -- tempered by humor."). Even assuming arguendo that interference with prospective business advantage constitutes a separate 3. Gerry Teiler's comment in his July 17, 1990 tort under Tennessee law, such a cause of action is letter to 2 Live Crew that the new version of "Oh, nevertheless preempted by federal law. As the Court Pretty Woman" is a parody does not necessarily found for the interference with business relationship equate with the specific legal definition of parody. claim, this second tort is equivalent to the rights Teifer says in his affidavit that he never heard the 2 specified in 17 U.S.C. 106 and thus is preempted by Live Crew version prior to denying their licensing federal law as well. request.

ORDER 4. It is unclear exactly what Acuff-Rose means when it complains in its response to the Motion for For the reasons stated in the accompanying Summary Judgment that the parody "dirt[ies]" the Memorandum, the Motion for Summary Judgment copyright. 2 Live Crew's version is neither obscene made by defendants 2 Live Crew and Luke nor pornographic. Even if the work included Skyywalker Records against plaintiff Acuff-Rose pornographic references, that does not necessarily Music, Inc. is granted pursuant to Rule 56 of the preclude a finding of fair use. Pillsbury Co. v. Milky Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 2 Live Crew's Way Productions, Inc., 8 Media L. Rep. 1016, 215 rendition of "Pretty Woman" is a parody of the U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 124, 131 (N.D. Ga. 1981). original "Oh, Pretty Woman" that constitutes fair use under 17 U.S.C. 107 of the Copyright Act, 17 5. Section 106 of the Copyright Act provides: U.S.C. 101-914 (1982). Subject to sections 107 through 118, the owner of The two Tennessee state law claims for copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to interference with business relations and interference do and to authorize any of the following: with prospective business advantage for the performance and distribution of a copy of "Oh, Pretty (1) to reproduce the copyright work in copies or Woman" are preempted by 17 U.S.C. 301. phonorecords;

IT IS SO ORDERED. (2) to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work;

(3) to distribute copies or phonorecords of the

71 copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending; (4) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, or choreographic works, pantomimes, and motion pictures and other audiovisual works, to perform the copyrighted work publicly; and

(5) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, or choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic or sculptural works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, to display the copyright work publicly.

72 cli c' Co 0 -4 ~

0o- '4)

Lsa U2 coJ 04 z P U2 z 02 Go oZ 0 0 > CD 4- : Z ,: o> a 0 !0 e,< 1 00 z 8Z gD I or U 0 : rz4 isc. ! So4 bo 0 02 E-(

gEo - - 0 me 0 4) rx4 z 0 z 0 C/I 0

1o > o co I

< a- o< 4 04 on

xa - . Ud

o2 .. Z.:c n--z c ozz ig< -D giw q

73 t- 00 t-

02 02 4) :4):,

02 :N/ :ho : -

U2 4..- a E-40 bo : : cof

I-

o,: 0 - :5 o

01 ZI

C) *14 c6 02 C4

V C) ,- a me co C4 40 m2 wt:- 00 1-4 T- - r- 1-4 V-4 1-I r -4 ,-4 06 V-4 16 02 02 00 :04 m - : :m . oo e - :0 o -w 00 -- C4() O V-

0O * 00 t :: - 101 000 02 ci 44 N 0 C) 0 h0 to0 0 to00 r0-~4 r- . 5 !!1 00 m 40.0 C4- C C) o e 0 C ~0 0 '-D - ho 0 .. r 1-0cc :01 M> ~ m:V-0 C13 -4: -C)l -ItCC. C 3 00 . z t.o 0 00 22 r'Tj oo M Oe 1-o o r-CJ4 la 0omC e':;ts eco a $ J) ! -& 00 r-4 > ~a04 co r' 4

rh T 10 Z 00 G6u2C P 00 02 02 0 E-

74 U * z

- .. *0 . Cd tit r (14 N

Q

a a 0 tN E-4 uu .rD 0 a:o> C, z 0\ e ~ - -o z C1*2S UM 4 0 z 0i oM =om < * 3i2 - 0 Ue, PP E- tit x 4 <.9 Z~ 0 12 I-

U-

75 '4 9 Cu^ CU4- -j ti4 . 0 ) =U 2 4 2 u C4) 0~

S0 L 0 cz A 20t '4. -0 4 0. 0: 4. 3 iCCU .0 -- ~03 0u . C.)4. ) 4.) w4 4)O '0 '. ' o 'D -0; C.) 0 0 0 04 * ca 0C. - C)0cd 0 E = 00.0 oa >0 o 0to 00 > 0 o- = -- w. 0 r - - .2 4. ) ~C~ ca 4)L C 02 0-4 0 4) a' 4)) ~0 C 0 c4 ) %CU p. ~ u 0. 0 I cz > - 0 - a)4. Cc ' S- *- 0 a0 C

- 0 c ' ca :3~ =-'. cu C4 12C U2 ' 5-d 4)~~ -H- E C.) 0 ca g 0 cs 0.. 04) 000 0

0*~0 .

02g

C)Z . E C ~ca.0

0 .0 , 00 ao tor. 4.) - CA r- 0 E 0L; 0 7 .0 0 n i- 0 a 0 0 0 ci~ CU, 0 a ) 0 - j

t.0 E- o w' 1:1:2 -0 CUs CS C4) 4) cn2 1:..) 0 ca .ul:-0 ,r E-= 6. 0

CM. d u 00 u C t. - C S-2 4) 0) rio 00 o o Ir 4,2 CU4 0: ri) 4.) 10 0 cm -f .0. >-0 0a r2 Ci' 4)"* "0. MO CO 0 0 )C)04 1-0 Cdcl 0 4) L .) V) Q.C 02> %U -0 0 *O40 , o.- -- -CUQ to,)0 0 0 ca =. : CU 4 u to0.C. a2 C = - C4- 0C C.) E--00 CA) 00 0 - 22 C = Q~ ~0'0

76 ~\0 0 C .2 4) SE CL 0 C 0 -o 0 Q cc r, - (1 0 ) 03 OCQ 0, 0 0 CZ r- . *CUt0 COU a-- r_,," oa-C' 0 0 .)= C3 00 *0 u~ 0. C) ) 4) "Coo C)

CZ a-. - 0 a-.a 0. cf. CU 0 C, 0 .4. 00 4) C,3 a.4) 0 CE0 .E C-- o .4- CU w~Z04 0 t.oO o 0. 0CU ~0 0 - 0 Q- oho 4) = cc oUI U-C *4- C3 >4 0 E -CZ' u 0. CU CU COO 0 a-- 4) .CU 0 0 00 Cd U W

z 1.-, * ZCU. Cl .= .- 0 C Q~c c',

< r) - N

a-. 4 4 4 -4)~ 1- . 0 -. C4 0- Q - ~ I d Q a,, 0 0 t 0.- 0 0 0 C~ Co COD 0U 0.CU t zo 0 =C4)4) z CU 0.~ ~C 00.s4) ) 04- ~ 04 =CU > 0~U ~~U-4 0 0 0.) C. 0:~~ 0 ~ 0-l CU'3 Zu~ 0-U CU~Uo ~ ~ CU E* OC .- CC0.0 CU0C 44 40 .ca < 0 0 z 4-w 4" cn .!2 = *0cz C ~CU 0 - CU- 0 -. 4.)> CN~ .0 0 4'4) cz a)U)4 0 50 Q C '=U 0V 4z ' 0 CO *0 e4) 4m. . 0 0n4 . E-1 a- .= CU r- ~ .C E-4 m V 4) . 2 ~cz cc ,p 0 cc EEc - EC (ZEzO CU 0o C-

4) .ao. 0.

77 %.0 0 C. 4.) * ~ )4 C 0 C~ ~ 0 E' 0

0 r~.~ i- 0 0 En> . oa to >0 a Ow 4 c =

u*.*C0 . e cU .000 G.'0c - .M 0 C6 0L Cu4- 0 0n Ct 0.- ob 00 inC > 40. cir C4) 4)Z0~ E Cu00

w 0 "1'5i . 4) >o' .0 co~ Ct. 4J0 - . C0 0~ 0C o 0 E ts -a 0- S 0 *.c E c0< C 0 c Ln ca * C U -0 &r Z - E u '0D ^cn ch ch E 0 Q = o cn c'40 0 c *: Qz u 04)C . 0-.Cr ~ ~ 0

0- 4) V) u t-- 0 ,GO' =l x0 r0 0 C u-o 0-0 0=,C-- -C- -'"0 48 Cu Quc-. )' c- "0 C 0 0 C~ 0 Lni Cu 4) %0 (L) o~-~- 2L2 ;Z-, ) 0 -U =, \0 (~u -a 0.D 0. X~ 2 a -Z. '46)

o 0 r cl .. C=.. z w u0 0CCu to -; - 0 0 0 20 >0 ca 0 0 ca CIS .. 0o U 0

U4 .0 oS~ ~ 50 0e 0~ 0 U) - Cu 0 0 0C t3 04 =0S - 00 Cu i 4 0 ~ ~~0 0 :a c U~0 0- * 00 C: 00 0 0-. M) 0 0 - 00 0 0n E C ~u4)4) r_-O o = ca~. .- 0 <0 0-- o - =0.0j .ca 0 0 CU 0 00 00 4L)0. >0 C 0 0 0 0 u .0 co ~ 4 ) ~0u~0

r) . 0 JCu w Cu4 ca (0 4) -0 - CI Cu '0 -- 0~o~ 3 >0 0-' U -

cc,. . O* 0 .~ -~ >~ Cu t '0 0-.0 Ia 00 c 0 0 .00 0 O. r_ Cu 4) o=I Q,00 -; 0 4) ~ ca'~ . 000 U0

oC 0

78 CO m o ce o> )4 E~ o 2 40-0 :3 - -i$. E 2'- U E 5 o0 o ~ 2 0 Cu oso *SCE... 0=0 CO 4)4) '-440. uCu. CIS d) - u ca 4 800 6 - cu 0 cd-4O0 0 cU5- C,: -. - Qu . ci o .s 0 >4 4 u s -* P-..o t. 0L 4C y E'.z 4 U =- o cca >:= 0>1Z: =u. O 04 L) . Z .: CuQ m) 0o~C )4 Cfl-d 0 4.) - 0 cz P, 6 C03 au ) * C-) .c C o.98 Z C)4)>,, ac .5 0 ' 05 E >0 ce z 0 o --,3 S04 0t -01 - ca

0 U ecz r coa a ~ucsO 0C 4))4 E >~ CZ~0 4)n u 40 o o.5 ) . e) -- C o C c - ~ O )Cu St 0 C4 0 o on r a U L >

&C - I-- c.o > )~

Cu.U~ as 22Cd>.~ E

:)4 .4)4)c c 04q) u tZ cc - OO C~4~ C,3 Cu3 N 40 5-.

ca 0 r-> - 0cu ca c CuuC

. - cz ca b . 0a CZ C ,. 0 C.0 Cu Cu, 0 ~ uE z4)% C- m 10 -) ca> 0 c .cu u ~C) - 4) Qo 0 m E.4 o .0 ca to2- E oc Cu 4)2 .4 0 0 o q - c oQ4E ~~o ~ ~ c = ~ - ''u~C~~o. -o- ~C0\'.- ~ E 0 0 cd j c

CO V, to 00 Cu -4 04 (uu oa) C' >

C ca.5 C Cu4) 4 ~Ou ;a ~ C 1 - ca E 72 - ' C to C u0 4 ' ~ ~ 0\ 14 . Cd - PC

>0a

- 0.-- 4)*. -

79 1 Ht a ~ cc -1 02 ~~- - 61- ;4 - 0t* " o = 0 ca0 T , L = C u . L ca EY 00 e. E

ca-I -- - C0 0 : CZ <. = CO 44 Q 0 c C u zz - a) &-0 414 mm 2 0 > ;:t, -n w 0- co .Cd C IS > .0 c - a- 4- 4--, IV 00 - Q ~ ~ u C-- - = 4 co

0z

- C. W~0 >E~ 0.A = EO0 e0. Ci . = ~ .2 j 0 00 w uc = 0 roi0 c. E ,r ~4 rq 1 > J 0 _00c

. t o r S. a C13 O0. 0.S *0 . -~C0 00 C 0. U 0.0 -,.7 C -- S c oa 0 Mez o Cz C C) 0 .4 0.'

4 GO So U 6' o d 0 C 0 0 a - 0 0 0 4 u O=

0~ 0 0 l a . C< .9 aCo o oQ.8-0 I a , 0u 0. oz o c 0 04 .U 0 4o Qoo Cd .Ct C 0 r. CC cz -< C00 0..C 1-V uH a 0U 0 -= . Q 428-Z ~ o >0.0 .1 5 9 e ---

0 4 Cus .0 2' cn- C, - -"ZQC _ so 00 0 0 m~ ~ Ua (u~ caE 0- >u. -Z o 2 C Cu C . = 0, c0= e- o 03 cn %= 00 '

O . A . 0U o E 0 0 U.u

80 C>

.- cf :, o L) -v I. I I I o

- r- d-00 S54)'ca >O a- . )C 414) 1 >J2

r.1 ,; - " 4.)'

&- ~- C d).Y C\ o U - *C,4to0 'A. E~ .- = .00 ~01.to (70 0 o- 2 to0

4 C, ta o o, co>~ 4) 0 > c.) 0 t to- Z-2 >~ Q C2~ ct 00 E o: 0 -

tb

> ~0

=1 r) v C. --* 0 " cc - -4 '-4 .4-a

4J00 0

E - t2 U co C 0~ *-. cr C40 'm 00 CO04CuIZ

.a~~ czZZ.* .0 000 0 - 0 )0 0. c cu M 04) -V 0.-

cc 4-- -4. 4) .0 . CU > -~ CO4 4)r-)

C4 0 2z te) - ) -

o~ 4.)' = . , au4)0) o - o i 0 ~ ~ * 10 X Z O t 4.) 4 I d l 7 CN

04)Co

81 OJ Q

wu .! s

> CU * J*0 .

dZ zoa F-

0 R o te. 8 immat..0 t - 4 C,,4 .0t o " 0 >, 0 z 4) >00 1 0 14 Cf.) s 0 * z 0 Z

0 z 0e d 0 Cu0

see on 4 oo ) E 8 zzo o 0 oa1 :,14 Z Cl. a9a z,48 M~ . 0 0o -d9 '-0) agoo-< 00 U) nI Et.d O*d " s-4 Wm V E m-c

82 C'4 'T %"0 'r~ 0

qu I. : c u x C 4.) .. U 4. cc 4. C,' C 4.) z * -. a 0 0 : 0 0. H .4 mo - 0 0< * L. 0 0 0 '00 * 0 <-c" (U U 0 * : 0 Lid 0 U u 0. o- 4.) cu 0 z 4 C :, C - oi. U o 4.) * Cu 0 od Ho I.- ,) 50 o 0 4: 20< U -C :- <- 0 LI. aD 0 4.- 0 0 4) U : 0 0 Cu z U U L. z z z02 U :D -~ c"i r~ 0 . < OZO 1 4 -i co H

4- Z0 CA C4 CA C1 It O CN 0% *a C) C) 0 \0 z. CD ~00 0. * C . 00 C.. C: .0 0- C-) 00 0% U- C14 C4 010

Q 0x C4 00 03 0% L. u. tU 0. 0\ :z Cl) : 00 Q . U L.I En r4 NU 00% :u 0 oa0

0z % 0>-C 0 ItC14 4 Z .2 ck 00

C12

cc 00 u

- tr 00 Cl Cl Cl4

00 S

0 z U*~... *O < . *: : o : mU

* *

%- 0. cis (4-

> uu

CLL U UE

> 0 <

84 N- 00 00 00 00 :4 E NN C-N 5- 0 cl -ci :

0%

O4t N

0- C-) '0 N 0 0O .0 C, *0 . N . .0 0 *~ 2. ) * .~ *0-' *, Cd . *N s. . 00 .0 .- .0 . .N ) . - . .N C14 .N (0 N N cl C. * CN . * o .

CM C,) ei d LU C/)

00 00 m~ C\

09 0 - 0 0 o6U N Ce" Ca, a : o: N

-: 00 C: U 0 C-4 S.- t3 . U U N0' . 0 C~). r4 C- 00 00. 0 o'0 0 d. :D 0 000 VC) Uo .. S.. lz

-.Z- o0 .' S.. S..0 0 c. 0% -=0 ~. U-. o 0% C-CA E00 . - u \0 N o-- 0.- 0 -S I 0 en C-hz 00 wel1" 0 -S.- W i o0 -S.- ~ 1-'e -on S- C-C." 04 M~ . 3- ~00 1 C7 n z a )e 0 ~. 00~ C,) 0 R

85 C4 C

I. 4.)

C; 0% 00 0. 0* . C.1

to

ct* to C..C 0 E-0 p.. *

0 0 F .Q QC Cu 0* Cu - 0 o 0: 0 o. t3

'T 00 - 0 - 0 C..4 0n C.. - C.. C14 CD N 00 Cu

C..' N C..

00 o . 0.9 0 C' 6 m. 0 0 0 * 0% Cu. E. u u E - C..4 c* C 4. c 0 0 00; U-J Cu o Co Ci

4. Cu 00 .) 00* 0 .0 0 en u4.) 0 00 C. 0 C -o o - co : Cu cA Zu u C 00 : 00 U U - ch Z% 0 C.' M C 2... ca 0 -Cu z0 CL I- 4u) 4.) U Cu <0 CuEC C

86 75 w CC

Om SCo U> 0..

ZO . 0Ll

eN0 - ~~000 ozoz 200 00 0 . 4.) -u U zo-o o oo 0 z O 0 0 P-' z 020

u 04 -6 .ZZn

87 ,a cC a0 0 0CU 0 0 Q-4- U).. (U .* 0 U Cu >O Ca CuC- CZu '4 l 0 Z ) C I- Cu00 Ua 4)-0 Cu0 C .0 0 0 E 'aA o 0 Cu .0 C6 4C >u 4. 0c 04 ca 2 mC C I).- AC* :c u Cu> SCA~ Cu ) 0 cc- 4) 0 > CA 00 0 z04. o -0' - uE C C Cu U> Cu .!z 0 Wu 0

.0 V Cu C 0 -0~C CA >Uca 0 0 En Cu MC0 0. - U 0 Cu ' 00 0 4.) I--a CA 4) 0 - r- 0 ca ).. 0 40 C.) 0 00 Cu Cu >4 Cu C U Q 0 4- .- 0 4 0 Cu 0 Cu >.E Cu u 0, u 0 0 . c . 0 Cu 00C 0 cc CU4 E 0 C .6 0 an Ow4 0 00'0 U Cu U . 0 cu 4.) 0.o00 '4. 0 0n Cu o 0u .0 o ~> 0 cU Cu o~~ = . .6.u > u)'4 0.0 ~ - U cU0 Cu U)Cu; 0 00 4) u) 4 Cu C7 CuC cn ;L),.0 c W 4. CuC Cu CuCD 4) 0 0 4) - ct 0 0 I- Cu 4) C< z)C >,.,~C cc 0 E ... 0 c '4. U) aU C0-CZ r U 4.) U. Q S> 0 Cu. 0 4) U Cu .0 I.. -a *=0 . 0. a 6 Cu 4) 0U cz 4) 0 E LI 0 0, 4u>

to.0 0' 0_ -: - 4)-0 Cu 0L'. 6~~o 00V.0< .~6 -. 2 .2 U .. 0 r Cur 020 0 Cu Z-'4 Cu: 00 o u Cu0 C' -. cu 0 0 Cu Cq ~ 04 Cu' u E Cu0- cu 0 C's2 Cu U0 w Cu U 0 >, 00cum u4) .0 > -Z . h~ ~.~ ~ C') m'. .ca 0 Z < . u C-) ca 4 0 00 r. - 0 C ou (A 4) u c 0 c 6 : < 0 0 U) 0 .0 .6 40 - C* lu CA 0~0 ca .- z 0C >u 00 - 0 Z0 00.. Cu r) CO Cu :3*~tj c

0 C 0 4) .0. ) to. -a L 0 Cu 4 0~ 4. o. c0- C 0 a.- co~ n 0 0 6 ~0 ~ 0 41 > E -C3 0 Cu C. 0 Ca w 0 " 0 c C 0~ ~ CuC A U) t- C CUc) gnU~ 0 U) LI LI00 >, u <~C C - Cu U C~ U) co Ud 0.. Cc0 6 a 0. au 6. 1)

'--

88 E V) t- . 0u Cu 4) c C 0 <0 c c E> C ~ 4) Cu u Cu ,. 0 = C. -C u o * 4) C,3 0. 0 I- 0 4)0 ~c u - C0 0 0 .0 0 C u u 'A to 0 to4 0C CO S C o -cc O 0 ) CO I- cc C 0 ECu C 4o 0 4 -0 0 *0 c 0 E Cu C0~ 0. < 0 ~ ~CA c~ cc Cu 0 0 C ca E 0 C-) CLO 4) c E 0 >~ 0 = C- C 0 u Cucu ud 5.- 4 ) 0 -%9 0. caS 0C - cu 0 qu - C4 C 04 CuZC - Cu0- S c 4) 0 0 Cu 0 Cu ca Cu E C >5 4- Cu 0 C r- .C 0 C 0 0 .0 0 CU:L Ck E 0 0 0 0C~ cz oE Un 4) 0L 0 4) to-~s -o tou 41 s- E u c 4)..o 4) - JC

- C 44-

C4- 4. 5-.- Cu ca - -r-cd -C 40 C 40 0 C 0 . Cd - bO0 0 )C > 0 .2 u5 E~. 0 -- u 0 o54 4-- '0 C0 cou 0 - C93 4>. 0 l '0 Cu3 4),- . 0 Cu 4> C 5a C c 0 04) C 0 0. C0 C = Cu - "a cc 0 u CA -( 0 -o z C*3 0 0 002C4 CuZ-cn 0. > Ca . . 4) - 05. 0 4u C 05 - ~ 0 0t 5-. 0 r E .00 u Cu U u -4) n- 0 0.o- CuC Ca44 on) ca C0 0 0 0 Cco CA~ c- C ' 4 C., CS 4 ) 0 )r 4u 4) 5.5 *;;u C~ 0 4) c 'n- q . 'o = 'S - 0 c '0 0 Cu 4 cc 0 ' a. W) ca Cu o~ C q L. 0 00 5-4 0 -z Cc - 0 Cu 0 > -. 04 ~CC5.-.m 2.Cal- ciW 0n (A 0 uu o- C C 0 4) CZ .4- ~~0. 0 E .- 4) 0r C 06Cu 0. <0 C to

89 4) .0 Z- -.. 4 coe I- en 0 0 4) 0 0.'. 0 ~ CO '4- .5' 0 a- .5' 0 0 01.. 0 0 Co CU &. 0 Q. C 0 4) 0- -r4 .0 *~0 4) N 4) 4) 4) 0 a- .0 a- 0 00e .0 .0 0-C .0 CO Co 00 - ne 0 a- 1.. 0 Co~cl 0 0l CU 0 0. 0. >~ E E~7u 0 o 0. C 0 0- a-C 0 0 a- 0 C) C.) \0 0 0 cc -u- E ) . 0& M 0 00 4) 4) 0 CU .0 .0 4) 0 U 0 0 EL 0-0 R 0 0 0 0 0 0 0en M - -0 4) en a- -a I- C- 0 t: >, a- en 0.' 0 -o .0-. 0 4) ~0 CoCo 000 0 en )~0 0 0 1~ a-4 0 >0 U 0 en - -0 00 -C.) 00 0002 -'4- cc L00 04) !o'.o~~ CU .~ ~ ~.0 0 C C.)~ 4) - ~f) 0 4)' 0 2 - *~ 08 o < U e 0 0

.0 .0~3 ~> 0 . ~<

04 0 m -. -0 4 O) o n ) .0- en a- 6 .0e .C 0 -0 0 0 E o0 0 .0 00

04 o COC C

c Ja, x 0.. 00 a 7:1 0 cn 4. tj 0 0 0 0 0 Q 0 00 U0 0 0 00 >co e.0 eno .0 - ~O 0 >C a, - a 0 4)o ~..0 a 0 c .- 5 00013 4) 02E 04) cc c 0 c0 mo ce 0o tv 0 0. O-L -o)- 0 CA E UU com~ enca-CO ~Ca Cl, U 0 0 .~E o e>. 00 oa -o 0. CcCU cc2 Cn. cc - > t- < 0 0 gom0 = 0C* o. ca00. 0 en -> - CU0 Co 0 CO :. - z C; 0'- >C Con.. - n e .0 4) en 0 0.UC. z 0 00 CU '4- -a en U0. 0.0 0 0 0 a- 0 E'u ( 0

90 cl r-

E o 0 C' CU -b 0. ~ o 0 00 0 o C. ~~~E~ ~ 4 0 -C ~ % U ~ . c

> ". .0 c O~ ca I;e 0. ', C 0 -0 o - a 0 0 0 * *~4 - au.. ~0C.) C cn ~ U Cu -~ C oj .0 -0 . C u clE-. CC *~Cu 0 CU I- . 0 C U C .0 Cu CIOU S COD UU Cu _ 4 2 '...~ 0 Cu C Cc. Cu CU 0. a.-- U . -C 0 U C) CU Cu OCU 0 U .0 z.)- U 0 0 c >'~ CU 0 *0.0 C) U CU 0. C 0 Cu '.0 ~CU > E 0. bo o >0 r .- x . I" U .- 0W C- UE ..- L. 0% .u0 A 0.C.. 00 UU % E > C.- , E4 oN.0 0 .2- .2 E cm 0 0 0 "J u0. C.) .0 0 o 4U lz 0. C) .C0 *.Lca C U 'C UC 0 0 0~ O U 00 00CO Cu ~) '4.-,. 0 0 -Cu c U2 0 a 00 'C) I- I) ~Cj .2 C Clu o aC CuCu 0 0 C 0 CU 0 C/i 0. CuL. o... C Cu 0 X Eu L... u& n 0 00 -Cu-Cu -E C0 UC U 0 C, 0 C U C C -Cu H

6- - 0 %.0 r- 0.0a- Cu >, CU Cu. CU r r- Cu I Cl

0. 0 .0 m O = c)0 -2 .2a I- O0CuUCL Cu ca -. Cu U0 - CUCE o CU 0 Cu.~.0 ,U ca Cu)- ba 0 ., C4~C CU C; ; = >,. 0 4 -l c 0 0 ~ 0 E v0 0 IQ I- s 0 0 - U 0 CU -u 00 .0Cu" (UC 0 E 0 .0 U 0 C E.U cn a' In JU 0.Q 00Z 0004.0 CUC0~ 0 2 0. C .0I 04 - 0 U~ * 0 w-" Cu Cu Q 0 CU 0 44,0 0 - &.U U'- U 0 cc c4a 14 00,2- 0 0 0 00 C4. CU 0 00 E E 0 C\ 0 U C. 0 2 C 1 1. a,- 0 ca W 0 C4 0 o~ r- ~0I ,m 0 - to t 0- vC am u r- 0 C 0 . CM . 00 CUc 0 ~ 0 ) C~ 0 0 200 cu cn 43 04f

u 0 U -. 04- -"U* 0 0 00 00 CD Uj C . =

'oU tou 0 rCu- - H u 00 E~ = . 0 u - to u 0 C 4 0 00 c

91 C 4)*0 o0 *) .0 . >% " - > r- 4) cu 41 U) ..- u C.,0~' U .0 0.o..- -. Sn

C,., CUo0 oU Co. ch lu Cu Cc 4 (U Cu Cu 4) 0. 0 C.)U W) U) En w-4

- U) CA~ (u Cu 0 Un toCu 0 0 L.4) -- o L.& Gj -Uu00.oi.00= C Cu E- u o .0 . :2o2 L.

Cu L(Cu Cu020s 0 o In C0 Cse- 0 (U ON> -- U o n Cu 0 - C. too 0 m 0 Z U.U cc0 >% o Z r-0k ( Cu co LCU) Cu U c au U) > .0 .> 0 .0 I. E00 0 Cc. w 0u~0 E4-0 EMt 0 "0 (o, 0 - 0 C.; 4 ) I- of~ L.0 sU)Cu 4) 0 oE -0 . o 0 4. 5~) a = ca C .4 Ca00 a > -0 Cu En~ 0 ~ CuZ 0~ o - o :. oCu . 0 U t- Cu A ;~U - a > 4 0 . U 0 Cu ca Cu o E w o 0 0 u - o~ 0... 0 Cu cz '- 0 -Cu 0U E I.. =.L E c uF ) 4i ) o= 4) C...

a> cs U 4 . U. u - ) - 4)40 )C .0 $- 0 C 0 (U o 0 n - C7%~"So 4 )a to0 C ~

.. 0 zo - r. bo .. 4 0 C 0 L~ .00- > -C . u u U - I o co U i L. Cu U o~U.'0.~ cr U C C .0 u~ u to CA2..0 u ca-u "a o - - .. C CA U 4) CC ta 14- u4 o 0 MC0 > ooE ul Cu ACu (U U ou o0 oz .0t ct .U.4 0, (U, r- Cu : Uca 4 0 S.. U- CZ W "o 3 E uV~

U -r S20 . 0 "a' \0 = 44 - 0 u >2 0 04 o~ 45U -W Cc r 0 003 00 N~L . .-- - 4) -4 R 0 ca Cu Lu C: >c- , ruC - .4C 0, 00 )U~ca (A.C Cuq S. OU (U.0 ba 4 O '-.0~ - ~O.Cu Z 0 4 > %6. W) lCu Co 0 > m0- 0 o 0 0 .0 oo 00.2 Cu c~ r~' - C UU3 . C4 c., S0 04)0r -0 Ia 0 0CA 0 -00 0. L. .n0Ut4. Cu en0. Cu ).. l £ - - C0 M .1 M C0

92 -0 6 , -t: -0 o) C3) Cu v~ r-0 - - t- M - 0 -A 0 u 00 C . 0 0 0. Z)o Co= ~ 0 79 -0 U .0 S2 >,, - o :3~ ~ Q. IuC# 40 0 o a.- o EU - U 0 (U 0 Cu 1 u00 O E- ,) 1. " C- E 0 u . . 4 cu. c > 0o. C- 4w . 4) 0r 20u E 4)4&- Cu o m =uC 0 . :0 M~ I 0 0=ca=-C * 0 . Q G ci-u~0~. -V. 0 cn OJ 0 .000 &ZC 0 > 0 CU o ~ ~ ~2- ~ . oo C - E~ 0 00 0 ca, E ci 06~ 4) ~t...4) *o = co- .% Ci- V~ uu ca~' > 0 .2 oo Q \ r C - 0 .-. '0 Co. >U 0 00. V V Cu u -_ * 4) "a C, C - < E Z- u- 0 IZ r .4C4 0 o 0 u C a _0uo'4 0 - 0 40 CA) * a*0 LZ. AC -0 Cd C6. u 0 U 0 o 1 0" 2 = .~0~ u 4) 4 C 4)Cu CL, *0 0 as Cu Cu E L- 41 $- 04 cu0 m . ' a,; 00 - CuL.Eu 2- .tvCU .0 o= Cu r 2u ' E bO * oc g *~.0 0 E. S0o -- ~ 00

0 >0%to ).% 04-. 3 U

0 0 - ~'~ C C r j: <. - '0 0 .2 M -- " cn .00 E. Cu t 3 on CU >%. 0uu .0 &, r . .0 ~C o o 2uI c 2-- C! 110 C a v C * 0 t Q " .,= 0. -fu 0 c 0~~ UQ) & 2 0 o, 0O* ) m,C 0u t. 0 4. 4 to Co C r 0.~ > o u 0 U 4 C4 2 - S 0 U 04 >4, U) Cu 0 C0- ~4)4u u0 2 0. P bo 00 00 oi. CUc .0 Cu.. z -- -. -c > C40 0.4) cl LL C,0 ~- C, 0 . .O 00 0. 0 0 . - 0n - CUC ca:j~ 0.N Q ) U) ~~~ 0 0OC C C 4 C " u uGO 0

40 Q. 0.C a. - >,. 2ca <)

93 0 - CW "0 - .0 0r, L . ->0 (2) 0 Cf 0) Cc 4) 0 !2 u .0 C4 r- w . 0 0 >,,- C \ - .0 . o o C7, a - .0 V 0 ot-- _ 4) n 0 2 . -wu Q C14 . ~.C: 0~ :t-- t C4) -o CM C) C- 4) Cu C. .~0 r- C o C W)~C C) 4) t3~ .0 0 - ~0 Cu to . 4 4*.m0'a Cu 0 cq C. L)4 Cu V. Cu0 2 cn-4)o . L 4 00 a u0. to C' 0. 0 4) = 4) (4- oo 4 00 0-~ CO 0 .0 (% 4. ,0 a. - 0 Cu 0 ~ 4) ('4 0 - C 0~4 Cu C 0. o4 4)- >, 0 O (I~ U 0 0 ca c I- Cul.. 0.uo Cu Eu~0~. - 4J ~Cu C/. .0 0 4.) co 4- U 0 C 4 * 0 au 0 : 0 a,- 4 IL Cu 4) L CO - 4) -. 0 u a) C. Cu C-2.ou0 '0 0 'aCu u r:- Cu~0 t;) 1.0 CS C- IV CuC q.j 4n~- . 0 a0 = 4) . OCW n (u CO -. to cc 0 ±- 4 ~ %0 - a C,3 =u - 0 0 0 Cu 0 - - ac4 -c4) Cu 0 0 Cu.:0 u Cu ~I4- .0 1. 0. .~Co 0 Cu~ z 'a Cu 4) co cu cucc~ ~ -. ~c' 0 "a4~ . L. 0 Lo. U22~0 . 0 C w0. Cu .0 0 Cu F-aU ~0 4)

c Co c 0 a0 0 Cu 0 V) > 00~ 2 Cu 0 U .0~ 0 0. z0 0 n ~0 to C*3 C) EoE Z 0. 0 ci4. 0 4 *- C6 c 0. 0. 0 . 4 * 0 0 Cu Cu - L.0u 0 a o 0 - C )0 0 4) Cu - uu Cu 0 - .00 0 E m~ 0 Cu 4)co 0 > C T 4) co Co 4 SCo - 0 .0 0 0I4) 0 .0C 0u 4-u C0 0 0 In. .0 A 0 04 riCO Co. Co Cu CU0 .0 0 .0 0 -04 0 0 0 .- C -0 4) 4 4) 0- 0 Cc Co a- C0 0n U2 0 4) 0Co > '4- 0.) E0. 0 C0. C0 ICI 4- .0 0 Cu-1 0 Cu 0 04 0 u0 0 -00 I-. 0 0 0, 0 0 0 q t ca (4- Cu .0 0 w- =-! 4) 4)0u w -C Cu 0 r) -u C-% 0 =0 5 4) Cu50 r .0 o c 0 0 W ci.U 004 C.) 0

.4 Cu0 Cu C-4 m -W 4) Cu 4) 0.- 0 10 Cu -43 Cu C0R U 0 0 0 0. E- 0 a0Q .000.-a)E 0. 004z Eu E) < 0 0 w w C

94 O ) Zr 0' C 4 "'o~ ! ) _Cu Cu i - 2 2 . Cu !2 - = "' *= co~ W)~CC~ a C)~ S2u 0s U, 0 .c E 0 >% * 4 uc E c . 00 0, I- 4) U, CU Z u E- :: ' 0 .~ 0 C U, c 2c Cu co 0 = 0 -0 4) U, 4) C o E 0 0>' M I- ol v) -c CL 0-C 4) C- cc 0 "a 0 c) Cuo 0 I- U, 0 C 0. 0 %. 0 - ~Cu 00 ca U, B: 00 C 4) - 0 ca. *0 4) o.- co o I- 0 0 Ce 4> 0 4) to0. 0 0.u 0 E 0 4 000 4) CL 4) 0 u .0 ~40 e-~ L.C4 o U, C 4) co4 Gn . .0 0 0 0 C uCu I- Cu CA 0. 4) a qu oC Cu3 E -C 00 - 4) 4) 0- oue~ 4) 0 .0 ; 0U toC)Cu0U Cu - o 4) ca EZ C 0 o 0 > )c 0 -C .cc S0 2u 0c 0 - 0 c 2

0 r_ toCu~ ca * 0O t

0 4)4) - U, - o o oP ~ U, -C aB 4) '-Cu C10 C 4)u .CU 4)

- U 0~CuC 0 CO 0 ca U, oo .~0 0. 1- co Cu 0 0 3U 4 ) .cd U, Cu 0 14) C Cu 0. CU 4) 0Cu C Ec >9 4) ca :3 cz Cu 00 0- .C Cu u Cu'- 0 -) r >-0 0. 4) *0 0 a0 U, u , r-> - c C ca 0 * 0 5 - *~ 0 t3. CUC 0 t0 t&... Cu 0 0Z Cu~ cc 00 00 C E.ON o c to 0.- ' .as 0 0 4 IO 0 4) 4) .2-o 0 - c 80. r U 00 00 U, cm 00C U 4) 4- ) 4) CC 0 0 " 0 .)0 .0 ;= 00. 0 .0 CC .-4 ca 3 0 )0.0 42 o - - 0 >9 c u 0 * 0 a 0 Cu .CU ~ C U, ~ 14)0- . 0.s Cu v. .0 ... 4 ) Cu

4) a..- 4)

95 -- ~ C,3 . 4" i- l. C4. wn 0 w C4 00 0u. U 0 . 0 ~ >'. E: 2 -3Cu 0 I- 4. 0Ca100C E I" -C uU 02 0 0 Cu~ 1.. E o C, :0. 44~ .ca 0.Cu In I- Cu *CZ 0 M 4- 0 4) Cu 0 0 In 'C Cu Cu 4 InCu4 en Cu Cu ~I0 cc u~ - C' *0 0IOc~ CuI = -~ 0. 030 0- Cu Cu Ca. " 0 Cu Cu 2.L- In "Zu In > .c - 0 . 1 4) I- In0 Cu -0 In 0l 4. I- > 4.) Cu C*u 0 SE 0 1< cz 0. Cu lC C- L: ca t:00 0. 4) CC OL -C 0= 0t. Cu E 00 *0' C, 0-C 0 0.4 00-~.C 4) C, Cu 4" In >,Uo Cu..w0 ca4 U E 0 4) Cu II- uIu 0 r..C >L Cu Cu0~C~CL V3 . > E6 In Cu 0 In 0 0- 0 Cu 0 0 In u 0 m to U 0 .0 4) 0L 4) Cu 1- 0 C* 4) cc In0000 Cu 4) -u .Cu Cu D. V3 0 0. Cu Cu 0.C 0 L) .- C 1- Cu . .0 4) 4) Cu 0.,,. M I In 4.) 0 - In 1 0-0. 0 Cu -Cu Cu 4) 00i (4- E0 .22 i 3;~ 4) 0 C4u Cu -1 o~ C C3 I 0~ L.0 0 U c0 4) 4.) n In = 0 Cu (Vr C In U Cu cl 0 u 0 1- Cu m C- %-CU In '*- - co CIS 0 Cu 0 0 CO)0 00 04 cn cn c CA" U 1- q) 0 .0 . u o -%4 l Lu~ . I - Cu

- 00 u4- '4- 0 u u *2Cu 0 0 - C u c -- aC ~ 4) 0s 0 Su "0 -,a. 0 Cu a, c7%~4 m 0'4 C InC 0 0. 2 0Cu > ,n o. - C12 In - - 0 ;"' E >~~0" 1 4) -.. 00 In r_~ 0 r - 0 U Cu0 0 Cu 4 C U..1 u u E ~ '- 0.0 -I Cu o o~ C,4) 100 Cu n - > 1- Cu0 Uo . CIS 0 r . 0. u 4) ) u W2 000I 2 cu 0 0 4) 0 r_ u .0 .0 0. C ',n 4) o4-

0 0 0uI Ca 0C .0 0 0 aU In 0 04. In0 0 1. 0.00 0 'Cu I 0 '4) 4Cu - 2 1- 1 - C~ 1 - '4) 0.~ " 0I - CID .0 C0 0 0 .4) I - C . c ,0 N CU0 CL 0 Cu 0 Cu ca rA W)0~ 0Cu2- ~ nC 0 - 0 W 0 A). s- c 0.M Cu 0 a :0 U." q.U 0.- 0.- .0 0 m0

.4) Cu Cu CIS0 0 .)

C 4- CC C

96 ''-0 0 - 0 : - I- 4. C4 Cu cu I*-. 0 44 I- -. 0 > C .0 tu 0 m5 0 > 6. .- 0 ca 0 4. o ~ ca >,; 0 4. 0CuCu w 0C 0 0- 0 4C ua> .uM .c13 . 0 s.- > ca . 'A ~ 0. o Coc

I)- C4 c 0 cc 44 ~C/ C). 4. cc .- 0 Cu 0)4 cl Ec~. M~ . 0 ou r- - M . C u .0 - u - rA 0. z m~u cc 0 4)a 0 0 C" -

0 E en -c 'E- --4 44 05 cn L. EE - . Uw C 0 4o E = , CuC 0.. cl 00V 44 Cu 0 = - r. Mo r -E C0 4)cn n : 0 cl4) -0 >,~~uc,4E E a 0 L. C C1 C 0.0 Cu 0 C0 * *o 0* 0. a0 44 0 C., 0 ti *- . C

~C00 440 ct q u 0 C -a 00 )04 lu0 o (,- 4- >) 044 . r C C 0U,-- -. - 0 a C 0.0 0 0 .-- Cus 0 t o~ .C*c (U U. CIu .) C, 0000 g -- C: Ca0C 4) = . - 0. * ~ ) C4. CL 00 >- C E 0 4) tu Cu (.S u o cau C1(4 00 LQ L . 44 .5 ca 0 -0

4 Cfl4 -a .u av- C2. C* =C - C- 0 ;C - ,- 06 -W .0 0* ba c - c - 4- . 0 .- z ca. SO'IT = 4 Cu ) CO ~ C~ ~ . r~4- o 4)~ CuE - .0 =X.Co 02 o) osb= 4Cci to .!t y Cu r uo 8 C ac C to C4 - 00 a. C .u 0 > 0' .0 r - Cu 0 ca 00S 0 u 0 > 0 C Cu 0 0> C- 0. C6 1 o " 4) 0.~ u ~ .. - 'o u .Cu C ca ~~ V 0 0 o- 44 0 = r C., 4) o 4). 0 a gj - o o uc:: r E c)' 4- 5. .0 44 C o -0 *0. 4) u.C a.. . a 0o )C 0 OC- 0. - Cu ot 0 -) ~0 - u > 4) .0 0 Cd, .0 13 C 0- 0 0 , Cu uu Cu C- :3 2 t-C 0 0 ag C c 0O 0 im. 0u>~00 U, U ~ 13 Cu 0 e a 0 U-~~-). ca C., .0 t~ ~ 4)41 ~ C 0s Co .0 0- 0 Cu 0 - 4'- Ou Cu C.) 00 0 4- U 0 ~0 0 0G ut C 8 ) Cu04 13 - u - a% ca - 0C . &,*-- .0 C C o .o cl E 00 0 r- - ca 0. E C4)c 9:6 0 4)4 Cu * Ln i 0 0 c) > 4) - ~0 ou .0 a o@ CIA 0. lz *;; N C H U-83) Cu 0. E' 0~ cc .~ 3 0 r-0 ca v~ 0 4Cu .5C~E Eu

97 -g 'I- >~, w

>0 L *.0 I u 0 cu S-. -C .0 Uu 0 I.-0U 3 E *0. CA o I-. ~ 0 C o) - a. .0 cz 0- U Cu cc 0 Cu >, u 4 4 0. E .0 C's 40 -0 u Cua) -. CA 0. -N CZ Cu : CuoCC-6 Ico LL. ) o. 0 0 0 00 U - Cu- Cu 0 t- U) 4 04 Cu r CZS U~ W~4 Cu0 o0 4)4) l 9 u 0 Cu 4 o o.0 - :3 0. 0 r .V 0 2- cu c - i.C; 4. 0 .bA 0~ 00 m 0 0o c U a r4 03 0 -u~. c -. 2 0 0c~ 4) .0 U W' Cn 4)C 0 U - 0 E C = 06 CL 0 CL C E U 0 Cu4) 00n j 0 CZ C C..0 0 Cu u E ) J Cu n C- u U cnU - w 0 -5 00 U C Cu 0 Ju c C.. ,0 w U) ca 1 C aC- E Cu'0 *0 00 .0 c 0 u0 Cu aa o ,0*~o ct C)u r Cu cu 0 U- 4) > cc 0 'Cu.4 C,-a 0 Cu ;t' 0 0 S- C.., 43 ca

0 (n0

Cu Cu =In go ~ Cu6.

0 0 ca .Cc% > co u ) CC 0 - U.0 0 0 .- 0 0 0 U . '-. cn n .~K ~~ >, t- cc ca Iw Uu . . .. c. .0 C Cuo -10 0 C 0 03 0U U = -. 0. In cu u 0 .0 o r Li *0 -0 oo Cu; 0 CS C 06 0.- 0 c C. tn. . - 0 A Cu6 C0 0 04) U - ca ci 0.. U) ca 0 , 0C ~ 4 .0 0 MX 0~ 0 4 ) 2 .~ 0 2 '4 0. ~~~ 0 )C o ca old 4) 0 = C *

Co a, ~ o) MO-~ U) U0 ca u 0> "~~~~t.a-. 0 0C W)

U) 00 0 ca Ui ca ca. = 0 -- 4) ) C'4 0 0 6 00. >0~ - C0 '0 (n- 0 'n 0 0 ca Cfl r. 0 c 0~ 0 C6 04 r- 0 4 C'su4)) 0 C cu. M - . - ca Catj C- ~ C ca- C.. u .' U i. ( U ~~.0 0 C. o . V. 0 cu 0) 0--

~ 0 '00 CI Ca ~ 4)0 S.0 .0 Ca 0 0 U 0 0.,3 Q u.~ U) E u * Cas 0 E-u- o0 ca

98 -0v 4) C-C Cu0ICi) E 4.m 0 .. -~ 0 cl 0 ~4 ~U - 00W ca C.0 Cun~ >, 0 0 t0 >'0 Z5 U. 0 Cu~4J0 cu CA u U . 0 -- Z cc E m u 4) Q 0 - u z .-u U- E U)0 0= (4. 0 0 aj .0 wLt zi c Go v, CM -. u 0 0 Cu -43 0. ca a. t U u Cw),. 0-.0 4) . 0 0 C c C 0E 0. 0. cc r-~ 0.~ Cu CU > 0. 0 u > c CU0 .C 0c Cc CA icc U c "U > - . u C L . '-0 co0 -- 00 - cn ~ 0--c (7s =. u0 .C U 0 Cu 0 -- U r- > 0: 0. C~ Cu u L. o u C t3C 0 r4) - 0 0*Q Cu 0 Q. C C0 00 Cc -, 0-0 E 0 U C'3 CU C

2 . 0 Cu cc - o 0 U) cc 4)- u E a~a4 Q 0 "a)0 Sca) 0 Cu L.C'0toC4) u 0 * C% = u&. a cc- .0 cis.

CU.0 4 -0 CA 0Z .: 0oS Cu u. ca

co4) U) 4) C0f >&-

0 2 . - 0)-C. .0. CUCuU C u. 0* 0 Cu UcUcU - 4u - Le) 0 Cu.4 0 0 w~ -0 4) B: 0 - - CUE 0 F. 51 ). 4)) CU "00.0C C C) 0-'0 u CIS CUs 4), -o o ca o co U) 0 EU.. WC~ - 0C 0.

-0 ca: o . b )- - u4 ~ ~ W0 o u C ). U' U... ~.C . V) 0 00 >'U u 0 )CU

4) r- U 00~ ~ a)C 4 C C ~t.*cm0* )..... Cuu.I 0.

0 V C I -0.2 0on C oO 0. 00I 0 x cn 0 x 4 o u - U 14 0 0 cl

Q-0.00 Cu 0>'4 0. . E. Ca.0 -4) 0 'n ~- Eu > o. ~ M~ 0 0 C CU CUU I-0 )Cu-00U ~ uE B ~0uC X U0 -~~~0 > 'u 0~ "~~~ 000~~.-Y

0 ) 0) )' cc.. 0: CU 0

Cu .... ~ CIS 0 % in Cu CUE. sd 2~ u c udU CU. cc 0 UU > C 22E

99 0 Q(10 4.) .0 00 C0~ cz. Cus U - U 'a C u > 0 C - Cu -. C&-~ E'- u U E~ Z; 0. a~ m b o c oa Uz Ca a >~ tCu Cu = ' Cu E 2 'o. Cu 0 U0 C 0 0 0 . - C u u Cu0 - ) - .- OU C * u .0 C.< cn CuCc W.. 0 > 2 R ~ C..2 E - 0. t-~0 E E '0 C' 0~~C u 0 0 -, 0 C ~.:0 0.0 0 U>u0 u C a 0 U Uu.0 ;-.0 CU 0>0 c- 4 Cu .-. -3 a U Cu Cu0nj .2 a0 .) C, t- c .0 Cc C- >, > c~u C u In L_ C'4 S. oi 0 - Cu t;u C Z r 0 u L.U~ I- >, C "t -u Cu Cu L. 0 C - 00 0 3 Cc cm C6 00 0- C u .- 0 E 0. > 00 x CIO 0 CuI 0 m C tu -4. m 3: 0 -0~ &-0 U U Q u 0 C, CC 4 M cuuu0 0 4 .0 0C .0

U CZ t -~ C -- 2 - 0 0 4 ~C - 0' OC o 0.~~C 0 .=: cac u u uu - - .- . Cu I E.u4 as 10 CAuEU M - Cu- 0, 0- 3: 0 Cu0 0 U . mt o U GnI 0 ~* 0 0 ouu-0C> ca C 04 Cu >,C a =~ -2 E.S C l 0 - c Cu C.) . E E 0c - -0 0 ~- 0 .0Cu .0- 3: 0~ U Cu 0 ~ Gn 0. C u 00 -C

0. C.0 = 00 Ua c, In C Z;C

0 o 0 Cuu U0 -u ca - Cua C. cc r-~ 6 'I CuC0 0 u0 EuC0. r*; E C. > -~0 E EC 000 0. r U.-. .0~~~ ~C W0-. 0 C, CuW 40 E o -0 4 0 0> .C0 0 0 Er~2 S .00 . Cd 0 0 0 tj -Cc U 0 a'-m o ca > 4. E .0 0 S U 0 0 C 4 - 0 C u Cdu - 0 ca - cz ~ d Cu0Z0 ca 0 U C - u 0 U nC p ~ - 0 .- .2.&-0 ci o E c u: 5 - cn So =00 0... 0 .2 ~ C) 0 . .' 0. ;IN E CD o0 U- 0 M 0 C u 0. 0 >1 CD uU uC o -Z ;; .0 Cu 0o ' U ) 0 cu Cu -0 00 cu t2 0 7. .00> Cu '0:.0 t3 C 2. 0 c t 12 . 'Cu = 0 Zu , Cus - 3 0 0 - '0 Q~C ' 003 Cu , u Cu U 0t U 0 00 CuU .. U 0 G C0 t~ = o U C- U toC Z~ C-4 r- %0 .0 c .0 r_ E r_.0W. N C 2 0o~3: C 0 E Uu Cu 5O 1- 0 cl CC3 o ca M-v,= .

100 0 r= W 0. 0 (-.4 .34 4...-C4 4) .0 : 0 0 1- U LL Z 0 4) .0 *a- 0. 0 I < ES .0 < 4-. > Z I.- 0 a 0is -8 ( . 4) c'~ r 0 4) 0 2 L .~ 0 V

0 0* 0 ON o o .0 C/C 00 I-. - 004, 0 r 0.0 - 0 Ei 0 -):0.>P m *a - o . o u 0 o 4)C r U .) cc 4) oo cn ca .0 H

101 -4 c'li m oa -4

0 0 '4 '4 ) A4 4

'4 02 '4 z 0 0 W Z c Z0 z 1.1 z 0 o U 4) P4 EH 02 Ece 12 ca 0 z 4) '0 H0 >) >-E-> E-4 .61 ,202 C4: >,C2 W: 4) H 02 >b 4 0 ~4) 14 Z.C 7 cc)~.4 0 EQ E4 z H~U2 ~CI2 4 i0t 0 4) (M 0-4 z E. 4 P4 4: E4 E- E4 4:

P4 *C02 V 0i: a cc ., - :

.4 Z 0 0 4

0% w PL4> *

0 "o , a 0 '4 4 (S. .0 4 04 t od0 F- ~o c F- pU 40 o CL) 44 0 Z oI CA4

I

103 kZm t- 00 0 I 1e CJ C -4 N. cqj C,4 clN N

-44t 0 10 o -4 to4 LOO :- 41 PC S:m .a * e3 et :

.i0 i C4. E- *0 :- 0a 0 4 C", rz 00 C.) co C 03 r-4 C3. CI)ee C,] 00 pq0 co) 00 O4 C,4: o 00

CIZ 02 oa cq 0 12 ZSS EE o g q) 00 eg r- Co a 00 t- 00 4 t3Q

(D 00 0 0 mO k0 0C 0 0 0 0 d 0 bo C'.' C') C4) CN. N N -4 T- hO W4 C kZ 4 r CV-4 NCCA 04

r. >, : x ca 002

02 0 ,

4 U 0 04 Ci) ~02 W2 0a 0 02 4). 0 :~E- 02 02 4) z cc cc U2 C') 0 02 4-4 z. 3)0 0 oo cc 4 0 4) 3- 2 z t4-4 E- .4-4 CD) Cs 0 0 0 02 '~0 Q E0 U0 i 4. l.4 L4 C< 0 0 C-) .2 $. e- Q) wz 114

104 a) 0 Loco ,-f l toS c'i -q C13 CII C'1 ' C6 -1

4Q 0.2 0 . '0 4 .64 02 *02 C C C)

-4: 0.2 C)o '0C)

0 Q 0

: D0P2 00 .- 0 bo0

A0 *0.~ 11,4*co I.. 0 IS~ 1) ~c 04 CU co) v0Io Q1 U 0 0. 0 Z) C4 C6 0.202 0 44-46 .4- C'- 0 00

ca~& C $-.4 0 C -4 0. 0 . : .4 j OS 04 C/E-

oi,

t- 00 t- 10 0.) C11 C3 ~ ,-4 l No o C~loi C11 C') -4 -4 -4 bo

Co C-4 :c] *. 00 C0) c.'1 m2 ~> S.;. C1- 02OC m2 I" '0 0 0 0*~2 E, dd X CO

to C 0 0 ca 0 0 to '0 0 CM) 0g0 U2 1:3~ %) :0 z q): ~~CokO2. .0 01 to 0 E,- C' Co E- C) E-4~ 00

00 02 CoD 05 E-4 mo 00 CO020Z ,. 4 022 2 02*i2.)~ -- 2 %)2 . - a 43 m 4 m Z. *02 ' . E Er

C'I t0 CO 02i E-2

0.20t 0 01~ 02~ ~ ~02 t .20'I cq 'a~.4: 0 o . r Q *4t Z> t

105 Cua 0.

o -Ca Cca G0 to m) Cu >. u C ccCa - .5 4 CZ cn a Cu.3 z .0L~cu 0 ~ C Z en U 4)> czu 0 Cu 4) < C.CtU L. M~ al6~U0.~4 Q 4)4.) z h-i cz(L) 0 L4n Q 0 0-

0 0- 0 c 0 E- - 1 -4 0 to 0 0. Cu0C ca C Cu .00 >, ~ C 1.. " -0 - C 0 0n a) C3 h-i C CU caE- ~0 cz C1 Cuz 0 I-w 4" -- c) asu4) L . z M Q.= ) 0 Cu "o - L). W CZu ~~0C 0 C-u U EU t 4 cz- 0a~ czccMC Cu 4) L ) Ca- - 30 CE 0.

106 c5

.. C * cz .0 4) . ). S 6 * . 1-~0 C)C 0.u 00 C C C

0 00 0 =1~)~C~C. 0 4 0 .-0 u 0 Cu 0 C) 0 ~~CA C,4 uu Wuc r- 1- 4 CA u d CZ 0Cu~C C cc o 41 C- =d. 0 "0 C ca 0 C)(L C)12) 0u.> 0 u C - .u .- a >%. Cu 0. w u 0~ 0 -1 .0 mu Hci Eio 0 O Q cz (z)c -C. 0u CC C oi C* 41 C) >'4 . Q 0 U' c ca ~ 0 C0 catoc cjj 0U r. -0. 0u C C u - . 0O Cd 6. C CLs~ r0 C 4 ) .C 0.0 cn 0t 0 oo 0- ( C!2.E CA cc u 'a 0 W ca~ c U C C's 0 0 . Cu C.) !:. CU - uCu>

E-i 4.) c

C 0 CA, so - Cu '--b ~ o 01 4 ) Cu - cu Cu .0>~u. Ia 0 - ca ~ ~ 1 ~~ 2c~ C) cncuCU C) CZ U.c > Cq~ A 1- 1- Cu 0~. C) E- U~ - C z ~0 5) ul C14 r..0C 1- . r- 0 C 0 uC C) CA C Cs U- Cu .- a U 5- CA Cu 0u Cu Cu ~ 0.) ca C) CA04)0 . u 0 Cu - .U I. caQ r 0 0- .~~~~~ - 0 ~ C uC a..C ca 1- ~0 e-Cu 0 C)- ~ o~3 ~.004 C '-Cu C) c 4)4) ~4 0 0 <.Z80c CU =Cu) ~0. 0> 0 )C 04 ~ ~~CC.3 r C:, Cu 0 w CO U, Ow CZO6.'C - 0 C) 414 CDW C C u 0 C. sCCa a ) ca C) Cu C) '~.0 bD~C 0 0t *0 04) Cuaul 0w-. C)~ ~ ~ , m0.1.).O -C) ~ 6H ~> 251. CuCu

107 (12 -o o~~ ~ ~C ~52* Cu VL. C) a: U t.0 c0 u- C u2 -C;u , ou Cu) ~CZ a.) ~cu Cu CV *0a (12 Cu stq Cu wU 1.. (12 - (z~C C)Z 04L Cu c C) < u 0 1 - 0 -z Ln cz -o > ~ to Z;- uC1 C 0 U Cuc1 I- 0 m Cu )=N Cu. ~0 00C. 0 C u .. ~ I- 0 u Cu C.Z Lo al 04 CC ;. 0 - c- c

Cu u 0 0~ (0 0k4 Z E~ 0.. O z C) u- "I - o > al

a.) - .0 Cu -to~ 0 ''- *o C ~ E ) Ca . a 00 -)2 C 4 a-)r. Cu~ 0 > Ca C. as) o.. 00 a) *O.0 0~~~u.0 C) (12 , - _Q -4 *2. -z .uC * . 0 Cual -o (/20) a 0 00 1. w0 ..CuH0 C14 tn Cu o C)~Cu - ~ ~ ~ c C)0) L-) 0 C. to) ~ t\ 0 cz

.Cu4 .~

.- h4a, 'a -0 r- 00 .= 0 (1) C t f. 0. z b 0 E) 00~Cu0

-- 0 Cu 04)0 bo 04~ 0uu.C ct cu0w 0>~ u11 0 ~ ~ .C .0 F.w 00 as C3 P6 CO 4)OC

<4 rC - L~ '. >1 d) ) *4 0) 0) C

.0 et . 0 .0 ' .0 c, -3 s-=

al CK Im o CU2 Cu cis. 00 ca..4a

- C 00 i 0 4 - 0E> ' -n as U.. 4-) h 04 00 Co - -c t0* 0 Co 00 * - . > C33 00.- (24 en~ 0 o 0 ,. z 'wCu 4u~ .2' 0 - m.a-) - 0 06 0 CA W) E -E o o 0 U as > E > u.6u 02 0

E-rJ r2 H

108 '. CU > >~4 C G, C -z ) c J CUC - CC u 0~C =C PC in So -a - - t- d Cd U U3 .2 c CA ~.0 C~~.C 734 5- ~ ~ C U CU - CCU r- qC ae: W2 * cm ia w- E-4 ac .aC E r_ C- ca U. ) cUcU3 a .C 0 CU 4 cts .u ta CU 0 cra C .4' CU.2. ci C.) 0) .4' C C4) 5- 4) CU U U CU-LC 's 7a ) 4) . 'CU W3; . .4' -0. -L 94 0c.CU . 0... o CU E-Q '2 - - 2U).CUO,.~.Cu I 4)CUL. A).~C

a, 7 o C 4) bc a- 0 >~U .4' ci 0 CUC. CU 00 L.ba ~J2 :z a;*C 3wuIU 0 -4 i Mr C (D - CU)c U z. _ CU a 2.i * CL.CC CUI c

to 41) '0l '0 > -0 UZ. - - 8U 0 CC C CJ a, " 0 *.- .0 0 CU 4 z-4 C3 0 C UC , ca CUo= 5 CIS Z''4 o t 2C U2 C '0 %64 0

EU 2>0 --c to o U-. O -

4) CU Cd) 5- 0 L 00 - ,CU wU 5 - 4'c 0.0

C 4

4'n Co ba '0 CU4 U )M U 0~ 0 o 4 0 U20 >.- CU CU ~0 ' 0 U 0. L- a c d) - W V " 0 CUa zC - t3- 4' U -' QO W ca 0C v0U cs (L Q, I 0 0 ci, bQ '.0 o ~ - ~ 'a 4) .0 D.C0'= 0 M C3 E~U~0 -,C

CU z ba E C CUC' -4' CUaa aOE =a 0 ca u) T2 40 cq-5 '-, 0 CU CUr ~ ~ ~ C 5- Co 0.%>, 0 i)0.C - 5 5- 0

109 UU I- 0

Cu a ) ) * -( ) C \c - s _, 0 ~ 4) ~~E E~ CuE 'r 4) 02 0 )C 00.LC

~S- u 4& 0 - C u IJ CCU .0 a) Ct G W 0 C,3 0 L ca >, .0 c 4. -- c 4) 4)4C u) c ) Uca co0 L .u 'D - 0 0.z u C.)L- $0 00Cu E ~ 0 C) cc- (U 0 0 i(U - U C 4)4) m0 o C .Z0) 4 ~ 0u'4~~ CL 4).~r-~ a, * to to Cu Cu -o: 0 u. 4 -z L- 0 r

.0r 4)- E04 - 0 to 0 - o ~ L- E C0 ~r/2 024) *..S~~~ uz C-)C E S. ~ 0 - C.u CZ- L *1~~~ 00 C') Oz EL4] ) 4)

Cl.) ~

0

2 PC w2 w) 4 w >, Q) >, S.. -. = . 4-4) w a. c 0 >-.<) c * rr= CI. ~Cu t - .0 0 0)S-0 E C Co-0 S.r- 04EuC o0 co .6 )0 o 4

, C OD4) cz04 (L(r E -n oc E- 0 d ['~-4)o o0 CI ) gs. cc SCu CN 0u t.. 6 . 04 03 ~ UU o 0 Cu >.r

L.0C - 00.) ' <~ 4)~u (Lu .0 . .0. re Cob ou2e4-- C'Cc 0 6.Cu

0 k z ' r' Cu. C.. - ,4 CZ 0 as0n 0 L ba 0 0 =~.0 t. ) 2a > = ba03 0 2~ 0 004o 0 6. C a 4 .0 1 0 C) 4) 0. O.cul- a, c

- ~ ~ j c C- 0 0 ) c 0 < ~U -0Cu (U~-- c 0 Q >O~u~~u Cu~ Ocz ez 0

Cu: z S..

<

110 be~a ~** S Z C : C LL; *' 0 . C.) C).) .cr . Q.C - 0 q:

C.)-0 =CN S.. -~~~~4 7;U C U C c~~0 L- CA 0 E, c Z 4) (u o EI cU- C; es~x Q.4

.c~ C 0 C; 0 Cl 4a E± CD w w E

> *C0 - . c ;-0 . CU-U

0- 0 .- 4) ca-

q >% c 6- CZ -c U .C C oo

tt= 0 4) c- 0 odo a: -" Z = , : -- * ~ - ~ Qn- r it L:C C C.) 4) c OJ- 02a (r *c t:= CCeU sU 0 ~ ~ 0 r. .~a, - .: - > as 5. -ma) E. u) US -~C,

CC CU S.. aU ca .

cU 04 ul- - 78ca

- CU, 6. 0- CU. 0. oC .r -CZ 41 C3 4) Z -- 0 -a0 0 as 0) 41 05- CC Ca ) cz zo 0U c~ca -4* 9050 0 U0 c-a

r- o)C 5 0 . 4 UC CL -o 0 -a- C1c.. *U C to 0 (. - ca 0. a:

OO O o CU =~~u o *0 0 Gk. 8dn I.-ougu .- 0 2 .4-

00 'i- 0~U 0 0. - 0. - .0. ' O.C.C CU I- 0 ~ =jC > i 00 c n, 0a S.. - cc,~

- 0--0 .. 00 00 CU , 4) ~U, > to CA U00U F- u0 UL U

Ill C)--IJ -7:). -=

-. cr.0 Cu ~ u u CU Cu .L. . O Cd *E u~5 c) E Cu - CZC 0 E- CZ~ 3-.-.- c CC C)= 0 C~u (v 0 CZ -= )C crC. U. o ', = >~0

cu u CC 0 C'.

0 0 Cu- CZ

w C)) t 'cc -r Cu- t.) L 0- - r c Q) ::) %. 3- C CJ C -abo' Cu C CU~ tr 0 C. E

'-- E cc 0 0 C u C) 0 > L- > - *- < u 0. Cuu0 C12 c~ 0 4-- < C3-) . (L) . Cu' 0u ~ u 0 C . 41a ;;c ~UMoo

I 1.- 4- - Z, . qu cz t au ' .±. Cc)C

- t C)4 E C) o - 0~~~~O . ~o0~CCNC 0 E~~..0 m- 0c C,, cc 0 . Cu 5 , CL 0 0 C*

> . . 0 C)S 0 Cu8 >. E 3EC ) .- o ) . cq- Q06.0 . C >Cu al Z: C .C, 0 - Id r, 00 0 .0- 0* 0 C, EU U C)0. 0- 5c)c)0 CA >CucC (U 4.)0 ca o c- S- ~ ~ 0. 4; Cu Cc Cc~ 4) Q) ' C CZ 2) c.) 0.-0 o) uC) C Ow S -) > .0 cc - u .0 2 .-. = <.) cC 2 ~ 50 ~.0Cu C Cu''3-n~c c 0 ~ W u r-- 3-z Cu 00 ~~3-E0 ,co :u~ 0 003C 0 E1; Q s E C4 d -- u G 3- . on 0C C) ON 3-CL C~ Cu u~03 3 - o--o C -.. .

112 L.. - 73 r--!= C V 000 - = Q 0)I * : - - 0 0 U Cu uu c

02 n 0 C4 * 0 Cd .0 -q 0-4 ( )Q - ca Co a.) cc 2 cz ~1.4= 060

IL) 42c) o q.) 0 a).t C1 as 0 W20. 0 *0 C0 rz0 Q. 0aC .5 o. IV~- -~ 0 C0C 0

em c - - cc -Z0 au CZ

d 0 0 C. a)C03*S ou SF *~C E - -W, C -- 4) 4m cc:

9L) a)14- C U a-. 0 a ca -'

-~ )0 Wu Ca. o0 .

u.~~ 4 0 0

, U 2 -o 0) >~ 0 ~ 2 ca r~. ~

Cu ~ C *. .62* Ct r-) -- r

U- - -a ajt ) )c ) >C~u -, u uC ~oO cc 0 0 u Q .0 0 ~ -- - 0 o )~-C)2 C3 C.)ccc 0 C C* En ca o cz 0 7= . C-r 0 CU U).- -, 0 .0 0 . 4- r- U

u -; c a.0> c a 00 r- Cu U. .0 U) 0 4) W u .0 0 CU cl ICua C . U;'l 00 0-0. CU a.a ' 2D 0 0 09 4) C w 4 00. 7;.0cC U- - a-t. E) t-, , a* 0--~ 0'" - C.0 0 u~ E; ca-in 0 = o >=

o . \C : ( cz 0 u . j.a)CEU) *~0 0 ca Cau

113 C .-

.2.

cz Cu cc~ CL 0 LZ0 u Cu On Or u.~ . C .C 0 - Cu CC E E ~ 6.C- C)U CZ u~ > . Cu R) to Q 4 0 0C u m~ CI- uC) u o ~. OO 00 u ej)4~I.. C.0 C 4 Z C. cc: Cu 0 2 . C') CZ4 -Wo r

0.0 0 0 0l 0 .0 4. - C Cu. . 00 C" .)0 .0~ -CuC .0 w p C.. U - 0- U, C- C-.c 0 .C. C.) >O~C Cu.. CuC) . Q-C C c- C.) Cu 14 cc> 0U -co cdz. . .4- C) C) Cuc) U-c 0 o tCu. U' Cc,, CuQ -> C) Cu COD I-

0 Cu '4- CZ oc C-0 uu C) Do u .4- 1- Cu 00Z-'f) -~ .0~ ~C)0Cu-~ 4)0. E0~~ E54~C4)fQ 0 e00 > , CL) C.) 4.) C,, 4.) -Cu 04 au' - = "C -a C

02 N . . & -' ~c en cc M 0 0 1-1w < E 0 0R 4. e.-E w " 4.) .- Cu So e a 0 U Eu,' o~2 0 easo 0 Q.

C.-'q -~-' C) UY Cu.W0 4 0 o o . Q .0~Cu0 .0 C 0 L Cc* '0 ou0o 2o" 4))u~ Cu - 2 Cd .ea o M) 0 Cu Cu '. 0 4- WC.0 - 4- .- > '- me o In. o CI ~C 0Cu a cc: S. Lv (D C .a 0 ca M-C- 0 4) C~ 2d 0 2 . 'b 0 E r0 ~~ Cu u: CI 0)) 0 .Cru~ u80 to 0 6. 0 '0 0 t & r.!2 0 C 04 C.) - 1 U'C cc1.> Cu. CIS

'-Cu~~u u00 00 0.== 0 fn- 0 C4u OO 0 cl- - U - ~ in "0 -C CZ~ CIO 0 b '-* CO0 0 0 C) M) Cu0--. U~~~~ ~C . cnE~. 0. to Cu C,,.0: - Cu)U *C( r In -0 -. C4

114 r - 0 : cu.: - ,& C6 - - = - 0~U o Culu 0c 0

z2 r) '44 ~ ~ C) tQ 10~ 000 a :- 2:%- 0 go 0. 0 ca~ 0)0 o. ~c: C N 0 2~~C 6.m 522 .C- in

. 0 C ~ES ~ 2 E-) -Z o cc E 2 44 ~ 02 >u~0 0 0 0.0.W 0 -5~ ~ - 00 0c c Cc >; <2o U 0 -2 r- -0 - - --. -6 0. 0 w2 E mo .C 0vi 0 00 cc 06 m 0 2 E =~ c i - C;_ - Cu Cu cn0. 0 =~ E- - w ~S 0.-0 = 0~E~ > 02

r_ C) v > 0 cc U2 0 2 U ca *~ .j ~ 0 0 00 be W = 0 Ca - 4.a 0 4 m) (1)- m cz o cts~ 0 0 #s E E 0 C. C 'm

ca) 0

- 00 U, 0 ce

0Cd E0 rA 0 c z

0 >b 0 0 0a 0 U, c 0 0 oc 0

0 c .0 Ca0 0 o 0 as 4 -- - 0 .5 o caa 00 0 Cu 0) 03 M -. U aI- a .L*C3 Q 000 00 SC3C 0 > - . a . . t o 4

0O) .o. C Cu 0 qcs U, .. !0 tn. ZJ I- al Cu e -. -o o 0 . 0 04(doCu .. -. 4 .) c On 00 0 > u Cu 0 U .4- 8 0s a -Cu. 0o 00 Ou0 tn.. U- 0 0 U 04.)a 00 c .0 2 U, - 4 .s 4Oe Cu 0. 004 b Ocn) U, C-)0 -Y. CA0 70 ~0 0 E - ca caL I- 0. E C. 0 cat \0 c - , - 4- o 0 ac 0.0 .0 O O

115 -cc- Ca~ ~ 0C)-0~

0 0 ~~>. 3) 0~0 00 . 0 0QE4) C) CC 00 .0. l > o~ 0-' 2 C - *= -- 0 Cc ~- u 0 C)= to 00 U E)0. L. C ~ ~ . a C. > C) E - 0 E~ 0 0 .0 6. - a- ~ 0.C Q-Q 00) ) Q o C)Cu=( (uu0 .0 E r) C)U4 03 q.0 00 C ~a- a

-L : 0>~. 40 'o c 0 C U > 0 U 0z 0 E 0 0 C-50C). .- U.- t-- u ... 0 000 cis W.- $- SO-2 c C.)." .0 ~.~ .2C.) C) (U - r .0~ G ~ L- 0o. o a > >%~ - ~ - .0U mC ~ - 0 cis 2 = *- .0 a -0 uc 000C 0. C)Q r-) 10 ix.~ v . 0 C cz u0 0Uo CO C. C 20o 0.S 0 0i -0 E 7 -z;~a

0 C) wj - (L) > 1 cs w -CL) - E- 0. . o 0 ,~ 10 Q6. C)C = .C 4'a '- 03 C) L. S.-I ac 0z - 0 . .0: n 2 0 0. 0c C)4. - d 0 00~C)0 0g

co t: U - 0 C0

54.4>> E~C* 41 C) C (p .4:a 0 W. 40 C) @20 0- 0 " 00 Cu0 0 0 Q to ) W CIA 0F04 1 U40. o~~ -- 0 C,- Em ->c: 0 0age 10 a ca 45a 4 94.- 0.0 .0 C)). 0 - o - C uu 40- .0 0 w 0- U cc0 Cu 0 0 wL 54. - - .00 0..0 0 me W -3-S >% c 0 .- be 73 00 o a w0 a- $U> > C woW 000 0 .0 .? en E.-O .0 to a. cc-

116 - 0 C> - - -a u C. > = -~ , .. Q 0 o~ ~ CwoE~ .

.0 ~C-0.4) z ')0.0 d 0. Z 0 tiz0 43 0.(1 CL -0 04 E c 1zW r ml .0 ;a 0= zz cc o" -. 0 4J 0X 4 a0 0 - 6 to.4'

>30~ - 0)

C 3r -0 C, 0.n . CU) CZ C; P. 1- 4:S IL) ~ cn 7 C.E. 43n cn c ch~ E c.- - ~ C Cr t -r N- S.. 00 r0 .- . -- .- 050 0 r .) -- 0~- ~2 C LZ go 0 c2040:j

>3.a 0~ -0 CL) -- ~ 0 s.. U, 0 -. L w o. 0.

Co.00 d -0. 0 t) .0 I... to go . 430 'Ui 06 1 " - U0 0..-q; J r =

(4) V3 -- %)I" >04.)4 d) . I .~ I I 4 - e- E3 cU =.. - 0 L" () as () '.4 =02 ). .0 ( .0- 0. -: - 0 > 4) 0 u34) :3 .0 20 0 Cc . #2Q 0 -S4.- mo00u 00 r CA) 0 ( >C*''' . 0.0 .~ ~ (1cz 0'a .2 .- = = .0.0 2 00 * cts 0 '0 0 C6 W .- " 0 - ca2 0 3 E ... C 4 0 0a .= W 'U 0 .0 r- r

'04o '0 0 '00A 0 4) c (12 4M1 0 >0.uZ im. 0'o~00 0 > as 0

04) 00 00=0 M. to 02 4.. 0 C3 ~ '.2 o) 0 00 'z0 0-. 0 6. t~.2.o w w2 0 C1 0. = M~ cs .0 U) C)- 0 0 3 Ow (1. -ow s0)004 o- -*0

0.s C* -0u o -o 10 I Q4S-* 3 o. 0...M.. -0 0E0 w 02 430 ) 0 .~ *~00. - C - ~ ~ c m -4j )C. 0 0 0 0-z ci c .). - * ~a- -~ ~ '0Z o 0( .4. S.-C.

117 Cu -t4 0 "o CO) l-a - *~C)0~' -~C.

Cu iu ca. Z C-. - - cz Cu o-IE C)E). 0- 0~5L 0C wu a zC .0. C, M) m~ 0*-'- -;: - LL. 0 > 0 E E CL; - c:) sac EoO0 Dcn .s-~. - -j 0u 'mu~ o - -=Ca 0-- c i* ru >~ >,c ,> (U ( . Cu a) QC tn - a o 4. ca.2C cc a c- - Cua CNu a a a . a r 2Z -- 0cu aE c .0 C4O0~ Cu.uC cja ZC), C u - Q >~ EZ Z C o 0- Cl > 0. r U) C~ 9 ( u. 'L0) C,4 0 E". &

.0u . ---. Cu -.= 'r = cz to. .~. cc C Cz >6.0 smo0 cdcz 0g a c - 0 0 C) 0u

ou ~PC - Cu Mu 0' C 0 r" 0 0O~ 0-=& 4.) 0~# 't .CCuuC Cu. cz cz u 0 0 Cua- Q I~ C ou~.c.u >CuC R. ~ u C Q..Cuo- E ti.2 (uV ) C co cn ) (J > 0u 0 m 0 cc a-.0 u. a Cu- *.UC u CurA = 0 - .0 0 0 C 0u coa.cl cz W) Q.) 0 uC ~0 0 - 4 - CO cc~ C.) c m 0 0. 4)% u ) C)E c0~ .o p) 0 IOpI C.a 0.0 w. 0 uU 0~. Cw ' a .- C-.0 E 0 cc 06. ~ a)0.O .0 > u Cu Q o E Cu0 Cn = a-..0 -a C*0 CZ .! 0~~ 'n c ~ u)Cu'-C 0 ~ Lo 0C 0 in c.

U - , .: =C-u.

Cu~~.. 0- N ~ ~ ~ u u in'a- a C a-.t4 0 .0C C . . a-C1- - 0 .) c Ua-. 0Cu- (D ~..O a C

* C"C.0 u.

118 0 2 0 - C'r 1:1 c C . 0 m~C C:6 0.C 4- 0 0000 0 0~u. 06 g C. =- -~ ", cc2 en. 0 o

r0. Ca (U to U 4 rn -) E r Cu C302

02

Cu Cc ce W C4 -m Iz E2c

ca U U 0C. CC - '-c; Q en~S- . Cu tn 0 - 0 02 C 2.

CJ. 0 - 0 0 ' Cu t. = . - ;: >~3~ 02E 0- 0

=.. cud (D I: C)m~ > 0 0 -:

6'.c .U m E1 Q:E .

a- oc 0 m

.11

0 CA U =u C6 a: C: UCA~ U - =~ 0

6. w U cq -s U - T;-. CIO 0 >- -~c 0 >~a - fu.- q.Q Cu Cu 4-: r- to U7 -UC r 00.C Cu ..

U e 4- cr0 00- .0 0 ca E c a =O ENt . % .. * ca - 0 ~> Cu

ts U'- *00. ~0. u CZ - 0 U KE , *c- 0 cac 0 ) (U~ CZ Cu .2 -Cu- 0.-o.- ' .c u 0 0 t)0 0a U ~c0-I 0Cu..5 - . Uz - Cu QuU C.) ~ U Cu U UCus I- .- C. Cu,....

EC~ \ u

U-U

119 C.Z E a20 . c:o Q)- u o g CZ0 W)0 >1- >

4) c- Z C; C0 0~ 0.0 -~

CZ C-. 0- *C- U 0 C E 00 0 C L 2 -o .; 0 -0 Q. 007 C -

u o Cr C CJ 7E.r- o a E C C 0 - 00 CC)U~C~cr& 0r a 0-

- , C- C 0 0 - 0 )'

~C0E -, 1... u>' U c CZ C- - ).-Z U C) 0 C C - c -- 0C I..

C) 0 C C) 6). C.. C

0 0C)C)'- 0 0010 C) 0. 00L. 0 U, ~" 0 . 9 Z. L. o 0 0 . 0 0 x .I.I.C 0 0= ~ -U %4- 7 = 0 CLOCo C

- CC 0 C. 040 0 0. 0 C Q 2 00 U ,- C COC ~C c .o C CZ z 0 >10C 0. 0 C ;=. -0 6.. C) -4 C) 0 C L. I 0 r_ >1 00 co V)~ C) u0 C) - E) 4) 0 C) C) 0 l ~0 C) .0 ~cc > 0U .2 Z. 4 ou r, u. CA CO- t C) . 0 C cc 00~' < ~4 C 0 CJ r 0 C z E)C3

C Cr 0 0 0~

Q6C - C

120 WIII

zU A. ..

t00

caas

'0 04

as

121 Cd~ C.) LL~ 8 u co 0. 0c

C-,

E 0 0 Cu 6.. Cu c F- 200cc cc~ 0 > C 06.. ZO\ z .u C) - U Z . Ct .3 o mca = - Cu to .0 .d u~Cu0 c.)>C

U, a: > o . = (u 6 0 0 -J >, 0 z 0 U .0 0 & - >g- ca > u .. z ue 0 uc Cu C E C - on C.)cz ) U u

0 Cd^6 * A. Sa -0 - .. Ca 4 .0 agaz .L)- >t U a 0 Cd, >~~~*- C E E C."U .s"E 5- 2

6 E u0 e.:oc.

122 cin6V " A.: Q~ 0 -a M 0 i CIO 0CZ 0 L - .. . CIO 0 o u o 0' 2 .0 0 0cr- cnU ca o. t CZ -0. C,3 ) *00 0 00 -- . cc C) ci OQ 0 6L) 0 U0 . > 0) U .CUca'- 03 V, -I- 0 '--- Cc-.~o6 Cl6)

t 6 0 6) 0 ~> =*00 0 6 CUo =0 0 ~ ~ >cz

0 4 -o6 00C- - - - 6)0 0 o U. 0 CI ~ u E Q. O o 0

= C-4 - Z, Cz ~ iC 00 o > 06)6)00 c r

0 r -o cz)~=0=6

- .-..-- - ~ -

- 0 ) C 0 :=o C's o Cu 00 cl *4.C C 0uCC~Cc~C G )*O ).0 ) 2 0 >,~ toI, CU~ 00.O- 0 a 0 U 4 CUC 6 >- 2d CU 0 Cu 0 CU*O 0 0 c L. - w o CD Gu -Cu 0.CUC U 0 Cc 't u C L ) I* 0.0 L 0 w - ~ ~ )->Q~C~ ~ Eu cu cd ~ Cu . 0 &0 L._ C c 0 6 ~ 'd ~. = -- -t- o.. _ "AS .O Eu o cz-C-- ) u 06. 1

d) M C03 C

C. (L 06 ) u~ 41 o Cu 0 to C

( to) L) d 4)CU 0Z 0 CU 6d (z d z r. Cu 4- - r u uU =~ CUC 0 't 00C)CUo ccs 6) '4- I- 0 6) 0~ 0 as.' 0. cc' 0 I- C. r60 CU 0 CU

CU CU .CU

123 CL : C.) E 14) 0 cts - (Z~ 0 - .0 4) - 0 5o c( o a= 0 7 .0 < .M S0 0 - 0 a C.) 0 0 0J Cc~4 a 0o C .J n 0 0 o OC~ c .0 0 oo 4 - (U(U aT 0 1 0:c ca *D 0 o 0 .- 0 0 -13 0 o m'- rito L- o o U 0.M a a c0 c')0 c n n : a 0 D o > 0 0s 8 0.0 C-n Q (U z C 0 Cl C" 0

N 0(z.4~W C U la 0 . = * >% o 0 C,

14- 0 .,

U, 0 0 . 0

.0 e-d Lad co -j4d. U. -~~~)4' Cd0. .u, )U

C- C14 ba) *0

C0 cl0 E C40)

0 -- a-0 t 04 u"1 4)p UU 4. 0 .0(a a( " .. o = a..)o - 0t 00 0~ 6.. )'

4 C/. 2 Cd w, c.. I-,0 -

124 C.) C-) 0 a.) Cu. 0 0 I.- C 0 0 u C> 0 Cu o C\ cz .0as 0 0 Cu Cu. 0. CZ) N u 0 N 0 0. cu L- L-Q u 0- - 0 z < 0 cl0 L: rz 0 .czv Mu C) cz 0 \.0 0 00 0 c- 00 U tz cu Cu Cu CZu6 .0- 0. 0 C 0 --- 'a w> .00' 0z. > C-, 0 IV ca .0 0r 0 r c- oc CZu Cu5 05 0 rz00. ca CZL. C4 0 0 < 0 .0 0 ,0 0 ci) C.) 0 C u 0 E o. )0~ -c (U ~-Z C 0: z

0 V Uco 0 0 (U Z-ECl 14. 00 000 0 04 - Cu 0 .0 0 cz 00 03 0 a 0 Cu,

0 ca Cc 0 N 0 0 .0 -a0 0 nC 0 . 0. S. 00 0 i, 0 " . Ci) 0 0 k Cu 0 C Oca 0. ca 0 C C00 0 Q6 0 0 Ca .0 0 C v - u LL 0 .0 Cd) 00. Q- -i 0 00 0 c 0. Cu C0. 0 0. 0 Wa *c A; 00 Sd 00 0c U a) cc 6. 0 0.. d E) Zu

0 0O

125 '4 C.) E C.)

00 u o ca 0 0 ~0 U- C.) 6d. C C) CU CU ca z U) U, C.) ca C 0 oU 2. - 0 0- CU'*-. o0 Co 0 CU 0 C.) ~ cl ~ .0 ~ L- - 4-c.- Q 0- .C .0 .0 CU U) 0 00 p *- 00 -U 0 o 0C7 C-) CC.) 04 0 - C,~ C.) 4 E N .0 CU - -0 c< - C H C - C.) UC CZ- 0 2 CU: &wC 0 0 ca 0- 0~C . CA) -C 0 ~ CU ~ 0- CU CU~ 040 u, CU§~

*0 0

0G. a - 0 .C .4- 00 00~ 0 .0 0 00

0 CU CU 0

CU 04 0 04 Co. C14 CU CU3 .0 N 04, 0 0 r4- 0 F- 0 CU, C.) 00 ca 0 .0 as CU 0 <00 CU .0 CUO 0 ) 0 ' >% 0 CU *0 0 0 00 0 *0 00 M-~~ 0 4 .) C. 44- *0 5U , 0 ad a .< c U CU 4 2 >4 *0 to 0 c.0 ~0.0 0 CU 0 0. -0C I- -o 0 n c - .e .)A . :lmCa 4 04\ C-o 0% C- CC ~tr, rU- 0 C3 c 0 . cn 4 CU I4 OCZ ZC 0 00 Cu- C.) 0.a C C- C.) CU 4- 0 CU -4 -4-

126 - C.) CO C-)c- > > )C.) >z C: z C-

Cuu <=. C0 0 to 4> 0 C. C/) -- ) C Z ) > .. Cc C < >~ Z 0< 2 Cc *0 L.C . C% D ~0cr 4 -~ 0 C.) 0 g0.. 0%1 > cz - - -E-C

U- 0 U = C= cU z z - <- =- a 0 - >, - 0).CCZ u > ~ C)

>~00~0.>. 0

< 0

<- 10. 0 cz U0 = ca 0 C6 W C >..0- 0:-0c . S C

0 6. -~0 0 0 41 0 - 0- C4 0 ) >

4 0 r7 U) 5 U-

coc00 U co 0. 0O L0U 0 Z 0 0. .0 0 E 0 U 4) ci)

0 0. 6). 0 0 5-C o E 0 Lio 0co 0 0. Uzz a.. co 0 0 - . )cac 0 4 to 04 . 0 I- 0. ~ 0 >C

- - N0 0 . E.0 . = 00 U) 0 Qas *- 0 3o 3N 0 U) E Lu- U CU)4 0 v0 0% O W E-- . 0 & 0% < 0ts< 0-4 - 0 = U .2. o CC

127 u- -0 CJa I , I- .0 u2EE Cu*gi .9= Coos- 4) Cd 0 E. C 16 ~ =uU0c* -i - 4) a- 0 at o c n C-. ; _a a 2 . Cu .s ; o E ejO Z alo E 0a e) a E - - a .0cz * tu . 0 -Ce eC cuf OE

4) o E, s oen 0 on ~ Cu 0. u 0C 0 4)CZc a * * aSoon 0Cu . . 4) ru o t .0 c I- 0 C a 0.. ~ o ~ ~ W 0)2 , ro

.0 C -n 0 cz 0 ,-0 .nCu

ce .9 4.) ). 0 > E E0 (12 5 0- . w 0 0 = 4) E 00

0 o .0 -L.12 - o cn -04) c oc Cu M - -o2 CZ Cu I- .-ca0 2 - 4) Cu00 Cu 4) (12

S. Cur.= 0. 2 >,.6 *L- 0 au- * - I- q4) 0 - - 0 a - 0cA~ 0- 0,..C u c. U-z 0 ~u0 0 a. -- 0000 4 040 a...' *0 Cu'-~ C s~ ~3 ~.0c. 0.0 4.4>

a C)0~

-C c0 o. cm1 4

ti- 4) ca r

ca~~~ -I-~ ci Cu0 0 # ILt > Cu 0 - Q .140 C u

~ C* - Q.Cu q) C 0 4. CIS toCu .OZ )* 4)= V) - - F 4) c toc.)4 Z C Cu O . c' Cu >C W) Er 4) W c 50' cc C. v 4 C L-~ 220 ~ 0 .- Cu0~ C * .

Cu u T3 cc

cuu 0-..-LL

128 1.. -U, = 0 C0 a, c 0 U. % M0 0.

Q CY 10 0< z C- cz eN so a E > >, o1 C. > eN C; eN c e z >m < > c eN -- a e c - C; Q < ~ -o >uE Vo> 0 U i co u 2 E CC4. LZ. = -' 0 Q U = t <0 -o -an 0 > E- : E

0 < o .< 6 ~.0 4-.4

-U C U.O 0- -0 C\0t ch - - to 6.~ ~

C- C -14

a

C 0 to akLZ =i caso CJ0 0.

.0 m 6. - c oN =4

0 > - 4- a o>-s 0 << CC$C) ca 0y d. - Q o-, ~ .o 4-(.

cc o c 0C 0 cco C

cc o - 4) a 4)

.> - . .2.5oy cu "Eo U 05 t: -g E -= e z o -4) tw A 0u .ga .

129 O0 C - I o C L- E 00 a a s.. C C o 0 2 a a Cu*r0. 0 3900 C.) 0. Ezo

~4)4)c00 -- - ca< C. -n 0- 00 -o.E-- '

a . 050 c C* CC We a Cud o u -- o a~-~.. a0. 0 . CuAc,CuUP -cu< U) U) 0.0 .) *Cu 4).0~ u ~ U Cu ' = :== . L- U)0 P=C Cuz U .00. u x 0- 0 > E r- .. U 0 socz 0 o 5- 15CuC.) -a . 5 0 Cu 4) to ao.- ca Cu *~Cu 0.0 Cu C Eu

4 Cam)u4E ou , a a -0 E)0S .C '0 Cu 2 E ~Cuo in. Cu~ ZC0>0.u ouA' uC > ct u - U. U Cu0 c o U>< a. 0. U' SI M O 5 < ol S> 0 W.5- g. Cu o a

4.) =' >,a CA 0) C.) U) C.) > Cu 6-5 m o .0 U) ~ ~ ~ ~CuCCu~ 3 o :-3 4) at - U) Cu 00 7-- 4.) P.C L- = C t 04 0 4) Cu0 Cu L) .Cu 0 '4- :E 0- 0 Cu u' E . > Cu)~ 4) E CL 5 0 < Cu ~ 0 . 0 -z 0 cz (:6 ) C- 4.) 0. 0 Cu -- r .4) 44~*~ CaCC.,0 c > 0 > t -4- .-4) 0>:; C 0E '4->.. Cu .0C u < c 0 -- 0 'a0 o 0 02 w~ 0U)) ~ C13. ~ C U) E 7.2)C 0.U)u ~ u E . .0 Ai -0.. ~C Cu- 0 v O0 to cc 0 - 5- E0. >u0 C.)E t- 0u' Ci ~ 0CU o 0 P.0 0U Cu o' - ~ 0. to0. '4- ca 4)0 2 . z 0.CuC 0a 00u~ 0 0. . u U) 4.) .UZCU2L E 06 U) - 5- 2) a)u~ > Cu 4 ) Q -~4 E) Cu u~ C -a . u Cu 0- Cu C.) 04) . = - . 0. . .C U) .0

130 C -,j M -

cu M > M. 0 c. Ul E E Cu- E U - >

I- 4) t- 4) Ca" '0 Cu d 00 ou uC) .0-C Cu< C . to >~~ to Cu-. ~

*0 C)- Cu~~u0>, 0 0 0.-- GC Cu0 cn C) to u '.- ~: '0 C) 0 0 25 C d~ CZ. C.4 E.u U . u C . c CU 0 u. u '0~ 0 0 0 4)E C Cu. 0 Q ILI .0. Cu - 0 to.=u C.0 0 > 0 ca Q C->, - -z '0 o0 00 CuC Cucj 0. oC - c Cu-1 -'u~u0 Cu0 00

00) 8~C 0. Cu C C'Cu:~u Cu u ~C)C ' =~ F0- 0, .C Cu a. 0 C~CuC) *~ - Eu ' u 0 0 fC

u0 4 Q 0. . 0 0 Cu

Cu a: 0, i) U- Cu o 1 2 f l- .CuQ QEs:. 3.- CU.E u0 C~' 6. 0 I. C. C Cul 4 0 Cu 4-.) ) C a, CIS 03 0 E Cu *~co 6. Cu C., C Cu 8 a z Cc, =4) - o 0c C ('.4 0% E~u~ 0 E0 > C'.' >.u0 -4 Cd z Cu c P, 0 C CI cl 0% 0 Cu 7 0' U' 6 -~ 0 ca 0 z z 0 6. 4) > ~ i.4 .0 im0 0. Cu Cu ~ 0 .0%- z o' a z.0 C-. Con in 0. LL) y 00 Cul. Cu4)

Cuu E r)-~C ce = -

131 00 0- 04 cc 0 0-,4 00 ca 0 )-4 0.C 0 M) 00 O-Z E .- C 0 oa ~0o a0 z cuCu . 0.* 0 0 0 CL 0= CAu

So0 0 0C 0 0 0 t- -z 0Cu asC CD CO) C- C o 0. 0 E =O OO- 0 u 0..c -E E 0(1 1.- Q. C ca = <0 Q.4)c 0 &. t- Z o .J0 o0 4.) co .0C 0 0 > . = . . 0.- 0 0) e.. o 0 W0 .0o - M ct o c > . 0.4>C cc (1). Cu Cu U U 4.) 4)a. 4) <~ Uj >4) o Cu4 Cu - ' 4)0 2 ) 4) Cu 4.) Q Q 0. 0L M.

......

Cu 4 0 0

03u 0 ,

- ~ ~ 4 c 4 ) u >0 . 4. >4) 4) s Eu uCuu = 0-

*O CJ Cu Q)) >2 C4) Cu l4 00 00

00 M

QCu Cur Ca 0 cd Ccu3 Cu Cu 0 4CS oC) 0. >, .0 03.

01 Co )4z c' bo - 0 bo. 4 ~ 0. 04.C o)~ r_ - C ca~ .u u 4) (u C EuC. 4) = 0= = 0 0 cu 0 4) 0.~~ Cu* 0 Cs Cu 1 02 Wu~ . ~C6) U' * 4C 4-du4. ~

4)Mu 00c1

0u &C-C u ' - 4 0 C- b 0 0

132 = a 0o 6 -- - 2E - c a- U U 80 E r oco z cr, z 0

u U 0 0.- 0 0. c Oc ) z 0< ou 0 0. .S u uu~ 0 C"' C) C-.4 z C)~G .~ 0. 0 o z C.. 0e 0 -z zo 2 (5 wdZ-a x9M~ = < cl o r .E 0 - O z< s- ot .0 Umd.c,, 0 ~ 0 z Cd, 0 0 U. U. 0) o a CuC H 0 W

0 - CN0 0E U 0 . .) aoe a, 0 > ma -

0 E~

C ui 0 0.

00

0 C z >4.) > 0 0<< 0 a4 q) C >o 0 8 0

4) > 0)0 WOn M O0 0 5 z oA >

4. o .n U z m U< 0

133 4) Cu 4).4) * C- -

0 0U 0 . C 0. L-0 - . *-4) 0* ci *~.0C~ 0.04)- ~ 4)4' = &n ej 0- 4) U a (U Q 01 Cu r 0 0 1 u - -a - 0 -0 0 'So Cu 4.) 4) 0 to 0~ 1~ C.. 04 Cu .) 0 (Lu . '- 4 4) c-o C.) 4 ) to4) 4)- Cu - 0 0. 0 00

C- C .0 - '~0-4) -D 0 . -'- ~ c4) c clr C 0< C 0 tn.~o . 4Cu)- cz 0.0 4--E trn I-. 4) cu "'r, 4 Cu0~~ 4) ~E ~Cu 4) 0 ~ 0 4)4) - Cu 0 4) .~ = twcc0t 0C. 0Q CC)Cj Cu - 4)0 > E '-4) 4)0~~ 0-. !:-~ ,L.'. .0. ~4) 0 ~0 00 4). 0O.00 *- Qru cc CuCu 0 a4) 0

cw E-E r 0 E Qn C Cu 0 crc *~: ~ >,0 Z 0 > )) 4 o 0 0 Cu 0z ~00~ c - I... 0. ~ 4)0 0.0. L- C -. 6.- 0. .- SC: ca u - 0 V -- .. 0 0 ' 00 oUL .=0'r 0 u20

4) (U 0 N - a I.>44 *- 0 0 C

: V) 4)0 *C 0~ 4 toC 0 6. 4.. 0 CA C

Cu Z tw= as; 04)0 2. 4.0 0~ 0 004)4Q t co C 0 '4 0 2 0

Cu -' = 0 .e U CC% . - 0 .0 0~ 4 0 .0 C4 0 u Cu4 4 o20 00 Cd .- E u C =-. Cu'- 00 -0 '- ca Cu c u 6. .0 6 c t 0C-~~> ~) ccE Ca 4 00 00'> :3 (U Q u 4 (U - -- z C) Z Cu -. = > - C).

Cu n t

0 0 co4) .0s Cb~ Q 4 au~ I ) C:. 0~ tu > C Z 7- = 0 Cu

134 U

0 C c 0 I- C- z0 w L .- 'I- z

>4) o u z .j L-i I- o o 00w LL t) ai0) rnO u us 0 - 0 U en - H 0 -'4 u0 LLi z0 -- LL Hu.M z z 0 o- 0 z 0 zH 0U0 < z C- 0> o C 0

000 HL o0 .. 0

&L c) a &- - c: -ooo U :4) o - - -C3 06. : d 0~ o ~ o- > - 6 C 0z -oo-uc e > o >.- (no =g ~o ~ 0 to.= C', .C:o0 cz 6-.) 04 C-Sc .2 = - O 2 3 cZ .6. C.) z < CIOP- o E NI oo 0 al o: 004 . 0c e . c o . 0, 04) O4 = i 2 ( u 0 g *0.Co o .. C.) 0 S. -~

a o- 0 - 0 o - C, ~4)

7 0 > 8 "N s 4 > ) Cc92 cn U - o z 4 .2 0.E 28 e -\ 4L) 06 - 0 i

135 x

0 O 00 As a z 0 C-4 U o -d 0 UUe 80

0 0 C..' o o 0 -0 E O 0 00 _'- Em-G) -0 E

0 0 -0 -- .. ) C. C. -- c o" o~ - co ou u to c0d0 acr U- r o - - C. 2Z - C. -- 2<0 C.) U, I- 0) 0 U

*ga

o) z

oo

00 N.. .o C.)o.

136 0 C - a, a. 6-

Cd, CL c E Wce CO CL 0 (U am cu w~~ o 0< - o U He z . 0 01 od C-4 Q 0 > Co- cuuCu 0 0 0 w o> .- D D as .z M 0 c - Cu. 4- > m 04 C. 0 0 cdZCu C>- Cao 0 6 o 0 *- 8 det Z0 z U0 o o o W 0 . 0 0 to E .u -0. a5o, -- s- 0* gE a) u -cO Cu ru U C- u 0122 0 O - a0iL cezs . 0 0)0 0o C~ j= 0 *l 'ta 0 0~ o rl o~ 0 a LL, .-

------

A<

T o

c)

CS C0 -0 0 * a - - 4-

0 .0 .- . a a 0 to .) >, 0cc S0 8 cz. a ) C&.-= -a 4- Cu5-a 0 0 o "a8 >% a a- a . C,3 OCto 008 . .0 ue a z 0 CA C . 0 * 0 o 0a 00 Cu2m ,~ (~U E. o = 0 C.E a) -. 5a 0u -co a) C co 04. - E -0 < 0 o 0 aoto 4 auz z < z Fn

137 0J C~ i!. _ 0 0.- 0O CAC

4.) = =o. >a.) 0- 0- .=4 'uCO CO0 .0 0. 0CO ca- 2 .CO. -:CO 6C > C. - 0 I-CO '.) . -c cn c n2 O .CO Cl )0. C.)* u-u 0 . a. CO . CC .. 0 .0 00L CI a, .ce w d0 ) .0 . 0 - 8 c- . -0o .0 c: C.4) -- 0. a.) gn L- C. o .C 0l. u Cz *0 OOoC~.-U 0 .) -= C 0 C )C -I- om04-.. .Gn UO 0 <. C. C.~ C or CO - -- - C- ci, 0 06C W2 CZ- U ,0C u -0 6: >0 0 **a- 4 ) 0> (L a) CO -BL 0 cn3 caI.

-a

CA- 7 ) - 0 - o 4) m 3) 000 CCO 0 C) ~82 S2 > E 0 -) -@ o 0 -OO c0 0 >~ >0 C A .0 0

OOC S >Ca OwC C 4 CO Cd- a E 0 N 0 an0 n 0 0 - U- cne O6 '0 0- 0~ 9 .. 0 C ~ O= o o 0 ? s CO 01&.C.CO>COa In-C.ae C ~0 0 OOJ 02 eCO ~ ~ -o mC..4)3O-c O 0 0d, on-O ed C'4a go u C-" tooi0a " "0 ou (:a I-0 w0 C O U. -~0 - 0 ~ ca ' .. .00 cf;u:0 . .0 0 COd0 c0 C- 003 a.0 a .) 0 CO .00 4- as- &~H% ~ o ~. 5cao oa o m C 0H i-0 ~ c o.0 0 CO'- C C: o &n0O> O .. 0.i~~ Q.z a- .CO - o 0-0-4 0 c- W3 C g- e= r-) . 0 M C. H z- a >e -

-a.cz

138 o1 =

- - 00

=x, t T o

It en *0 zc >.0 T*00

-o4)

4) c

139