>>1341900Putting text on a still image from a movie is video is transformative and doesn't qualify as using a substantial portion of the copyrighted entity. In the US that's fair use, fairly cut and dry. Putting text on a photograph like distracted boyfriend is transformative but also uses the entirety of the copyrighted entity. However, because using the entirety of that entity is necessary to achieve the purpose of the use, courts might not care, as in the 9th Circuit's ruling in Perfect 10 v.
Amazon.com. So, if Coco didn't have to worry about Japanese law, I think she'd be in the clear. I don't think it would ever be court-tested. That's the problem with fair use, it's ambiguous and mostly up to courts to decide on a case-by-case basis.
Japan is different and has a lot of exemptions to its copyright law, which are mainly the same as what the US would consider fair use, but more clear cut and actually codified. In Coco's case, she'd likely be okay if she demonetized meme review, since that should fall under the non-commercial exemption. But it's not something she or Cover wants to chance, because in Japan copyright violation is a criminal matter, not a civil one like it still is in the US (albeit not for long).
