Can You Use Bluey in a Political Cartoon? Copyright, Parody and Satire Explained - Ep 46
What happens when Australia's favourite blue heeler becomes caught up in a political controversy?
The ABC has called for Pauline Hanson's One Nation party to remove political cartoons featuring Bluey, raising some fascinating questions about copyright, parody, satire and who actually has the right to enforce intellectual property.
In this episode of Elise Explains IP, Elise Steegstra unpacks the controversy and explains why making something funny doesn't automatically make it lawful — but why copyright owners can't necessarily prevent every use of their characters either.
Under Australian copyright law, there is a specific exception for fair dealing for the purpose of parody or satire. But what does that actually mean? And can a political cartoon rely on that exception even if it isn't making fun of the original character?
We also explore another interesting aspect of the dispute: the ABC broadcasts Bluey, but doesn't own the underlying intellectual property. So who can take legal action when a character is used without permission?
In this episode, we cover:
- What sparked the dispute between the ABC and One Nation over Bluey.
- Whether fictional characters can be protected by copyright.
- The difference between parody and satire under Australian law.
- Why fair dealing is not the same as American-style fair use.
- Whether copyright owners can prevent uses they consider offensive or damaging to their reputation.
- The difference between owning copyright and holding a licence.
- How trade marks, moral rights and misleading or deceptive conduct might also become relevant.
- What businesses should consider before using popular characters, memes or other people's creative work in their marketing.
The key takeaway
Copyright is a powerful form of protection, but it isn't absolute. A copyright owner doesn't automatically have the right to prevent every criticism, joke or satirical use of their work.
Equally, describing something as a parody, satire or meme doesn't automatically make it lawful.
For business owners, the important thing is understanding what you're using, who owns it, and whether you have the right to use it.
Resources and further reading
- ABC News — Bluey, One Nation and the Senate estimates controversy (28 October 2026)
- Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) — section 41A, parody and satire
- Australian Copyright Council
- Related episode: Moral Rights (available in the Elise Explains IP episode archive).
Want to understand the IP in your own business?
Start with my free IP Audit tool, designed to help you identify the intellectual property your business owns, uses and relies on.
You can also book a strategy call through elisesteegstra.com.
Disclaimer: This podcast is intended for general educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. You should obtain advice tailored to your circumstances before acting on any information discussed in this episode.