as how they responded. They were rude and insulting and she just asked for a donation to a local college. To respond in the way they did anyone would be upset and, out of principal, take legal action. They could have just said, sure we'll make the $130 donation and be happy, but they had to insult her instead. The magazine should donate 10 times the amount and fire the editor.

Parody has a very specific legal definition. IANAL but basically if you make some kind of derivative work that doesn't actively parody the object it's being derived from then it's just ripping off it's fame and style and you're not protected as a parody.

MacGruber is a parody... Micky Mouse pooping on GWB's head is not a parody.

So given the above information, would you please outline how you would explain this to children?

Step 1: Teach them critical thinking, instead of doctrine.

Step 2: There is no step 2.

Children should learn to think. With regard to controversial topics like copyright law or health care legislation, they should be encouraged to seek broad resources and to judge for themselves. They should never, under any circumstances, be indoctrinated into any belief. Not even beliefs about fair use, of which I am a rabid supporter.