That's an example where you could have an exception created for parody. There is, in fact, no clear exception for parody in our Canadian legislation. Some argue that it is embedded in fair dealing; others say it is not. This is one of the problems with fair dealing: you never know.
You never know. Even if it's open-ended, as a user, you never know whether you're in or you're out. So there are two ways of approaching providing, ensuring, access when we're actually dealing with a policy position where we feel we need to ensure and allow access as opposed to it being an issue of payment.
If access needs to be provided for a work, for example, in the case of parody, there is a justifiable public policy reason why access should be allowed. Then you could create what I call “four corners exceptions”. What are they? Those are exceptions that are defined in such a way that people know whether you're in the box or outside the box. If you're in the box, you don't need to worry as a user; you don't have to ask for authorization or pay. If you're outside of the box, then we're dealing in an area where you need to ask for authorization and, at times, payment as well.
Those are four corners exceptions and we have examples of them in our Copyright Act. So this is an example: for a good public policy reason, you create a four corners exception that says there's an exception for parody.