Parody & Fair Use: Creators are Legally Allowed to Make Fun of You and That’s Actually So Awesome

One of the weirdest trends of the modern internet is how many people seem genuinely shocked to discover that other people are allowed to make fun of them. Not harass them, stalk them, threaten them, steal their work and repost it wholesale (which some people seem to conflate “comedy” to be at times) … but make fun of them, offer criticism (constructive or otherwise), create a parody, co an impression, comment on their public behavior? Abso-fucking-lutely.

In fact, not only is it legal in many circumstances, it's one of the most important and essential creative freedoms we have.

The internet has fundamentally changed how comedy works. Twenty years ago, if someone wanted to satirize a celebrity, politician, public figure, or cultural trend, they generally needed access to a newspaper, magazine, television network, radio station, or comedy club. Today, all it takes is a smartphone and an internet connection.

As a result, parody has become more accessible than ever. Millions of creators across YouTube, TikTok, Instagram, Twitch, podcasts, and countless other platforms participate in a tradition that's far older than social media itself … and despite what some public figures would have you believe, that's a very good thing.

Parody Is Older Than Practically Everything Else

The internet did not invent satire. Human beings have been making fun of each other for as long as human beings have existed.

Ancient Greek playwrights mocked politicians and public leaders, court jesters made careers out of insulting nobility, political cartoons became powerful tools throughout Europe and North America, newspapers frequently published satirical commentary long before radio, television, or the internet entered the picture.

Comedy has always served an important social purpose. Sometimes it helps us process difficult events, criticize people in positions of power … and sometimes it simply reminds us that nobody is above scrutiny. Most importantly; it allows societies to examine themselves.

Humor often succeeds where direct criticism fails. People become defensive when confronted head-on, so if you can wrap the same criticism in a joke, suddenly audiences are willing to engage with ideas they may have otherwise rejected.

That's why parody has remained culturally relevant for centuries.

Fair Use Is What Allows Modern Internet Comedy To Exist

If you've spent any amount of time online, you've probably heard somebody mention fair use … usually loudly … usually incorrectly.

Fair use isn't a magical legal shield that allows creators to do whatever they want. Contrary to what some people seem to believe, slapping "fair use" in a video's description doesn't automatically make something legal. Instead, fair use exists to allow certain uses of copyrighted material for purposes like criticism, commentary, education, reporting, and parody.

The key concept is transformation. *cue Usage Tsukino-esque magical girl henshin sequence*

You're not simply taking somebody else's work; you're using it to create something new.

A movie review may contain clips from the film being discussed, a commentary channel may show portions of a video they're critiquing, a comedian may imitate a public figure's mannerisms and speech, a parody song may borrow elements of an existing work while transforming it into something entirely different (or even a non-parody song may sample something.)

Without fair use protections, a massive portion of modern online content simply wouldn't exist; reaction videos, commentary channels, media criticism, film analysis, internet satire, political comedy, the list goes on and on.

Many of the formats people consume daily would become legally questionable overnight, and whether you personally enjoy those formats or not, society benefits from their existence.

Ethan And Hila Klein Accidentally Helped Change The Internet (groan)

No discussion about modern fair use would be complete without … sigh … talking about Ethan and Hila Klein of H3H3 Productions. Back in 2016, the Kleins found themselves at the center of what would become one of the most important creator-related lawsuits in internet history.

After producing a reaction and commentary video criticizing another creator named Matt Hoss’ content, they were sued for copyright infringement. At the time, many online creators were nervous. If the lawsuit succeeded, it could have fundamentally changed how commentary content operated online. The court ultimately ruled in favor of the Kleins, finding that their work was transformative criticism and therefore protected under fair use. The ruling became a landmark moment for online creators.

Suddenly, there was stronger legal precedent supporting what many creators had argued for years. Criticism, commentary, and transformative works deserved protection. The outcome helped shape the modern creator economy in ways that are difficult to overstate. Thousands of channels built around criticism, analysis, reviews, reactions, and parody have benefited from the legal principles reinforced by that case.

Ironically, years later, Ethan Klein himself has found himself on the opposite side of various copyright and creator disputes, leading many internet observers to point out the hypocrisy in how he now chooses to conduct himself in the online community. (Among other things … ((I’m being shady here but what can I say … life’s more fun in the shade)))

Once legal principles become established, they belong to everyone. Even people you don't like, that's kind of the point.

Weird Al Was Doing This Before Most Internet Creators Were Born

Long before YouTube commentary channels existed, there was Weird Al Yankovic. Younger readers may know him as a beloved musical oddity, older readers know him as one of the greatest parody artists to ever live.

Weird Al built an entire career around transforming popular songs into comedic masterpieces. What's fascinating is that his work demonstrates something many people misunderstand about parody; that parody is not inherently hostile.

In fact, some of the most effective parody comes from a place of admiration.

Nobody was asking Weird Al to parody obscure songs nobody had heard of. The artists who received the Weird Al treatment were generally some of the biggest stars in the world. Being parodied often became a cultural milestone. Many musicians embraced it, some actively encouraged it, others collaborated with him directly and gave their blessing.

The joke wasn't that the artists were untalented, the joke was that they were famous enough to be worth parodying in the first place … and that's a really important distinction.

Not every joke is an attack, sometimes parody is simply participation in culture.

Public Figures Are Not Entitled To Universal Praise

This brings us to a more recent phenomenon; increasingly, public figures seem to believe criticism itself is a form of persecution.

Actors complain about reviews, politicians complain about comedians, influencers complain about commentary and tea channels, podcasters complain about impressions.

The expectation appears to be that visibility should come with admiration but never scrutiny. Unfortunately for them, that's not how public life works … or honestly life in general. If you build a platform, people are going to discuss you. Some folks will praise you, some will criticize you, some will make memes about you, some will create parodies, some will do impressions that are so accurate they're uncomfortable, others will do impressions so terrible they become funny for entirely different reasons; that's life.

For decades, late-night hosts like Jimmy Kimmel and countless others have built careers commenting on current events and public figures. Satire has always been part of political and cultural discourse in America. Recently, however, we've seen an increase in public figures attempting to frame criticism as censorship while simultaneously demanding that critics lose their platforms.

It's a fascinating contradiction; people are entitled to free speech, they're not entitled to universal approval.

The Druski Problem Isn't Actually A Druski Problem

The recent controversy involving internet comedian Druski and his parody content surrounding Erika Kirk provides a useful example.

Some viewers found the content hilarious, others found it disrespectful, some thought it crossed a line, others believed it remained firmly within the realm of comedy. Reasonable people can disagree about whether a joke is funny, what they generally cannot do is demand that parody cease to exist because they personally dislike it.

It’s worth mentioning here that Druski never actually mentioned Erika by name … people just connected the dots.

A lot of conversations online confuse offense with harm … which are NOT the same thing. Being offended is part of participating in a society where people are free to express themselves. Not every joke will land. The alternative is a world where creative expression exists only with the approval of the people being criticized, that sounds significantly worse.

Why Creative Freedom Matters

The beauty of parody isn't simply that it allows people to make jokes; it's that it encourages creativity.

A healthy creative ecosystem requires experimentation, criticism, artists building upon existing cultural moments and transforming them into something new. Without those freedoms; entire genres disappear.

Satire, political comedy, commentary, and many forms of internet culture disappear. Frankly, the internet would become a much less interesting place. Maybe that would be a good thing to get us all off of our phones, but there are other ways without infringing on creative thoughts, or just thoughts period.

Not every parody is brilliant, most aren't, actually. Not every comedian is talented, many aren't … but creative freedom includes the freedom to create things that fail. The freedom to make bad jokes is inseparable from the freedom to make great ones.

Learning To Laugh At Ourselves

Perhaps the most valuable thing parody offers is; perspective. The ability to laugh at ourselves is a sign of confidence, the inability to tolerate even mild criticism often signals the opposite. Nobody enjoys being mocked, at least not initially.

Bu,t a society where public figures, corporations, politicians, influencers, and celebrities can all be examined through humor is generally healthier than one where criticism is discouraged. Parody reminds us that nobody is untouchable, nobody is above criticism. Nobody is so important that they cannot become the punchline. Comedy exists, in part, to remind power that it shouldn't.

Parody and fair use aren't loopholes, they're essential protections for creativity, criticism, commentary, and artistic expression.

Of course there are limits, like stated earlier; harassment isn't comedy, copyright theft isn't parody, defamation isn't protected simply because somebody claims they were joking. Though within those boundaries, creators have enormous freedom to critique culture, examine public figures, challenge ideas, and occasionally make complete fools of all of us. That's. Worth. Protecting.

The ability to laugh, criticize, parody, and create without asking permission first is one of the reasons the internet remains such a powerful creative space. I’ll leave you with one final thought; if somebody can't survive being the subject of a joke, they probably shouldn't have become a public figure in the first place.