嘲諷性模仿是一種以幽默反諷的方式利用他人作品，並具有批評意義之藝術創作。為使讀者能夠辨識出模仿對象，嘲諷性模仿者常利用被模仿作品最有特色的部分，因而有侵害著作權之疑慮。嘲諷性模仿是一種藝術創作，享有藝術自由，被利用作品的著作權人格權與著作財產權，也受憲法位階的人格權與財產權保障。故嘲諷性模仿是否侵害著作權之問題，基本上是一種基本權衝突，立法者與法院應本於利益衡量之立場調和此種衝突。就此美國與德國均有不少足資借鑑之案例。美國實務上係以在著作權法上之是否為「合理使用」作為解決問題的方法；德國則以是否屬著作權法第二十四條之「自由利用」為解決模式，二者皆為解決基本權衝突的方法。 我國著作權法第十七條「禁止不當變更權」規定中，有「致損害其名譽」之要件，足以提供法院針對嘲諷性模仿之藝術自由與著作人格權衝突為利益衡量之依據。至於嘲諷性模仿之藝術自由與著作財產權之衝突，我國著作權法第六十五條第二項之四個合理使用之判斷要素，可作為利益衡量之判斷標準。雖然我國著作權法對於嘲諷性模仿是否侵害著作財產權之問題，有適當的條文可以適用，不過基於對藝術自由之重視，與藝術創作之鼓勵，本文認為應於著作權法新增條文，規定基於藝術創作之目的所為之著作利用，得主張合理使用。

Abstract Parody is an ironic imitation of another work for the purpose of criticism and humor. A parody must inevitably make use of another creative work because to be effective a parody must make the audience realize the parodied work. The reference to another artist's work, which often entails copying of the source, may constitute copyright infringement. Parody, as a method of criticism, may also injure an artist's honor or reputation by changing the content of the original work. Virtually, parody is an artistic creation and protected by artistic freedom. The author's moral rights and economic rights are also subject to constitutional protection. Therefore, the unauthorized use or copying of copyrighted material for parodic purposes lead to conflicts between the basic rights of the parodist and the copyright owners. The "fair use doctrine" of the American Copyright Act and the "free use" provision of the Copyright Act of Germany provide solutions to the problem of interest conflict, which can be good examples for us. Article 17 Copyright Act of Taiwan says "the author has the right to prohibit others from distorting, mutilating, modifying, or otherwise changing the content, form, or name of the work, thereby damaging the author's reputation." The words "thereby damaging the author's reputation" shows a request of interest balance. The Copyright Act of Taiwan enumerates in Article 65 II four "fair use factors" that must be analyzed to determine whether a particular use of a copyrighted work, such as a parody, is fair use. The four factors for determination of fair use are just a basis of the balance of the conflict between the copyright owner and the parodist. For the purpose of the artistic freedom, and regarding the interest in providing incentives to create more art, Copyright Act of Taiwan must add a new provision to refer to the fair use of the copyrighted works for the purpose of the artistic expression.