Don't worry, you can upload (with restriction).
If you look at the wikipedia page for Ayu, they used pictures and music samples. The pictures are not in its original size and quality. The music samples are very short and the quality is low. All these are copyrighted but their use are not illegal because the nature of it is to just inform the reader, rather than to simply copy and upload the original for everyone to download. This is an example of "fair use".
Another example is everyone's avatar or signature here with pictures. All of these in some degree are copyrighted. But we can excercise our right to fair use by making the image smaller with lesser quality and with lots of modification. (Though uploading the original image here is illegal).
If you want to make a legit website, ask yourself if its of fair use. You can use short samples from songs with lesser quality. The same goes for images (photobooks, magazines, booklets, etc.). You can transform the music into midi files (I haven't seen those in a while). You can make your own covers and remixes or take others if you have their permission. If you know music, sheet music is fine. You can make your own avatars or custom signatures or flash animation. You can take a few screenshots of a live concert or of a CM, but with small size and less quality. Or you can do the same with Ayuready and make a summary of what happened in the episode.
Yes, you can upload these things depending on how you use it.
The following site is about copyright and fair use.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJn_jC4FNDo
This is actually an informative comedy. The video is made up of entirely of copyrighted characters and clips from movies. However, the nature of this video is totally different from its original that the company, in this case Disney, cannot sue the maker of this video.
I hope this helps. The concept of fair use is a tricky subject since it is a gray area between what's legal and not legal. Because of that, it is a very common dispute in court.
For a real life current example...
Spoiler:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...MNU412FKRL.DTL
In this particular case, August 2008, a mother made and uploaded a 29 second clip video of her 13 month old son dancing to Prince's song "Let's Go Crazy" on Youtube. Eventually, Youtube deleted the vid as ordered by Universal Music, who owned the copyright. Then Youtube restored the vid since the mom said it was legal and then the mom sued Universal Music. This happen because I quote the site, "the federal judge ruled that copyright holders can't order one of their songs removed from the Web without first checking to see if the excerpt was so small and innocuous that it was legal".
Why was this fair use? Several reasons, the nature of the vid is totally different. It's really more about her son dancing than the song. It's only 29 seconds. The sound quality of the song is much lower. The commercial value is little to none. And as the judge said, it's small and innocuous.
Just keep in mind copyright laws may be different from country to country. I'm speaking from the U.S.