What Congress and the courts ultimately decide may determine how such activity continues both online and in the court of public opinion. What you get are these obtuse manifestations of the law where it's technically illegal to share something as innocuous as an Internet meme. However, these laws work to protect the financial interests of corporations that obtain and own the rights to such works. Tom Petty and his label, and also Sam Smith and his label, both parties with the financial means and legal resources to negotiate a matter, such as this, and potentially mount a costly and time-consuming lawsuit if it would be economically beneficial for them to do so.
It would seem that many people struggle to understand why large corporations, aided by financial incentives to uphold the law, control the law so much. Critical groups often discuss the philosophical, economic, or social reasons for such laws and the implementations of laws, the benefits of which they claim do not justify the costs of politics to society. The ability of legislators to draft, debate and enact sensible bills has been tested by technology, which has evolved more rapidly than they could have imagined. Therefore, this law was against people who used their devices or digital platforms to infringe on other people.
But fair use grew out of our common law system and its application by the courts is complicated and unpredictable.