Slashdot Mirror
What Protections Exist for Parody Sites?
jolchefske asks: "I'm a small time guy running a small time parody website of a medium sized school district. My site lampoons the real website of the Seattle School District -- a district currently over 30 million dollars in the hole due to accounting "irregularities." My question is, what protections (if any) do parody websites have against copyright litigation? The district is 30+ mil in the red but they've got the lawyers knocking on my door."
No, seriously. I'm not a lawyer. Neither is most of the other folks around here. Maybe it would be best to actually call a lawyer in your own area and see what he/she says? Most have initial consultations for free...
Long, cute, or funny Sigs are just another form of over compensation, used by geeks, nerdz, etc.
You have little to fear provided you get a lawyer right away. Your site is a parody, presumably protected by the First Amendment, and it does not appear to have any content that could be termed libelous or obscene. I would observe that your site a) isn't very funny; b) isn't very robust; c) doesn't do a good job of explaining to someone like me, who is unfamiliar with Seattle or its school system, what it is that aggrieves you about it; d) links back to the official site in such a way as to confuse people. Maybe they will violate your civil rights and you can countersue.
Gee ... so copyright must be unconstitutional?
No, wait, there's also a Copyright Clause in the Constitution.
I'm ribbing you a little; but my point is that First Amendment absolutism doesn't actually solve all that much. This is a tension within the Constitution itself, and I doubt the 1st A. was meant to amend away copyright.