I'm glad you stated that you are a writer and not an attorney; people giving legal advice can be sued for malpractice if there is any way one could interpret the advice as "legal advice".
I would have to be recommending a course of action for it to be advice. Explaining the meaning of Fair Use or what happens if one files a DMCA complaint is not recommending a course of action.
Plus, the Amazon agreement is pretty clear that Amazon asserts a copyright for all of this content, so you'd have a standing problem.
I don't see anywhere that Amazon claim for posts. Quite the opposite, actually. From the Friends and Favorites Guidelines
You understand that you shall remain solely liable for any and all information, text, images, photographs, graphics, e-mail addresses, Web pages, reviews, discussion board postings, and other materials ("Content") that you upload, download, or transmit to our Service.
and
The following non-exhaustive list details the kinds of conduct or Content that is prohibited:
- The upload, download, or transmission of any Content that infringes the intellectual property rights or other proprietary rights of others, including, without limitation, copyright, trademark, patent, or trade secrets
They do assert a license to use reviews, but they don't claim the copyright.
Oh, as an aside, you don't sue in the county where he lives, you need a Civil procedure brush-up.
You would if you were filing in small claims court.
Yes, parody permits far greater use of copyrighted material than any other use, however it does not permit the wholesale copying of things just because "I think it's funny." When SNL made their parody of the Council of Elrond, they didn't just take the clip and redistribute and say "don't you think this is funny?" They altered it and created a parody.
I don't think that this particular situation would be considered a parody. Simply commenting that you think something is ridiculous before reproducing it in it's entirety doesn't make it a parody.
Barbara |