HARRY POTTER ALTERNATIVE SOUNDRACK, FAIR USE UNDER COPYRIGHT LAW?

NOW THAT AIN'T HARRY POTTER

Another blow struck against the entertainment industry:  a 27-year-old comic-book artist from Austin, Texas, named Brad Neely, has created an "alternative soundtrack" to the first Harry Potter movie. Mr. Neely calls his soundtrack "Wizard People, Dear Reader,"  and it is played simultaneously with Warner Bros. "The Sorcerer's Stone."

In Mr. Neely's version, Hagrid, Harry Potter's giant, hairy friend, becomes Hagar, the Horrible, and Harry's fat cousin, Dudley, becomes Roast Beefy, the three main characters are child alcoholics, and Quidditch takes on sexual overtones. 

Is it copyright infringement?  One commentator doesn't believe so:

It is not clear that Neely's soundtrack violates the studio's copyright. Jonathan Zittrain, co-director of the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard Law School, said that while the copyright holder retains the rights to derivative works, it was possible that "Wizard People" was protected under the rules that allow "fair use" of copyrighted works for purposes such as criticism, comment and news reporting.

I don't buy it and I would imagine that Warner Bros. isn't buying the argument either.  Although Warner Bros. had "no comment", I would imagine that they are drafting a cease and desist quickly in order to quell the desire to make such "alternative soundtracks."  Unlike Mr. Zattrain, I can't see how comment and news reporting apply in this situation.  As far as criticism is concerned, it doesn't appear from a brief review of the file that Mr. Neely is criticizing or holding the file up for criticism -- rather, he has put together a rather crude adult version of the soundtrack. 

It will be interesting to see how this one plays out.  Any other thoughts out there?