 Here again, the transformative use affected the court's analysis.Use of a substantial part or the "heart" of a protected work is justified when the character of the work is criticism or parody, because these expressions necessarily demand a greater quantity to be useful.The court reasoned that a greater degree of material from "Seinfeld" would be necessary for an accurate critique of the show's "nothingness", but because the court found little transformative use for the purposes of critique, this weighed against defendants.