The Electoral Commission's lawyer Austin Powell told Justice Denis Clifford satirists were safe if the effects of their satire was just to lampoon.
However, he said no form of artistic expression could get away with being a political advertisement without also including a promoter statement, which provided the name and address of the instigator of the advert.
"You can't carve out exemptions for songs, any more than you can for poems or limericks."
Watson and Jones have denied the song and video were advertisements.
Their lawyer Wendy Aldred said it was a humorous piece performed in a Monty Python style.
No reasonable person could anticipate having their views changed after hearing the song, she said.
The word advertisement was not intended to mean a satirical song written by a professional songwriter. Rather, it was an announcement to the public, she said.
If Watson were to add a promoter's statement, he would have to "sing his name and address" or stop singing and say it, which would be out of character with the blues style, Ms Aldred said.
The hearing continues.