[Howlin]

I have actually seen this book; it most certainly IS a parody.

[JoeSixPack1]

If they sold that many books already it makes greedy, yet sound economic sense, to shake the copyright tree at least once.

[new cruelty]

I can just imagine it. "See Jane schlep. Schlep Jane schlep."

[sinanju]

Some people have no sense of humor.

Now what was all that about adultery and sexual orientation? Just part of growing up?

[Fiddlstix]

I have actually seen this book; it most certainly IS a parody.

Scr*w 'em if they can't take a joke!
(I like to have fun)

Click the Pic J

[roylene]

Would that mean the movie "Fun with Dick and Jane" is not a parody?

[Publius6961]

The parody book takes Dick and Jane into adulthood, where they're faced with problems like adultery, ailing parents and sexual orientation.

How thick does the dividing line need to be between parody and exploitation?
Sounds like a parasitic exploitation of recognizeable names for the perverts' agenda to me. More effective propaganda.

[Phsstpok]

I have actually seen this book; it most certainly IS a parody.

Absolutely correct application of copyright law dealing with parodies.

I now suggest the following parodies:

• Yogi and Boo Boo's gay wedding
• Bugs Bunny - traitor and war criminal
• Wile E. Coyote - why selling meth to the Road Runner was a mistake
• Wolf Blitzer: male prostitute
• Ted Turner Tells All - how I paid for sex with Jane Fonda, got screwed by Steve Case and lost my company
• SI(ck) - the Michael Moore swim suit issue

I bet they won't like their properties being used in such a manner.  But hey, it's parody.