While fair use laws favor using less... "In a parody, the parodist is borrowing in order to comment upon the original work. A parodist is permitted to borrow quite a bit, even the heart of the original work, in order to conjure up the original work. That's because, as the Supreme Court has acknowledged, "the heart is also what most readily conjures up the [original] for parody, and it is the heart at which parody takes aim. " (Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music , 510 U.S. 569 (1994).)"
There's no 3-second rule in copyright, I think that's only when you drop something on the floor. People have been sued for less and cleared for more. There is no magical number. Seems to me that this is all about John's video popping up under "related videos" when people watch her videos. They just can't stand it. Copyright is the side issue. So let's admit what the real problem is, discuss our feelings, and figure out how we can heal one another? Sorry, I watched a few of her videos. Just as it isn't in anyone's best interest to go to court, I think the same can be said for messing with people who have the capability of posting much weirder (debatable) and copyright compliant video responses to "the University's" YouTube videos. We could make a month of it.
