Originally Posted by gideongallery

ok smart guy if changing the context of a movie by layering in new subtitles why did the eff win their arguement that this

was a parody

you only prove your a clueless moron when you argue that the court define definition of a "parody" is not a parody.

of course if you want to argue about creative and creating something new

there are only two creative or new downfall parodies

the very first one which recast the serious movie into a comedic commentary/parody about an issue.

and eff one which turned it into a DMCA trap that both explained why it was a valid fair use within the video and made itself a target of the abuser of the DMCA(sending take downs without actually check if it was fair use-- which the explaination within the video proved)


everyone else are not new, not creative , derivative works which are still valid parodies.