Reading the section of fair use and copyright reminded me of this one episode of Nathan For You. Nathan planned to rename a coffee shop "Dumb Starbucks", but was told that he would be sued unless he could establish himself as a well-known parody artist, like Weird Al. After marketing himself as a parody artist, he decided he was technically in the clear to parody Starbucks' name. I was wondering if this was actually enough to help him escape copyright infringement, or if it only worked as a loophole on TV (I get that it's only a comedy show).
Also-- I'm not sure if an image I uploaded to the library was in the realm of fair use. The article said that you would not be able to use a line like "I can't get no satisfaction", but argued that other, less popular lines from the song could be considered fair use. The image in question is of an old woman's eyes, and it's a thumbnail from a video from a website that looked sort of shady. Since the photo is not a central aspect of the video, and the website itself doesn't seem to have any actual merit, do I still have to credit the original uploader?
Hey I was skimming through other people's comments and noticed this one because I thought of that Nathan for You episode to when reading about the parody rules! I was going to use that same example, but you beat me to it!