The parody primer

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

The parody primer

Parody will be the subject of what promises to be an entertaining session today. Moderator Camila Santamaría tackled some questions about it.

What is your interest in the topic of parody and why did you decide to moderate this session?

I think parody is a fascinating topic because—besides the fact that it is very interesting from an academic point of view, given its intrinsic versatility, both from a case law perspective and from a jurisdictional viewpoint—parody is dynamic and current, due to new technologies and trends… plus, it is literally very entertaining!

Why do you think it is an important issue for trademark practitioners now?

I think parody is a very important issue for trademark practitioners since parodies usually occur with protected IP rights—and frequently very well-known IP rights. The issue is that there is a very thin line between what is considered fair use and what is deemed as an infringement, and many don’t know this, even trademark practitioners. At any point the trademarks that we protect may be subject to this frequent practice, so we must know about it … besides, in our daily life we are more exposed to parodical practices than we think!

Do you think the law on this issue varies much between jurisdictions and if so is that a problem?

Unlike what happens with many aspects related to trademarks—whose standards are more or less consistent worldwide—the conception and thus, the protection of parody does vary among jurisdictions, and one of the reasons for this is based on precedent (this is even applicable in; many civil law countries). More than a problem, I see this as a challenge and an eventual wakeup call to trademark practitioners, because they need to be updated with the current legal standpoints in their jurisdiction(s) of interest, to be able to effectively protect their own or their clients’ trademarks, or on the other hand, to avoid committing trademark and/ or copyright infringements.

What will the speakers be covering during this panel? Are there any particular cases or examples you will discuss?

The speakers will mention several parody cases in different jurisdictions, evidencing the multifaceted nature of parody and its many spectrums of protection. It will be very amusing.

CM20 What is Parody? takes place from 11:45 am to 1:00 pm today.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Ruth Hoy will join the firm's IP practice alongside Huw Cookson, who will also become a partner
IP boutique firm says its platform will help navigate ‘scattered’ decisions by bringing case law, commentary and research under one umbrella
The latest round of promotions has contributed to a 21% rise in partner headcount in the past two years, with business leaders eyeing litigation and the UPC
João Negrão, EUIPO executive director, is joined by a seasoned official to reflect on three decades of stories
Sim & San, which secured the $16m victory for their client, previously led Communications Components Antenna to a $26m damages win in 2024
IP litigator Ruth Hoy has led the London office since 2022
Emotional Perception AI is seeking more than £200,000 after the UK Supreme Court backed its appeal
Lawyers at Pinsent Masons discuss why the advent of ‘AI-free’ might be a crucial moment for brands seeking to protect their identity
Newly independent King & Wood has established offices in North America, while Mallesons has entered a ‘new era’ with a 1,200-lawyer firm across Australia and Singapore
Ryan Dykal and John Wittenzellner of Boies Schiller Flexner tell Managing IP what’s driving the firm’s patent litigation expansion
Gift this article