I reverse the lower court's decision that Negativland violated copyright law. While one may perceive music to be a free market based on the love of music, others may argue that it is based on profit. In the article "U2's Double Trouble," Negativland claims that U2's label Island Record's only concern in the lawsuit is "controlling the market" (139). Negativland believes Island is trying to control what music is created and sold. Island is so focused on profit that it limits the music market. I agree with Negativland that Island Records only cares about the profits they would make from controlling the market. Music is created to evoke emotions, not just to make money. Since there are only a limited number of ways to play an instrument, it won't be long before songs sound the same. The similarities between the two songs should flatter the original composer as their work inspired another artist to produce a similar sound. Composing and making music is a craft that should be shared and used to help influence or inspire other people, not under anyone's control. Accordingly, the decision that Negativland violated copyright law should be overturned. At first glance, this may not appear to be the case, but the lawsuit between the two groups is actually about censorship. In “U2 Negativland the Case From Our Side,” the band Negativland claims that the song they created was “a parody, a satire, a social commentary, and a cultural critique” (147). The band expresses that their song is a work of art and has every right to be sold like U2's song. By removing Negativland's song, U2 and Island Records are censoring the public from hearing... middle of paper ......vic sampled, copied and created a parody of Michael Jackson's song “Beat it.” Weird Al copied everything from Michael's video, including his hairstyle and the scenery throughout the video. However, even though the song "Eat it" was almost identical to the song "Beat it", fans knew the difference between what was done by Michael and what was done by Weird Al. The Negativland song still has less similarity to the U2 song than Weird Al's song to Michael Jackson's. It is for this reason that one would assume that U2 fans would be able to tell the difference between Negativland's choppy techno sampling style and U2's heartfelt balladry. Putting concrete limits and rules on what an artist can and cannot use when expressing their opinion about another artist's work is unconstitutional. If we put a price on freedom of expression, we put a fine on our freedoms.