As I stated here, I think you are correct that fair use protection for MoR turns substantially on whether MoR is interpreted as parody of canon Potterverse.

Regarding settlements, I agree that there is no legal difference based on the amount of settlement. My point was that the fact of a settlement was not evidence of who won the court case, particularly because the appellate court discussed likelihood of success on the merits in evaluating the preliminary injunction.

Edit: and if you think "likelihood of success on the merits" is a prediction about the future rather than a legally binding statement of the content of the law, then I assert my expertise to say that you are legally incorrect.