Wouldn't all those cringe lip syncs count as fair use under parody?
Probably not, the internet seems to think that fair use is much broader than it actually is in practice. The use of copyright materials to produce a work which relies entirely on those materials is not covered when no editorial value is created by the second work. Lipsyncing isn’t parody, essentially.
A lot of people on the internet don't realize how much content is plain copyright infringement that simply doesn't get pursued. Memes, fanart, edits, covers, so forth.
Personally I think that should be reason to rethink how IP law is written, if the average person doesn't find so many uses infringing and they have become part of the typical cultural habits. But that hasn't happened.
You could make that argument, but the users would need to get the unedited songs from a legitimate source first. Tiktok wouldn't be able to provide them directly without infringing copyright.
Wouldn't all those cringe lip syncs count as fair use under parody?
Probably not, the internet seems to think that fair use is much broader than it actually is in practice. The use of copyright materials to produce a work which relies entirely on those materials is not covered when no editorial value is created by the second work. Lipsyncing isn’t parody, essentially.
A lot of people on the internet don't realize how much content is plain copyright infringement that simply doesn't get pursued. Memes, fanart, edits, covers, so forth.
Personally I think that should be reason to rethink how IP law is written, if the average person doesn't find so many uses infringing and they have become part of the typical cultural habits. But that hasn't happened.
You could make that argument, but the users would need to get the unedited songs from a legitimate source first. Tiktok wouldn't be able to provide them directly without infringing copyright.