Can I Make Money By Creating A Parody

I am thinking to make parody trailers for bollywood, am I breaking any law?

There is no Indian Law that directly prohibits someone to make or distribute parody/spoof of any bollywood movie. So you can very happily and creatively make the trailers, upload on youtube and earn a decent sum of money. But, there are certain provisions in our constitution that says, one cannot hurt the sentiments of fellow citizens, example Sec 295A: Hurting religious beliefs Sec 334: Voluntarily causing hurt on provocation Such laws if used against you can really land you up in jail but these are bailable sections so nothing to worry if you can afford some lawyers. While creating the spoof content keep in mind that it doesn't hurt someone but then if you are new to this entertainment industry something like this is boon to you. It will give a limelight that you need to promote your product and then there will be social media war. Some will support you as your Right to Free Speech, some will target your hurting their sentiments while others will enjoy everything going on. If things escalates too much, you just post a apology video and even take down the video for some time till everything gets calm down. Just don't worry, don't hold the creativity inside you. Write the good content, shoot it and upload it - Spread smiles!All the best! Do send me a link of your first video.

Is it possible to make a career out of writing parody lyrics for YouTube videos?

Yes, since Brentalfloss (Brent Black) is doing exactly that. More precisely, he makes humorous lyrics out of well known video game musics. Here is an exemple: Right now, he makes gigs, sells CDs and clothings. His career started soon after he started adding lyrics to video games.You will learn a lot more by looking at his youtube channel or his facebook page.

Why don't music artists sue those who make parodies of their songs?

First, you have to understand the vast differences here because you're mixing up a lot of stuff.  You don't sue for plagiarism, you sue for a violation of your copyright or trademark.  So, when you have a painting, and someone creates an imitation of your painting, it likely violates your copyright and as a result you have an actionable claim against them.  Similarly, if someone imitates your song directly, you might have an actionable claim if they violated your copyright.That question though, second, is much more complicated.  It's complicated because there is a vast series of arrangements which govern the licensing - discretionary and automatically - of sheet music, and the right to perform a version of a song.  For example, Section 115 of the Copyright Act provides what's called a compulsory license to cover a performance.http://copyright.gov/circs/circ7...However, most of those rights are tied to direct performances, e.g. the re-recording of Taylor Smith's recent 1979 album by Ryan Adams.  Even if Swift had not wanted him to do so, since he completely re-arranged the music for the songs, he likely would have only had to pay licensing fees for the lyrics themselves.  (Of course, in that instance, Swift loved the fact that he did it).  Songwriters, separate from original performers, also get compulsory royalties in the US for performances of their songs.  These mechanical royalties are also governed by the same laws.How Music Royalties WorkFinally, there's something else at play when an artist like Weird Al does a satirical parody.  The US recognizes the right to free speech includes the ability to use copyrighted or otherwise protected intellectual property if it's so-called Fair Use.  One of the legally recognized Fair Use instances is parody, but not satire.  Al has notably had to deal with plenty of artists who don't want their music parodied.11 Artists Who WouldnFor more discussion of the difference between satire and parody in the law, look here for example:https://apps.americanbar.org/lit...In short, the Supreme Court identifies parody as the "use of some elements of a prior author’s composition to create a new one that, at least in part, comments on that author’s works.", Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. 510 US 569 (1994).  Satire,   on the other hand, just makes fun of something generally.  However, the courts have struggled with this split.

Is it trademark infringement to sell parody stickers/apparel featuring a famous brand logo?

Let me share the story of Chewy Vuitton and the South Butt.A dog-toy  company--Haute Diggity Dog, LLC--parodied a number of high-fashion lines with canine equivalents: Chewnel No. 5, Jimmy Chew, Dog Perignonn, Sniffany & Co., and Dogior. Louis Vuitton finally called them out and sued on Chewy Vuitton, which was a dog toy fashioned like a Louis Vuitton purse. The court examined the dog toy and determined that it was a parody of a trademark (I've pasted a paragraph from the suit defining what a parody is below, but won't explain it here, as we all know what a parody is.). Here's the best sentence: [T]he “Chewy Vuiton” dog toys convey “just enough of the original design to allow the consumer to appreciate the point of parody,” but stop[s] well short of appropriating the entire marks that LVM claims." Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A. v. Haute Diggity Dog, LLC, 507 F.3d 252, 261 (4th Cir. 2007).Now mind you, that was the 4th Circuit, AND that was a case where the Chewy Vuitton products did not replace any consumer's demand for Louis Vuitton products, most likely, that is (an argument could be made that Haute Diggity Dog was excluding Louis Vuitton from the opportunity to make their own line of dog toys, but whatever). On the other hand, take the example of 'The North Face vs. South Butt.' I don't believe that case went to trial, and I DO believe that the boy ended up paying a settlement. Basically, he lost. What's the difference? The South Butt articles of clothing were just pieces of clothing that looked not too different from The North Face, and there was a greater likelihood of consumer confusion. Trademark law is, at its heart, about the ability of a company to associate a mark with their company. The answer, I'm afraid, is that it depends. It's certainly a risky path to take, but it is possible to pull it off. More specifics are needed on your idea, friend.

If I want to publish (for profit) a parody of a song, what steps do I need to take to keep everything legal?

If you use someone else’s tune, and that tune is in copyright, you’re still infringing. It’s true that there are special cases for parody but you still need to remember that the tune is someone else’s property and they may not take too kindly to your using it for your own purposes.However if you’re a skilled musician you can create a looky-likey version of a tune that isn’t an exact replica of the original but which clearly makes reference to it. For instance you can put your parody song in the same key, in the same rhythm, the same phrase patterns, using the same vocal style, same instruments and production values - so it will sound quite like the original but it won’t be the same as it and they can’t really touch you. This is quite a common approach. There’s a guy who frequently appears on the BBC in the UK called Mitch Benn who is absolutely brilliant at this - and given that his material is frequently broadcast on the state broadcasting company, I can only assume that it has all been checked by copyright experts and is 100% legal. It’s also 100% clever and funny, and also very respectful in a way.I also think there’s a sense in which it depends on how ‘affectionate’ or otherwise the parody is. If you were doing something really nasty - say parodying someone else’s song but with a really offensive message - the owner of the original might have something to say about it. But I think if you’re just being funny and witty, without causing offence, you should be OK.I think. Like others here, I suspect you might be wise to take advice. This stuff isn’t easy.

Can someone write a parody of a song and distribute it legal as long as they don't try to make money off of it?

A legitimate Parody is Fair Use under Section 107 of the Copyright Act and is NOT an infringement of copyright.The question of whether the use was commercial or non-commercial, for profit or not for profit, is merely one of four factors to be considered by the court when determining whether the use was Fair Use. Those factors are outlined in Section 107.The case of 2 Live Crew and their rap parody of Roy Orbison’s song “Oh, Pretty Woman” went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1994 and the Court ruled in favor of 2 Live Crew.Obviously, to parody a song such as “Oh, Pretty Woman” some of the original song must be used. A parody must conjure up the original and be recognizable, otherwise the parody makes no sense.2 Live Crew copied the bass riff of “Oh, Pretty Woman,” and the first line of the lyrics. Beyond that they departed from the Orbison version.Some of the 2 Live Crew lyrics were:Big hairy woman you need to shave that stuff, Big hairy woman you know I bet it’s tough, Big hairy woman all that hair ain’t legit, Cause you look like Cousin It!The Court ruled that 2 Live Crew’s use of the song was a legitimate parody and was fair use under the Copyright Law. I believe that the decision was unanimous, 9–0.It is important to understand that a Parody uses the original and it targets the original, i.e. it makes fun of the original.Had 2 Live Crew used some of the music and words to “Oh, Pretty Woman” to write a satire about the President or politics or something of the sort, it would NOT have been a parody.You can rest assured that Weird Al Yankovic got permission from Michael Jackson to use “Beat It” for the basis of the song “Eat It.” Michael Jackson got paid the full song royalties, too.Groups such as The Capitol Steps, who use familiar copyrighted songs as vehicles for poking fun at politics, must get permission from the copyright owners. They are not creating a “Parody,” they are simply making up funny lyrics to familiar melodies.

Why do "Minecraft Parodies" exist? Who thought of them?

You've pretty much pinned it down right there. Minecraft is an overwhelming cultural phenomenon. The PC version has sold some 25.8 million units as I'm writing this. Below you'll see an infographic from June 2016 detailing their sales.And that's nearly a year ago! No wonder people have been making Minecraft parodies, it's a cheap, easy, fun, and creative way to express yourself, not to mention people love it. You don't see COD parodies as frequently (though they do exist) because while COD is an overwhelmingly successful game, Minecraft is far easier to work with. There are dozens of animation programs that work very well with Minecraft's blocky style, including at least one specific to Minecraft. You say “it's only Minecraft”, but it's not only Minecraft, it's a fan base of millions.