Parody

Timothy Carr

Timothy Carr

Hey, Im shooting some "parody ads" here in Australia, and was wondering how far i could go (Name wise, etc) before i get a less than friendly email asking me to go to court....?
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
Sweetie said:
Fancy seeing you here Mr Red ;)

The best that I know,when you're doing parodies copyright is very very lax, however, you still need to pay attention to trademark law.
Click to expand...

Haha hello!
Great... Well lets just say, its not your usual parody. Its a "negative parody" (there not going to like it put it that way)... So still the same laws etc?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Great! Well ill come clean, there is the HORRIBLE communications company here in aus called "Vodafone" So im going to make a anti-vodafone add... But using different names, like vodafail or vodamoan...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You can always get in trouble. They can still sue you without a winnable case and since they have more money than you, trouble can follow. That's the worst of it.

I should have known that you were going to do something about Vodafone with your recent disdain for them. What you really need to ensure is that you don't more from parody into slander (or is it defamation? Not sure, it's one of them) especially if it is clear (since you recently got banned from their page) that you're trying to take them down a peg.

I'm not saying don't do it, just be careful. Consider talking to a lawyer first. You've got a long career in front of you, be sure you don't sabotage it for a fleeting vendetta that you won't care about a few months down the track.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
As Sweetie said, they can still take legal action. If they do, it won't be a matter of winning or losing, then may just want to financially run you through the grinder to set an example for others who may decide to be 'funny' with their product.

At the same time, they might not want to vilify themselves by prosecuting someone who all their users support.

Generally only a lawyer should decide what is fair use (fair dealing in Australia). www.copyright.org.au/admin/cms.../9596827704f39afefd0112.pdf

It is worth mentioning that there have been cases in the US where the courts determined that the 'parody' was not fair use because it wasn't "funny enough" and therefore was considered defamation. Best of luck

https://www.facebook.com/chainoftitle
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Don Henley vs Chuck DeVore: Judge James Selna quantified the difference between parody and satire and said that the songs failed to make fun of either Henley or the original song, instead taking his song to make fun of a separate subject. Proving he is an expert at pop culture lawsuits, Selna cited a variety of other trials -- including J.D. Salinger's victory over the purported 'Catcher in the Rye Sequel' and Tom Waits taking a bite out of Frito-Lay for using a voice similar to his -- in siding with Henley in what is at least a tentative ruling.

I was just linked this video which was done about a service provider in my country. I'll follow and post back if it gets pulled. https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ADEyPx_b8X4

https://www.facebook.com/chainoftitle
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top