Non transformative use -> Not cool.
Transformative -> it's fine
Original work attempting to deceive or confuse the origin as being by another. -> not cool
Original work emulating the style of another without attempting to imply involvement of the other -> it's fine.
For example, you can use a sample in a new song. And that new song can by copyrighted. But you still have to seek permission from the copyright holders of the sample to use it.
Fair use is the only time it’s legal to use another copyrighted piece without consent. And the rules for fair use vary from country to county.
Fair use is a defense, not a requirement - You don't need permission to claim fair use; it's a legal defense if you're sued Seeking permission can backfire - Copyright holders may deny permission even when fair use would apply, creating unnecessary barriers.
This is especially true for parody and commentary.
That’s not why I said.
> something like YouTube's automated copyright strikes might affect you. "Ask Forgiveness" is often a better option.
Now you’re talking about platform quirks rather than copyright law.
> Fair use is a defense, not a requirement
Actually “fair use” is defined by law in a lot of counties. It’s not a defence, it’s a legal right.
> You don't need permission to claim fair use;
That’s not what I said.
> it's a legal defense if you're sued Seeking permission can backfire
It’s spelt “defence” (with a C not an S) and the point is you seek permission before distribution, not after
Not everything in life follows the “ask for forgiveness not permission” rule ;)
> Copyright holders may deny permission even when fair use would apply, creating unnecessary barriers.
Copyright holders cannot deny fair use in jurisdictions where fair use laws apply.