Right. That's a really good description of the difference between SATIRE and PARODY. Only PARODY is protected against copyright infringement - and even then, parody isn't as protected as many people think. The absolute bare minimum is protected, so if you take more than you need for the parody to work, you can still be found in violation of copyright protection.TwinIonEngines said:The use of Nintendo's characters is only permissible if it is the Nintendo characters themselves that are being parodied. PETA's objectives with this piece are largely preclusive of this - it's hard to argue that political statements about animal cruelty constitute parody or criticism of video game characters in the sense that would be protected by 'fair use' doctrine.
Also, I should point out that this isn't strictly a case of copyrights, but instead of trademarks. A copyright is protection for a particular implementation of something. A trademark is a series of recognizable elements that are used by customers to identify your product in the marketplace. I don't think that matters as far as Nintendo's right and need to kick these turd in the pants though.
