Generally, this seems to be a good law. To my understanding, it's on par with the protections we already have in the US.<p>It's interesting how the law singles out "discriminatory":<p>><i>If a parody conveys a discriminatory message (for example, by replacing the original characters with people wearing veils and people of colour), the holders of the rights to the work parodied have, in principle, a legitimate interest in ensuring that their work is not associated with such a message.</i><p>Why is that the only case where right holders have a "legitimate interest" like this? There are lots of other cases where somebody <i>should</i> have a similar case by a similar standard: obscenity, sex, violence, religion or anything else counter to a group's core beliefs. The law should be consistent one way or another, but it isn't.<p>A few decades ago, sex would have been the one issue singled out. And before that? Probably anti-religious messaging. Or maybe just communism, although that was more of an American concern.<p>Point being, it really brings to mind the idea of "moral fashion" from "What You Can't Say"[1]. As time goes on, I'm seeing the ideas from that essay illustrated more and more, especially because we seem to be in a transitionary period between two different fashions. It's a bit disconcerting, honestly; it feels like things aren't really changing, just the names and details.<p>[1]: <a href="http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html</a>
"Owners of the copyrighted works will only be able to sue if the parody conveys a discriminatory message.<p>"It would then be down to a judge to decide if the parody is funny."<p>Can't wait to see that lawsuit...
The most successful use of this in the US has been <a href="https://twitter.com/dumbstarbucks" rel="nofollow">https://twitter.com/dumbstarbucks</a>. Pretty great.
<i>Cassette Boy, who is known for his online mash-up parodies of shows</i><p>Not so many years ago, that sentence would look very weird. I love the times we live in.
If copyright owners start using this law to sue everyone they see fit, the law will last 12 months tops IMHO or it will destroy both parody and satire as we know it in the UK.