Question about using Brand Names in VNs

[FranceToast]

Is there an actual legal reason VN authors use pseudonyms for things like "Google" or "Pornhub" in their games? I can understand why they don't show the actual Logos on the simulated screens of devices in the game (I guess? Is Google really going to care?) , but I'm assuming characters can actually refer to them in conversation?

And on a related but totally off-kilter note- People can post Youtube videos of Skyrim, with mods, machinima, lets play, etc...is there anything stopping me legally from using a still scene(s) from Skyrim in my VN? I'm not thinking of doing the whole VN in Skyrim, but I have an idea about using one stage set shot...

 

[W22N]

I mean... You're asking law-related questions in a piracy/porn forum.
I think most people are deterred from even naming them because they're fucking giants and you're a grain of dust, most likely they won't ever see your game, but what if they do? would you really have the money and fight power to stand up to them for what you believe is free use? It's all uncharted territory, specially considering the fact that porn is such a taboo topic.
I'm not a lawyer, but (from wikipedia, not the best legal reference):

Copyright law grants authors and artists the exclusive right to make and sell copies of their works, the right to create derivative works, and the right to perform or display their works publicly

Someone could argue that using skyrim shots could be considered derivative work from their game, and that'd be all it'd take for them to take legal action if they wanted, even though they're usually laid back with that kind of stuff.
I doubt any of that is actually helpful, but I'd recommend you check out

You must be registered to see the links

, as he did create atmospheres that resemble the skyrimverse with daz

 

[FranceToast]

I'd recommend you check out

You must be registered to see the links

, as he did create atmospheres that resemble the skyrimverse with daz

Thanks for the recommendation-that looks pretty cool! My idea is not exactly a VR experience, but similar in that it might take place in such an alternate world. Rebuilding Skyrim just for one scene does seem pretty daunting though, lol.

 

[DarthSeduction]

There's actually very little, legal wise, that a company can do to you if you simply use their names in your work. They can Trademark their logos, but they can't claim copyright or anything on names and titles like that. There are real reasons to avoid using them, but for the most part the people who do are doing it wrong. The real reason to avoid real world items is to make your story feel unique, not break immersion by making someone question whether or not Pepsi exists in your universe. But when people use silly nicknames for those things, it essentially causes the same reaction. Google, specifically, it's probably better to include than not to, since its simply in our vernacular at this point. It's almost as common to hear someone say, "I'm gonna google that," as it is to hear, "I'm gonna look that up."

That said, there are some times when it's really a good thing to use real world things in your universe. If you want to easily make your characters relatable, one way to do that is to make the bands they like, or the films they enjoy, real world things. Having a character geek out over who's gonna win in a fight, batman or vader, is a good way to signal to the audience who this character is in a limited amount of time. This can also be done with silly nicknames for the items in question, but again, so long as you don't actually show the logos or anything, you should be good.

As to your question about Skyrim, if you just mean a single frame, especially viewed through a screen and preferably, without the logo, you'd be fine. If you want to do an entire scene, multiple frames in the world of, you're treading dangerous water. Parody law would protect you for simply saying you were in Skyrim, but actually using Skyrim's assets would not be protected. Machinima gets away with it because they aren't a threat to them, but actually free advertising. Sadly, companies are less likely to see porn games as free advertising.

 

[GuyFreely]

I think most people err on the side of caution when it comes to legal matters. It's easier to make your character use the Webfind search engine because being made to change it later for some reason is extra work. You can take the stance of fuck it, I'm making a porn game, who gives a shit? But that could come back to bite you. The average person isn't going to give two shits if you don't have name brands involved.

As far as using Skyrim for a VN, I tend to think you could argue transformative artistic license. Skyrim isn't a VN at it's core. It's an RPG and it's built on a custom engine. If you lifted assets from Skyrim and stuck them in unity to make an RPG, that'd be asking for trouble. Basically, you aren't repackaging Skyrim and saying, here buy my Skyedge game. You are using it as a tool to create scenes for use as a story telling device. Now it would be muddier if you took someone's art. Let say you took a manga or comic book and rewrote all the dialogue and rearranged the images. You are basically creating a "competing" product in the same genre as the original aka. ripping them off. In this way, I think the lifeselector games that copy porn scenes is pretty dicey legally.

I think the main argument to be made by youtubers/streamers playing games is that they aren't delivering the experience of playing the game. It's transformative because a different person would play it differently. Some game companies disagree with this idea, especially linear story games. I think most companies are willing to let it slide as a form of advertising.

 

[FranceToast]

The real reason to avoid real world items is to make your story feel unique, not break immersion by making someone question whether or not Pepsi exists in your universe. But when people use silly nicknames for those things, it essentially causes the same reaction. "

This is actually my exact issue, lol. It kind of breaks my feeling of immersion when they use silly names, but maybe it isn't a big deal, in terms of just being safe.

 

[FranceToast]

If you lifted assets from Skyrim and stuck them in unity to make an RPG, that'd be asking for trouble. Basically, you aren't repackaging Skyrim and saying, here buy my Skyedge game. You are using it as a tool to create scenes for use as a story telling device.

Right-my (very hazy idea) was to just grab a couple of 2-D screens as an unexpected encounter, like accidentally falling into the game and ending up in Whiterun Marketplace having Ysolda ask me for a mammoth tusk or something, LOL.

 

[GuyFreely]

Right-my (very hazy idea) was to just grab a couple of 2-D screens as an unexpected encounter, like accidentally falling into the game and ending up in Whiterun Marketplace having Ysolda ask me for a mammoth tusk or something, LOL.

I would say you can probably get away with it, but I would avoid proper names and things like that. So it can totally be Ysolda, but maybe don't say her name? It's tricky if you want to actually reference Skyrim proper. It's probably still fine, but it rides the line a lot closer. Like "Oh shit, I'm in Whiterun!"

 

[OhWee]

Fair use actually gives you a bit of latitude r.e. what you can use, but it's a moving target, and depending on the amount of other people's material you are using it can land you in hot water.

That being said, I'd recommend staying away from Disney or Paramount (Star Trek) stuff, as those two entities are particularly active in enforcing their IP rights these days. Just this week, CBS/Paramount came down on someone that was building a 3D Enterprise D environment so that people could virtually stroll through the Enterprise D. It was a 'free' endeavor, but nonetheless the 'Cease and Desist' was invoked by CBS.

Yes Paramount does have the 'fan film' guidelines, but they are simply guidelines, and CBS can choose to enforce/protect their IP anytime they want, guidelines or no.

There are other companies that are rather active in enforcing their IPs (Nintendo, etc.). Others can cite their own examples, I'm just making the point here.

You are better off 'parodying' brands (say Happy Cola instead of Coca Cola), as then you can claim a bit more artistic license, but if you are making money off of your efforts, that's when the big companies start becoming more concerned. If the brand involved feels that you are diminishing the value of their brand though - yeah that's lawyer territory.

So a more appropriate questions are, what is value of the IP you are looking to borrow from? Why are you borrowing from someone else's IP instead of creating your own thing? If this is a 'well those Overwatch characters are really sexy so I wanted to see them in sexy situations' thing, yeah there's a market for that, but of course if the creators take issue with what you did...

There are bucaneer sites/forums such as this one that can make such things available on the downlow, but if you are trying to make Patreon dollars off of such 'parody' works, yeah do so at your own risk.

If you are bound and determined to do this anyways, yeah do a LOT of reading on fair use, and don't assume that just because someone else did something similar that you are safe. Companies can be rather random r.e. when and how they choose to protect their IPs when others 'borrow' from them, so keep that in mind. DMCA takedowns can really ruin your day, and if you were 'in the right' yeah then having to spend time arguing with Youtube or whomever that fair use applies in your situation is annoying.

The internet is a massive place, so you can always hide in anonymity, but if you get noticed by someone that is with or reaches out to a company or author/artist...

It's best to just do your own thing, but I get that people like playing around in other people's sandboxes too. Just remember that nothing is guaranteed on this front. Some companies may appreciate you elevating the exposure of their brand, although they may never admit that, others will be looking at the dollar signs and if they can squeeze some out of you, or they just simply won't want their IP infringed upon, period.

 

[anne O'nymous]

There's actually very little, legal wise, that a company can do to you if you simply use their names in your work.

They still can sue you because you give a bad image of their product, but for this you need to effectively give a bad image of it. I mean that naming Coca in your game is not enough. The effect on the image is not negative just because even perverts like the product.
But using a Coca bottle to violate a girl, this give a bad image and you can be sued for this. The object don't even need to looks like the product for this. You can take a generic smartphone, as long as you said that it's an iPhone, if you use it to violate the girl, Apple can (and will) sue you.

This said, you missed something here. The question is not "can they legally sue you", but "will they sue you". Legally, Apple can't sue you because you said "iPhone" in your game. But personally I'll never try it, because chance are high that they'll not care about the Law and start a legal action against you. They are a big company with $US billion annual benefits, while you are a poor guy relying on Patreon to cover your expenses.
They know well that they will surely not win the case, but they don't care, it's not what they want to do. They just want you to stop using the name of their product ; whatever by asking it gently or by breaking you, they'll achieve it. The same happened with Nintendo. Most of the legal claim they made were falling under fair use, still they did it, knowing that the guy at the other side will not be strong enough to fight back.

They can Trademark their logos, but they can't claim copyright or anything on names and titles like that.

It's the opposite. They can copyright their logo, but just trademark the names. This said it change nothing to what you expressed. Trademark just prevent the use of the name by other companies, but just limit the use by common people.

Google, specifically, it's probably better to include than not to, since its simply in our vernacular at this point. It's almost as common to hear someone say, "I'm gonna google that," as it is to hear, "I'm gonna look that up."

It's because the name end being integrated to common language as word/verb. But there's many issues here. Firstly not all Laws are equal in regard of this particular case. Secondly it don't change the fact that the name can be registered or trademarked (unless justice said so) and so some things are still not permit ; you can't use the home page of any search engine and name it "google". Thirdly it's a local thing, not all countries see "Thermos" (beyond many possible examples) as a common word and not just a registered or trademarked name.

As to your question about Skyrim, if you just mean a single frame, especially viewed through a screen and preferably, without the logo, you'd be fine. If you want to do an entire scene, multiple frames in the world of, you're treading dangerous water.

It will depend of the concerned country. Fair use is a common thing in Law, but its application vary depending of the country. To this you must take in count the "length" of your fair use in regard of the "length" of the original. If my memory don't betray me, for music in France fair use limit is to 15 seconds. But obviously you'll have more problem is it's fair use of a 30 seconds music, than if it's fair use of a 1 hours modern symphony.
So, in regard of Skyrim, he should be good as long as it's a small animation.

Parody law would protect you for simply saying you were in Skyrim,

There's no real thing as "parody law" (even in the US Law). It's a subdivision of fair use and it will apply only if it's effectively a parody.
There's a game available here where the young sister pass her time daydreaming that she's in a MMORGP universe where her lust for her brother is the main villain. This could have been done in any effectively existing universe, because it's a parody ; the universe is used as a symbol of the fight, not as itself. But if she were just dreaming that she lived in this universe, then it would have been just fair use, and couldn't have been done more than once and with more than few panels.

but actually using Skyrim's assets would not be protected. Machinima gets away with it because they aren't a threat to them, but actually free advertising.

It's not exactly this. Machinima is clear because it's either an homage or a parody. They use Skyrim's assets, but they use them inside the game itself, which is perfectly legal. What is not protected is if, by example, you take assets from Skyrim then import them in Daz3D and use them in your rendered scenes.
It's legal to use the game the way you want ; well, as long as you don't use it for illegal actions, but still it's not Bethesda that can sue you in this case. It can be legal to show the use you made of the game, depending of the fact it's harmless or not for the image of the game and the right owner(s). But it's totally illegal to use part of the game outside of the game.

 

[DarthSeduction]

It's the opposite. They can copyright their logo, but just trademark the names. This said it change nothing to what you expressed. Trademark just prevent the use of the name by other companies, but just limit the use by common people.

So, I looked it up again, because as someone who's kinda always had aspirations to write, I've looked into the exact topic of using brand names in my works of fiction. And apparently, both are trademarkable, not copyright. That said, the portion you said about preventing other companies and merely limiting use by common people. Again, in a work of fiction it's very hard to pursue this. Companies can face hefty fines if they can't produce a valid reason that the use of their trademark in this instance was in some way harmful to their company image. They might have an argument if you make a game set in a mcdonald's wherein the employee's are fucking in the kitchen and putting their special sauce in the food, etc. But if your character just visits a mcdonald's, or mentions visiting mcdonald's that suit would be deemed frivolous and thrown out, possibly resulting in fines for the company.

It will depend of the concerned country. Fair use is a common thing in Law, but its application vary depending of the country. To this you must take in count the "length" of your fair use in regard of the "length" of the original. If my memory don't betray me, for music in France fair use limit is to 15 seconds. But obviously you'll have more problem is it's fair use of a 30 seconds music, than if it's fair use of a 1 hours modern symphony.

You're right, I didn't directly address this, and were he trying to use Youtube or something, I would have, as there are people trolling Youtube to launch DMCA claims, which they then sell to the copyright holder. He's far less likely to have that happen for a scene hidden in his indie porn game. Impossible? No, very few things are impossible, but the chances are low enough that length really isn't what he'd have to worry about. If his game went viral and those scenes were in it, no matter how long they were, Nintendo, Disney, Paramount, etc would have a lawsuit up their asses so fast. There's no guarantee about Bethesda doing the same, as they've mostly got a reputation of being good to the community and allowing fair use regularly, but the threat, considering the location of the content, pornography, makes it more likely that they'd act to silence it, even if they were wrong.

There's no real thing as "parody law" (even in the US Law). It's a subdivision of fair use and it will apply only if it's effectively a parody.

Semantics, it's exactly how you say, and this section of fair use would be referred to as the law regarding parody.

There's a game available here where the young sister pass her time daydreaming that she's in a MMORGP universe where her lust for her brother is the main villain. This could have been done in any effectively existing universe, because it's a parody ; the universe is used as a symbol of the fight, not as itself. But if she were just dreaming that she lived in this universe, then it would have been just fair use, and couldn't have been done more than once and with more than few panels.

That is not true. Parody is not so cut and dry as all that, and as I'll get to when addressing your next point, this would be argued on a totally different grounds by the trademark/copyright holder.

It's not exactly this. Machinima is clear because it's either an homage or a parody. They use Skyrim's assets, but they use them inside the game itself, which is perfectly legal. What is not protected is if, by example, you take assets from Skyrim then import them in Daz3D and use them in your rendered scenes.

If you use their established world, even as an homage, they can, and will, argue that your project counts as a derivative of their work. I can't simply write and sell a story based in the Star Wars, or Harry Potter universes. Parody is not clearly defined, so some things get by, but other things do not. If you wrote a serious porn comic, but based that comic in Skyrim, and either drew it yourself, or rendered your own models to serve as the characters, you'd be in parody territory. If you modify their game to add sex to it and then take screenshots in game to make up their game's content, they'd be in murky territory. Some lawsuits of this nature win, some lose, and when they lose, the next step is usually to buy it and then buy the rights to making any porn parody of their work. Now, if you can afford to fight them, sure, take that risk, but if you can't, you're better off not poking the bear.

It's legal to use the game the way you want ; well, as long as you don't use it for illegal actions, but still it's not Bethesda that can sue you in this case. It can be legal to show the use you made of the game, depending of the fact it's harmless or not for the image of the game and the right owner(s). But it's totally illegal to use part of the game outside of the game.

I don't know what you mean by "Its not bethesda that can sue you in this case..." They should be the only one who can. Again, what is and isn't fair use is not so cut and dry, and there are many areas where this can work either for or against you.

 

[FranceToast]

If his game went viral

LOL, I am pretty sure if I ever even finish this it will have an audience of about three people if I'm lucky I am mostly just using this as a creative personal outlet-not even sure if it will be worth Patreoning it.

If you wrote a serious porn comic, but based that comic in Skyrim, and either drew it yourself, or rendered your own models to serve as the characters, you'd be in parody territory.

I guess the safest thing for me (if I pursue this) is to just try to recreate a recognizable scene from scratch.
My original idea was to suddenly appear outside Whiterun's obviously recognizable gates, using a screen grab of the guard and his "halt-gates are closed with dragons about" text, and mimicking the responses (since you, the player has probably played it.) Then cutting to a screen grab of the market, with Ysolda for example, and then screen grabs of various poses, etc...But seems like the safest approach would be to rebuild it all, which seems kind of crazy, lol.

 

[OhWee]

OK, never having played Skyrim, I had to google Whiterun gates to get an idea of what you were talking about.

Looking over the gate structure, you might be able to reconstruct most of it using Daz products, such as this one:

You must be registered to see the links

The problem comes in with the partially completed/destroyed wall above the gate. You could probably avoid having to show the top of the wall using camera angles.

As suggested, you could hand draw the structure (using a pen/stylus, photoshop brushes, etc), and place the image on a plane as a backdrop (or do the superimpose characters over background thing in Renpy). That might not fit your artistic style for the game though.

You could also check various royalty free pic sites to see if there is an image that is fairly close to what you need.
Here is one such example (did a search for castle gate just for fun):

You must be registered to see the links

Sure, you won't find/be able to build an exact match, but you might be able to come up with something fairly close that you can zoom in on (say just the gate door)...

Just a thought.

 

[FranceToast]

OK, never having played Skyrim, I had to google Whiterun gates to get an idea of what you were talking about.

LOL, I may be drastically overestimating the familiarity with Skyrim, TBH.

You could also check various royalty free pic sites to see if there is an image that is fairly close to what you need.
Here is one such example (did a search for castle gate just for fun):

You must be registered to see the links

Thanks!

 

[OhWee]

I've definitely heard of Skyrim, just never felt the need to play it.

 

[anne O'nymous]

Again, in a work of fiction it's very hard to pursue this.
[cut]
[...] but the chances are low enough that length really isn't what he'd have to worry about.

I agree, but the problem is still in the difference between being able to, and doing it.
Unless justice directly claim that the lawsuit is not receivable, there's company which will not care if they have to spend $US 50.000, even knowing that they'll loose. As long as it will result by people fearing to use their brands' name in their games, for them it's money well used. And most of the time they don't even have to spend this much, because the guy at the other side will back off after the first e-mail and/or his ban from Patreon, youtube, or whatever.
It doesn't mean that authors should avoid using brand's name in their game, just that there's some companies which must be avoided.

Semantics, it's exactly how you say, and this section of fair use would be referred to as the law regarding parody.

I know that it's semantics, but we are talking about Law here, and semantics is a big part of it. If you receive a copyright infringement notice and respond that your work fall under the parody law, you'll have less chance to reach to an accord, that if you say that it's a parody and so is Fair Use.
In the first case, you'll be seen like someone who don't really know what he talk about, and so can probably easily be fooled. In the second one, you'll show some knowledge, and the guy from the juridic service will be more cautious. The impression you make is your best insurance in case like this.

If you use their established world, even as an homage, they can, and will, argue that your project counts as a derivative of their work. I can't simply write and sell a story based in the Star Wars, or Harry Potter universes.

Machinima don't use Skyrim world, they use Skyrim. It can't be compared to anything else except other games, because it do not respond to the same concept. They aren't writing a story based on Skyrim, they are in Skyrim writing a story based on the universe they are in.
What would have been illegal here, is if they used Skyrim, but a modded Skyrim that absolutely not correspond to the effective game. Then it would have been illegal use of the game engine. It also would have been illegal if they had used another game, modded it to looks like Skyrim, then tell a Skyrim story by using it.
But using Skyrim to tell a story based on Skyrim, there's absolutely nothing illegal in this. Like there's nothing illegal in writing a story based on the Star Wars or Harry Potter universes. Same, there's nothing illegal in the fact to make this story public, as long as it's harmless for the brand name.
The only thing illegal is to earn money by doing so ; yet, the rights owner can choose to not take action against you, seeing the money you earn as a just compensation for your works and the homage you give to the universe. And that's, apparently, the case for Machinima.

Parody is not clearly defined,[...]

I'm not familiar enough about the US Law, but I think that

You must be registered to see the links

can be trusted on this subject :
"The key factor for a parody to qualify as fair use is whether the parody is transformative -- it adds something new, with a further purpose or different character altering the copied work with new expression, meaning, or message."

It's, of course, subject to variation, because the alteration is itself subject to interpretation ; by example, just changing the color of skin will not be enough alteration to fall under parody. Still it seem to be clearly defined ; opened to interpretation, but not opened to any interpretations.

If you wrote a serious porn comic, but based that comic in Skyrim, and either drew it yourself, or rendered your own models to serve as the characters, you'd be in parody territory.

Yes, and there's few tumblr that do so. Still they can only be shutdown by justice if Bethesda, then justice, think that it's harmful for the image of their game.

If you modify their game to add sex to it and then take screenshots in game to make up their game's content, they'd be in murky territory.

No. With the same limitation that above regarding the image, you're just using the game. That's what you didn't understood in the rest of my comment. A company can't sue you for the use you make with their product. Even when the ToS claim that you must use it as a good family's father, they can't in fact really enforce this.
If Bethesda sue you for this, it will be because they see it as harmful for the image of the game. They have almost no chance to win if they sue you because you didn't used the game like they thought is should be used.
It's the same if you use a screwdriver to kill someone, the manufacturer can't sue you because their product aren't supposed to be a weapon. Or if you use a bottle of Coca to make your girl climax (clean it before, please), Coca can't sue you because it's not designed to be a sex toy.

I don't know what you mean by "Its not bethesda that can sue you in this case..." They should be the only one who can.

See above. The manufacturer/seller of a product can't sue you for the use you made of it, but the victim or the state can do it, depending of what you did.
If you make a bomb by using fertilizer, Mosanto can't sue you (well, they'll still try I'm sure), but the government can because you intend to use it as a terrorist weapon. You'll not be sued because you misused the product, but because of what you did with it.

 

[zerozip0]

... There's no guarantee about Bethesda doing the same, as they've mostly got a reputation of being good to the community and allowing fair use regularly, but the threat, considering the location of the content, pornography, makes it more likely that they'd act to silence it, even if they were wrong. ...

As soon as I read that I just had to comment on this. My view of Bethesda is quite different! They will charge into a legal battle if they get a tiny opportunity to do so. They will find a way to win the war even though they have lost all the battles. If you need proof look up the legal battle for the Fallout MMO between Interplay(creators of the fallout brand) and Bethesda.
Bethesda lost the two first battles and even the appeal for the second battle and still ends on top in 2012 when Interplay sells the rights to the Fallout MMO to Bethesda. ALL references to the fallout world had to be taken out of the fallout mmo that Interplay had been working on if they wanted to publish it at all!

So my advice is to stay far away from anything that refers to any game title owned by Bethesda.

 

[Volta]

I think mentioning something from a game or intellectual property other than your own is relatively safe no matter what, depicting(showing screenshots for example) it in a game that earns you no money is less safe but since at worst it's defamation and since they have nothing to gain from legal action i doubt they would waste the money. The problems arise when you use content from their IP's and earn money from it, you could argue it's a legit parody ect. but if you depict something that isn't yours and make money from it they have an excuse to come after you, justified or otherwise.

IMO one screenshot is safe, the odds of them finding out are minimal and even if they do they most likely won't care, i think they'd be far more concerned about the plethora of sex mods available for skyrim than a single porn game mentioning them and i have not heard of a single adult mod being spoken against or even acknowledged.

 

[FranceToast]

IMO one screenshot is safe, the odds of them finding out are minimal and even if they do they most likely won't care, i think they'd be far more concerned about the plethora of sex mods available for skyrim than a single porn game mentioning them and i have not heard of a single adult mod being spoken against or even acknowledged.

And there are a ton of them!

 

[DarthSeduction]

The only thing illegal is to earn money by doing so ; yet, the rights owner can choose to not take action against you, seeing the money you earn as a just compensation for your works and the homage you give to the universe. And that's, apparently, the case for Machinima.

You say that as if the assumption of this thread is not that the op intends to sell the included product. Again, homages are not necessarily protected. Something like Skyrim Cops, a well known Skyrim Machinima, gets by on the fact that it is clearly intended as a parody, there's no distinction. Telling and profiting from a story that is supposed to take place in the elder scrolls universe, no matter whether you run it in their engine or not is not protected if you're intending to profit from it.

No. With the same limitation that above regarding the image, you're just using the game. That's what you didn't understood in the rest of my comment. A company can't sue you for the use you make with their product. Even when the ToS claim that you must use it as a good family's father, they can't in fact really enforce this.

Rick and Morty was originally written as a parody/spin-off of Back to the Future and rick was Doc and Morty was Marty Mcfly. They were forced to change that, resulting in the Grandpa Rick character and the family theereby attached. What you're suggesting is cut and dry is very much not. If your assertion that it was fair use to use Whiterun and Ysolda were true then it would be just as legal to use Doc and Marty, but it isn't legal, so neither would the scenario which OP is asking about. Maybe in some abstract you could make an argument for a specific use, but it is very much a case by case decision.

It's, of course, subject to variation, because the alteration is itself subject to interpretation ; by example, just changing the color of skin will not be enough alteration to fall under parody. Still it seem to be clearly defined ; opened to interpretation, but not opened to any interpretations.

Which is what I was getting at with saying it isn't something that is clearly defined. Precedent helps, so if you have done your research and can find an equivalent case in which the verdict went in the favor of the parody creator, then you have a better chance in court, but otherwise it's going to be up to the judge's personal discretion as to what constitutes a transformative work. I again point to Rick and Morty, and the multiverse addition is pretty damn transformative, considering Back to the Future assumed a linear timeline. Meanwhile, Skyrim Cops gets away with both parodying cops, the television show in the US that it copies the format from verbatim, and the use of the skyrim world and lore, because it's clear, I guess, that the use is intended merely to get a laugh, and not to defame either property.

See above. The manufacturer/seller of a product can't sue you for the use you made of it, but the victim or the state can do it, depending of what you did.

Who do you think the victim of copyright infringement is? I assure you, when you infringe on someones intellectual property, the lawsuit comes from the person who owns that intellectual property.