However, I don’t remember if any copyright was waived on the original 50 Shades fiction but there are often disclaimers on fan fiction such as “these characters are not mine but the property of Stephenie Meyer” or something like that. Could a waiver of copyright have occurred? Further, derivative works often have lesser copyright protection than original works of creation. In sum, there may be a suit here but I don’t think that the porn producers are arguing the right one. Hollywood Reporter
“UK research has found that reading is more relaxing than listening to music, going for a walk or having a cup of tea, reducing stress levels by 68 per cent. Cognitive neuropsychologist Dr David Lewis from the consultancy Mindlab International found that reading silently for just six minutes, slowed the heart rate and eased muscle tension in research volunteers” The Age
For instance, in regards to lyrics, he argues that as long as the lyrics are integral to the work, it is fair use. He also states that you can use public famous figures in your book without problem so long as it is a) an opinion or b) not believable. He then cites the famous Falwell case with Hustler, but that case was founded on parody, not simply because it was “not believable.” Nor does Rapp reference a false light tort or the right of publicity such as the famous Wendt v. Host International, Inc. case.
In sum, just be careful of listening to any lawyer on the internet. If you have a specific legal concern, go to a lawyer. If you get sued, you won’t have any protection if you say “But Paul Rapp on the internet said it was okay.”
As for Stephen King’s use of lyrics in his books? Take a look at the copyright page.