Fair use - Knowledge

1227:. Lenz notified YouTube immediately that her video was within the scope of fair use, and she demanded that it be restored. YouTube complied after six weeks, rather than the two weeks required by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Lenz then sued Universal Music in California for her legal costs, claiming the music company had acted in bad faith by ordering removal of a video that represented fair use of the song. On appeal, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that a copyright owner must affirmatively consider whether the complained of conduct constituted fair use before sending a takedown notice under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, rather than waiting for the alleged infringer to assert fair use. 801 F.3d 1126 (9th Cir. 2015). "Even if, as Universal urges, fair use is classified as an 'affirmative defense,' we hold—for the purposes of the DMCA—fair use is uniquely situated in copyright law so as to be treated differently than traditional affirmative defenses. We conclude that because 17 U.S.C. § 107 created a type of non-infringing use, fair use is "authorized by the law" and a copyright holder must consider the existence of fair use before sending a takedown notification under § 512(c)." 1083:

the Android operating system to support the mobile device market. Oracle had sued Google in 2010 over both patent and copyright violations, but after two cycles, the case matter was narrowed down to whether Google's use of the definition and SSO of Oracle's Java APIs (determined to be copyrightable) was within fair use. The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled against Google, stating that while Google could defend its use in the nature of the copyrighted work, its use was not transformative, and more significantly, it commercially harmed Oracle as they were also seeking entry to the mobile market. However, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed this decision, deciding that Google's actions satisfy all four tests for fair use, and that granting Oracle exclusive rights to use Java APIs on mobile markets "would interfere with, not further, copyright's basic creativity objectives."

1185:

the original artwork was. Second, the photographs had already been published, diminishing the significance of their nature as creative works. Third, although normally making a "full" replication of a copyrighted work may appear to violate copyright, here it was found to be reasonable and necessary in light of the intended use. Lastly, the court found that the market for the original photographs would not be substantially diminished by the creation of the thumbnails. To the contrary, the thumbnail searches could increase the exposure of the originals. In looking at all these factors as a whole, the court found that the thumbnails were fair use and remanded the case to the lower court for trial after issuing a revised opinion on July 7, 2003. The remaining issues were resolved with a

1062:

uses cause few problems. A teacher who prints a few copies of a poem to illustrate a technique will have no problem on all four of the above factors (except possibly on amount and substantiality), but some cases are not so clear. All the factors are considered and balanced in each case: a book reviewer who quotes a paragraph as an example of the author's style will probably fall under fair use even though they may sell their review commercially; but a non-profit educational website that reproduces whole articles from technical magazines will probably be found to infringe if the publisher can demonstrate that the website affects the market for the magazine, even though the website itself is non-commercial.

1748:

eight Australian government inquiries which have considered the question of whether fair use should be adopted in Australia. Six reviews have recommended Australia adopt a "Fair Use" model of copyright exceptions: two enquiries specifically into the Copyright Act (1998, 2014); and four broader reviews (both 2004, 2013, 2016). One review (2000) recommended against the introduction of fair use and another (2005) issued no final report. Two of the recommendations were specifically in response to the stricter copyright rules introduced as part of the

945:, the Supreme Court stated that "when a commercial use amounts to mere duplication of the entirety of the original, it clearly supersedes the object of the original and serves as a market replacement for it, making it likely that cognizable market harm to the original will occur". In one instance, a court ruled that this factor weighed against a defendant who had made unauthorized movie trailers for video retailers, since his trailers acted as direct substitutes for the copyright owner's official trailers. 62: 843:

protect. This is not to claim that unpublished works, or, more specifically, works not intended for publication, do not deserve legal protection, but that any such protection should come from laws about privacy, rather than laws about copyright. The statutory fair use provision was amended in response to these concerns by adding a final sentence: "The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors."

764: 1585:

the pictures constituted fair use, such that he did not need permission to use the pictures or to pay royalties for his use. One of the pieces sold for $ 90,000. With regard to the works presented by Painter, the gallery where the pictures were showcased posted notices that "All images are subject to copyright." Several lawsuits were filed against Painter over the New Portraits exhibit. In 2024, Richard Prince and the galleries were ordered to pay $ 900,000 to the photographers.

531:, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include: 852: 1105:. With the help of an intellectual property lawyer, the creators of Loose Change successfully argued that a majority of the footage used was for historical purposes and was significantly transformed in the context of the film. They agreed to remove a few shots that were used as B-roll and served no purpose to the greater discussion. The case was settled and a potential multimillion-dollar lawsuit was avoided. 632:" reviewer may fairly cite largely from the original work, if his design be really and truly to use the passages for the purposes of fair and reasonable criticism. On the other hand, it is as clear, that if he thus cites the most important parts of the work, with a view, not to criticise, but to supersede the use of the original work, and substitute the review for it, such a use will be deemed in law a 557: 1521:, a case involving mass digitisation of millions of books from research library collections. As part of the ruling that found the book digitisation project was fair use, the judge stated "Google Books is also transformative in the sense that it has transformed book text into data for purposes of substantive research, including data mining and text mining in new areas". 1873:

legislated in the abstract. It is the very foundation of the digital age and a cornerstone of our economy," said Ed Black, President and CEO of CCIA. "Much of the unprecedented economic growth of the past ten years can actually be credited to the doctrine of fair use, as the Internet itself depends on the ability to use content in a limited and unlicensed manner."

4444: 1251:

protection. ... It is undisputed that Hoehn posted the entire work in his comment on the Website. ... wholesale copying does not preclude a finding of fair use. ... there is no genuine issue of material fact that Hoehn's use of the Work was fair and summary judgment is appropriate." On appeal, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that

1899:

academia shared stories about the importance of fair use to their community. The first Fair Use Week was so successful that in 2015 ARL teamed up with Courtney and helped organize the Second Annual Fair Use Week, with participation from many more institutions. ARL also launched an official Fair Use Week website, which was transferred from

747:

based on Prince's deposition testimony that he "don't really have a message," and that he was not "trying to create anything with a new meaning or a new message." However, the artist's intended message "is not dispositive." Instead, the focus of the transformative use inquiry is how the artworks will "reasonably be perceived".

834:, the aspect of whether the copied work has been previously published was considered crucial, assuming the right of the original author to control the circumstances of the publication of his work or preference not to publish at all. However, Judge Pierre N. Leval views this importation of certain aspects of France's 1379:

tried to justify his appropriation of Art Rogers' photograph "Puppies" in his sculpture "String of Puppies" with the same parody defense. Koons lost because his work was not presented as a parody of Rogers' photograph in particular, but as a satire of society at large. This was insufficient to render

1276:

was created in 2005, it was nearly impossible to obtain errors and omissions insurance for copyright clearance work that relied in part on fair use. This meant documentarians had either to obtain a license for the material or to cut it from their films. In many cases, it was impossible to license the

1184:

found in favor of the defendant, Arriba Soft. In reaching its decision, the court utilized the statutory four-factor analysis. First, it found the purpose of creating the thumbnail images as previews to be sufficiently transformative, noting that they were not meant to be viewed at high resolution as

1061:

The practical effect of the fair use doctrine is that a number of conventional uses of copyrighted works are not considered infringing. For instance, quoting from a copyrighted work in order to criticize or comment upon it or teach students about it, is considered a fair use. Certain well-established

1053:

use of non-public domain material, even in situations where a fair use defense would likely succeed. The simple reason is that the license terms negotiated with the copyright owner may be much less expensive than defending against a copyright suit, or having the mere possibility of a lawsuit threaten

750:

The transformativeness inquiry is a deceptively simple test to determine whether a new work has a different purpose and character from an original work. However, courts have not been consistent in deciding whether something is transformative. For instance, in Seltzer v. Green Day, Inc., 725 F.3d 1170

1780:

establishes fair dealing in Canada, which allows specific exceptions to copyright protection. In 1985, the Sub-Committee on the Revision of Copyright rejected replacing fair dealing with an open-ended system, and in 1986 the Canadian government agreed that "the present fair dealing provisions should

978:

ideas. One can plagiarize even a work that is not protected by copyright, for example by passing off a line from Shakespeare as one's own. Conversely, attribution prevents accusations of plagiarism, but it does not prevent infringement of copyright. For example, reprinting a copyrighted book without

905:

The fourth factor measures the effect that the allegedly infringing use has had on the copyright owner's ability to exploit his original work. The court not only investigates whether the defendant's specific use of the work has significantly harmed the copyright owner's market, but also whether such

358:. The fair use right is a general exception that applies to all different kinds of uses with all types of works. In the U.S., fair use right/exception is based on a flexible proportionality test that examines the purpose of the use, the amount used, and the impact on the market of the original work. 1747:

While Australian copyright exceptions are based on the Fair Dealing system, since 1998 a series of Australian government inquiries have examined, and in most cases recommended, the introduction of a "flexible and open" Fair Use system into Australian copyright law. From 1998 to 2017 there have been

1690:

Compared to the United States, Polish fair use distinguishes between private and public use. In Poland, when the use is public, its use risks fines. The defendant must also prove that his use was private when accused that it was not, or that other mitigating circumstances apply. Finally, Polish law

1082:

case revolves around the use of application programming interfaces (APIs) used to define functionality of the Java programming language, created by Sun Microsystems and now owned by Oracle Corporation. Google used the APIs' definition and their structure, sequence and organization (SSO) in creating

948:

Second, courts also consider whether potential market harm might exist beyond that of direct substitution, such as in the potential existence of a licensing market. This consideration has weighed against commercial copy shops that make copies of articles in course-packs for college students, when a

1716:

In determining whether art. 35-3(1) above applies to a use of copyrighted work, the following factors must be considered: the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is of a non profit nature; the type or purpose of the copyrighted work; the amount

1584:

in New York, entitled "New Portraits". His exhibit consisted of screenshots of Instagram users' pictures, which were largely unaltered, with Prince's commentary added beneath. Although no Instagram users authorized Prince to use their pictures, Prince argued that the addition of his own commentary

614:

The first factor is "the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes." To justify the use as fair, one must demonstrate how it either advances knowledge or the progress of the arts through the addition of something

361:

The doctrine of "fair use" originated in common law during the 18th and 19th centuries as a way of preventing copyright law from being too rigidly applied and "stifling the very creativity which law is designed to foster." Though originally a common law doctrine, it was enshrined in statutory law

1732:

Fair dealing allows specific exceptions to copyright protections. The open-ended concept of fair use is generally not observed in jurisdictions where fair dealing is in place, although this does vary. Fair dealing is established in legislation in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Singapore, India,

1250:

in a comment as part of an online discussion was unarguably fair use. Judge Pro noted that "Noncommercial, nonprofit use is presumptively fair. ... Hoehn posted the Work as part of an online discussion. ... This purpose is consistent with comment, for which 17 U.S.C. § 107 provides fair use

754:

Conversely, the Second Circuit came to the opposite conclusion in a similar situation in Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. v. Goldsmith, 11 F.4th 26 (2d. Cir. 2021). In that case, the Warhol Foundation sought a declaratory judgment that Warhol's use of one of Goldsmith's celebrity

746:

shed light on how transformative use is determined. "What is critical is how the work in question appears to the reasonable observer, not simply what an artist might say about a particular piece or body of work." The district court's conclusion that Prince's work was not transformative is partly

1898:

in February 2014, with a full week of activities celebrating fair use. The first Fair Use Week included blog posts from national and international fair use experts, live fair use panels, fair use workshops, and a Fair Use Stories Tumblr blog, where people from the world of art, music, film, and

584:

reviewer may fairly cite largely from the original work, if his design be really and truly to use the passages for the purposes of fair and reasonable criticism. On the other hand, it is as clear, that if he thus cites the most important parts of the work, with a view, not to criticize, but to

1613:

published a compilation of portions of over 40 nations' laws that explicitly mention fair use or fair dealing, and asserts that some of the fair dealing laws, such as Canada's, have evolved (such as through judicial precedents) to be quite close to those of the United States. This compilation

842:

of the artist) into American copyright law as "bizarre and contradictory" because it sometimes grants greater protection to works that were created for private purposes that have little to do with the public goals of copyright law, than to those works that copyright was initially conceived to

1872:

The study found that fair use dependent industries are directly responsible for more than eighteen percent of US economic growth and nearly eleven million American jobs. "As the United States economy becomes increasingly knowledge-based, the concept of fair use can no longer be discussed and

1641:

passed a new copyright law that included a U.S.-style fair use exception. The law, which took effect in May 2008, permits the fair use of copyrighted works for purposes such as private study, research, criticism, review, news reporting, quotation, or instruction or testing by an educational

1057:

Fair use rights take precedence over the author's interest. Thus the copyright holder cannot use a non-binding disclaimer, or notification, to revoke the right of fair use on works. However, binding agreements such as contracts or licence agreements may take precedence over fair use rights.

425:

for teaching and library archiving in the U.S. are located in a different section of the statute. A similar-sounding principle, fair dealing, exists in some other common law jurisdictions but in fact it is more similar in principle to the enumerated exceptions found under civil law systems.

1263:

In addition to considering the four fair use factors, courts deciding fair use cases also look to the standards and practices of the professional community where the case comes from. Among the communities are documentarians, librarians, makers of Open Courseware, visual art educators, and

1113:

also relied on fair use to feature several clips from copyrighted Hollywood productions. The director had originally planned to license these clips from their studio owners but discovered that studio licensing agreements would have prohibited him from using this material to criticize the

605:

has written, the statute does not "define or explain contours or objectives." While it "leav open the possibility that other factors may bear on the question, the statute identifies none." That is, courts are entitled to consider other factors in addition to the four statutory factors.

345:

material without having to first acquire permission from the copyright holder. Fair use is one of the limitations to copyright intended to balance the interests of copyright holders with the public interest in the wider distribution and use of creative works by allowing as a defense to

1823:

Within the United Kingdom, fair dealing is a legal doctrine that provides an exception to the nation's copyright law in cases where the copyright infringement is for the purposes of non-commercial research or study, criticism or review, or for the reporting of current events.

1405:" in a mocking rap version with altered lyrics. The Supreme Court viewed 2 Live Crew's version as a ridiculing commentary on the earlier work, and ruled that when the parody was itself the product rather than mere advertising, commercial nature did not bar the defense. The 1881:

Fair Use Week is an international event that celebrates fair use and fair dealing. Fair Use Week was first proposed on a Fair Use Allies listserv, which was an outgrowth of the Library Code of Best Practices Capstone Event, celebrating the development and promulgation of

1717:

and importance of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; the effect of the use of the copyrighted work upon the current market or the current value of the copyrighted work or on the potential market or the potential value of the copyrighted work.

1349:

of a copyrighted work have been sued for infringement by the targets of their ridicule, even though such use may be protected as fair use. These fair use cases distinguish between parodies, which use a work in order to poke fun at or comment on the work itself, and

781:

Although the Supreme Court has ruled that the availability of copyright protection should not depend on the artistic quality or merit of a work, fair use analyses consider certain aspects of the work to be relevant, such as whether it is fictional or non-fictional.

1413:, which they described as a broader social critique not intrinsically tied to ridicule of a specific work and so not deserving of the same use exceptions as parody because the satirist's ideas are capable of expression without the use of the other particular work. 925:

the case regarding President Ford's memoirs, the Supreme Court labeled the fourth factor "the single most important element of fair use" and it has enjoyed some level of primacy in fair use analyses ever since. Yet the Supreme Court's more recent announcement in

588:

In short, we must often ... look to the nature and objects of the selections made, the quantity and value of the materials used, and the degree in which the use may prejudice the sale, or diminish the profits, or supersede the objects, of the original work.

973:

and copyright infringement are related matters, they are not identical. Plagiarism (using someone's words, ideas, images, etc. without acknowledgment) is a matter of professional ethics, while copyright is a matter of law, and protects exact expression,

1267:

Such codes of best practices have permitted communities of practice to make more informed risk assessments in employing fair use in their daily practice. For instance, broadcasters, cablecasters, and distributors typically require filmmakers to obtain

580:, in which the defendant had copied 353 pages from the plaintiff's 12-volume biography of George Washington in order to produce a separate two-volume work of his own. The court rejected the defendant's fair use defense with the following explanation: 751:(9th Cir. 2013), the court found that Green Day's use of Seltzer's copyrighted Scream Icon was transformative. The court held that Green Day's modifications to the original Scream Icon conveyed new information and aesthetics from the original piece. 1832:

A balanced copyright law provides an economic benefit to many high-tech businesses such as search engines and software developers. Fair use is also crucial to non-technology industries such as insurance, legal services, and newspaper publishers.

4731: 1860:

and other high-tech companies, released a study that found that fair use exceptions to US copyright laws were responsible for more than $ 4.5 trillion in annual revenue for the United States economy representing one-sixth of the total US

1593:

While U.S. fair use law has been influential in some countries, some countries have fair use criteria drastically different from those in the U.S., and some countries do not have a fair use framework at all. Some countries have the concept of

4318: 4901: 1354:, which comments on something else. Courts have been more willing to grant fair use protections to parodies than to satires, but the ultimate outcome in either circumstance will turn on the application of the four fair use factors. 4414: 957:

Courts recognize that certain kinds of market harm do not negate fair use, such as when a parody or negative review impairs the market of the original work. Copyright considerations may not shield a work against adverse criticism.

499:

granted to the author of a creative work by copyright law: "Fair use is therefore distinct from affirmative defenses where a use infringes a copyright, but there is no liability due to a valid excuse, e.g., misuse of a copyright."

674:

in a collage painting. Koons appropriated a central portion of an advertisement she had been commissioned to shoot for a magazine. Koons prevailed in part because his use was found transformative under the first fair use factor.

4188:

The Scope of Fair Use: Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, and the Internet of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, One Hundred Thirteenth Congress, Second Session, January 28,

3714: 1649:

that fair use is a user right. The court also ruled that streaming of live soccer games on the Internet is fair use. In doing so, the court analyzed the four fair use factors adopted in 2007 and cited U.S. case law, including

4923: 4657: 886:

However, even the use of a small percentage of a work can make the third factor unfavorable to the defendant, because the "substantiality" of the portion used is considered in addition to the amount used. For instance, in

1670:

An amendment in 2012 to the section 13(2)(a) of the Copyright Act 1987 created an exception called 'fair dealing' which is not restricted in its purpose. The four factors for fair use as specified in US law are included.

789:—only their particular expression or fixation merits such protection. On the other hand, the social usefulness of freely available information can weigh against the appropriateness of copyright for certain fixations. The 1277:

material because the filmmaker sought to use it in a critical way. Soon after the best practices statement was released, all errors and omissions insurers in the U.S. shifted to begin offering routine fair use coverage.

495:(2015) (the "dancing baby" case), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit concluded that fair use was not merely a defense to an infringement claim, but was an expressly authorized right, and an exception to the 3482: 906:

uses in general, if widespread, would harm the potential market of the original. The burden of proof here rests on the copyright owner, who must demonstrate the impact of the infringement on commercial use of the work.

4889: 4603: 3538: 1781:

not be replaced by the substantially wider 'fair use' concept". Since then, the Canadian fair dealing exception has broadened. It is now similar in effect to U.S. fair use, even though the frameworks are different.

1206:

that copyright holders cannot order a deletion of an online file without determining whether that posting reflected "fair use" of the copyrighted material. The case involved Stephanie Lenz, a writer and editor from

433:

In response to perceived over-expansion of copyrights, several electronic civil liberties and free expression organizations began in the 1990s to add fair use cases to their dockets and concerns. These include the

1197: 397:

established the doctrine of "fair abridgement", which permitted unauthorized abridgement of copyrighted works under certain circumstances. Over time, this doctrine evolved into the modern concepts of fair use and

1048:

Although fair use ostensibly permits certain uses without liability, many content creators and publishers try to avoid a potential court battle by seeking a legally unnecessary license from copyright owners for

4812: 4640: 1036:

Some copyright owners claim infringement even in circumstances where the fair use defense would likely succeed, in hopes that the user will refrain from the use rather than spending resources in their defense.

859:

The third factor assesses the amount and substantiality of the copyrighted work that has been used. In general, the less that is used in relation to the whole, the more likely the use will be considered fair.

1699:

Section 35 of the Singaporean Copyright Act 1987 has been amended in 2004 to allow a 'fair dealing' exception for any purpose. The four fair use factors similar to US law are included in the new section 35.

4824: 897:'s 200,000-word memoir was sufficient to make the third fair use factor weigh against the defendants, because the portion taken was the "heart of the work". This use was ultimately found not to be fair. 755:

photographs was fair use. The court held that Warhol's use was not transformative because Warhol merely imposed his own style on Goldsmith's photograph and retained the photograph's essential elements.

692:, the court clarified that this is not a "hard evidentiary presumption" and that even the tendency that commercial purpose will "weigh against a finding of fair use ... will vary with the context." The 3834: 1023:

case of infringement, and the defendant need not even raise the fair use defense. In addition, fair use is only one of many limitations, exceptions, and defenses to copyright infringement. Thus, a

3019: 1365:

dolls for his photography project "Food Chain Barbie" (depicting several copies of the doll naked and disheveled and about to be baked in an oven, blended in a food mixer, and the like),

1534:, in finding that the defendant's uses were transformative, stated that 'the search capabilities of the have already given rise to new methods of academic inquiry such as text mining." 736:

Another factor is whether the use fulfills any of the preamble purposes, also mentioned in the legislation above, as these have been interpreted as "illustrative" of transformative use.

1477: 3704: 478:, news reporting, research, and scholarship. Fair use provides for the legal, unlicensed citation or incorporation of copyrighted material in another author's work under a four-factor 3898: 2426: 1465: 1435: 1235: 3101: 1305: 1114:

entertainment industry. This prompted him to invoke the fair use doctrine, which permits limited use of copyrighted material to provide analysis and criticism of published works.

4313: 2614: 2609: 2589: 2296: 1417: 704:" was fair use, even though the parody was sold for profit. Thus, having a commercial purpose does not preclude a use from being found fair, even though it makes it less likely. 684: 1309:

changed practices and opinions overnight. Samples now had to be licensed, as long as they rose "to a level of legally cognizable appropriation." This left the door open for the

1065:

Fair use is decided on a case-by-case basis, on the entirety of circumstances. The same act done by different means or for a different purpose can gain or lose fair use status.

739:

In determining that Prince's appropriation art could constitute fair use and that many of his works were transformative fair uses of Cariou's photographs, the Second Circuit in

1625:(IIPA), a lobby group of U.S. copyright industry bodies, has objected to international adoption of U.S.-style fair use exceptions, alleging that such laws have a dependency on 1427: 1181: 876: 126: 3508: 682:

case also addressed the subfactor mentioned in the quotation above, "whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes." In an earlier case,

2806: 1691:

treats all cases in which private material was made public as a potential copyright infringement, where fair use can apply, but has to be proven by reasonable circumstances.

3766: 3542: 2858: 4275: 1272:

before the distributor will take on the film. Such insurance protects against errors and omissions made during the copyright clearance of material in the film. Before the

969:

One such factor is acknowledgement of the copyrighted source. Giving the name of the photographer or author may help, but it does not automatically make a use fair. While

1749: 5056: 1837: 1785: 321: 3801: 2400: 1614:

includes fair use provisions from Bangladesh, Israel, South Korea, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Uganda, and the United States. However, Paul Geller's 2009

1038: 1005:

that the use was fair and not an infringement. Thus, fair use need not even be raised as a defense unless the plaintiff first shows (or the defendant concedes) a

2986: 2720: 3736: 1622: 930:

that "all are to be explored, and the results weighed together, in light of the purposes of copyright" has helped modulate this emphasis in interpretation.

707:

Likewise, the noncommercial purpose of a use makes it more likely to be found a fair use, but it does not make it a fair use automatically. For instance, in

3408: 2522: 1618:

says that while some other countries recognize similar exceptions to copyright, only the United States and Israel fully recognize the concept of fair use.

111: 3248: 3197: 2960: 1742: 2639: 1295:

in certain genres of music was accepted practice and the copyright considerations were viewed as largely irrelevant. The strict decision against rapper

652:, the U.S. Supreme Court held that when the purpose of the use is transformative, this makes the first factor more likely to favor fair use. Before the 883:

in online search results did not even weigh against fair use, "if the secondary user only copies as much as is necessary for his or her intended use".

3117: 2322: 1325: 1866: 1809:

for providing photocopy services to researchers. The Court unanimously held that the Law Society's practice fell within the bounds of fair dealing.

1329:

case, holding that artists must "get a license or do not sample". The Court later clarified that its opinion did not apply to fair use, but between

1123: 717:

content by the Free Republic website was not fair use, since it allowed the public to obtain material at no cost that they would otherwise pay for.

4402: 863:

Using most or all of a work does not bar a finding of fair use. It simply makes the third factor less favorable to the defendant. For instance, in

552:

The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.

383:

The 1710 Statute of Anne, an act of the Parliament of Great Britain, created copyright law to replace a system of private ordering enforced by the

5046: 4945: 2780: 1599: 1286: 422: 229: 4303: 3027: 2754: 1041:(SLAPP) cases that allege copyright infringement, patent infringement, defamation, or libel may come into conflict with the defendant's right to 2095: 370:

has issued several major decisions clarifying and reaffirming the fair use doctrine since the 1980s, the most recent being in the 2021 decision

4719: 4268: 4089: 1769: 3084: 2584: 2265: 1985: 1712:

was amended to include a fair use provision, Article 35–3, in 2012. The law outlines a four-factor test similar to that used under U.S. law:

1440: 1422: 889: 443: 187: 3902: 2938: 5051: 3049: 1658: 244: 146: 350:

claims certain limited uses that might otherwise be considered infringement. The U.S. "fair use doctrine" is generally broader than the "

4972: 4750: 4488: 4378: 3483:"US Government Threatening To Kill Free Trade With South Africa After Hollywood Complained It Was Adopting American Fair Use Principles" 1517: 407: 314: 1102: 729:

that despite the fact that it is a non-profit and did not sell the work, the service profited from its unauthorized publication of the

4525: 2458: 2291: 1922: 1818: 993: 794: 730: 594: 524: 516: 505: 411: 372: 867:

copying entire television programs for private viewing was upheld as fair use, at least when the copying is done for the purposes of

5010: 4940: 4261: 3516: 3308: 3228: 1883: 1642:

institution. The law sets up four factors, similar to the U.S. fair use factors (see above), for determining whether a use is fair.

1511:

has led many to form the view that such uses would be protected under fair use. This view was substantiated by the rulings of Judge

1045:, and that possibility has prompted some jurisdictions to pass anti-SLAPP legislation that raises the plaintiff's burdens and risk. 537:

the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

2810: 1369:

lost its copyright infringement lawsuit against him because his work effectively parodies Barbie and the values she represents. In

4137: 3778: 1315:

doctrine, for short or unrecognizable samples; such uses would not rise to the level of copyright infringement, because under the

4843: 4684: 4558: 4308: 3774: 1753: 1385: 1269: 1224: 648: 276: 101: 3161: 2464: 2444: 2436: 224: 4201: 1903:, who attended the Library Code of Best Practices Capstone Event and had originally purchased the domain name fairuseweek.org. 1033:

establishes that it is legal, using certain technologies, to make copies of audio recordings for non-commercial personal use.

2546: 2187: 1602:. Many countries have some reference to an exemption for educational use, though the extent of this exemption varies widely. 1174: 656:

decision, federal Judge Pierre Leval argued that transformativeness is central to the fair use analysis in his 1990 article,

439: 435: 307: 2833: 4714: 3663: 3367: 3338: 4689: 4433: 4390: 3269: 3141: 1942: 1319:

doctrine, "the law does not care about trifles." However, three years later, the Sixth Circuit effectively eliminated the

1202: 1098: 491: 31: 4426: 3899:"Computer and Communications Industry Association. "Fair Use Economy Represents One-Sixth of US GDP". September 12, 2007" 4997: 4957: 4630: 4625: 4505: 3808: 1709: 933:

In evaluating the fourth factor, courts often consider two kinds of harm to the potential market for the original work.

839: 585:

supersede the use of the original work, and substitute the review for it, such a use will be deemed in law a piracy ...

447: 3678: 5041: 4913: 4704: 4620: 4568: 4563: 3740: 2906: 1802: 1526: 1142:, announced a similar defense. However, the Court in the case at bar rejected the idea that file-sharing is fair use. 709: 471: 2993: 4059: 3835:"Book Publishers Whine To USTR That It's Just Not Fair That Canada Recognizes Fair Dealing For Educational Purposes" 3409:"Richard Prince ordered to pay damages to photographers in copyright infringement lawsuits over Instagram portraits" 3175: 1956:, an additional law for educational and governmental institutions that provides some additional copyright exceptions 4992: 4775: 4694: 4588: 4578: 4542: 4458: 4298: 3390: 1652: 1460: 1152: 1109: 688:, the Supreme Court had stated that "every commercial use of copyrighted material is presumptively ... unfair." In 657: 42: 4346: 3744: 454:" archive was established in 2002 as a coalition of several law school clinics and the EFF to document the use of 4709: 4679: 4647: 4510: 4358: 3952: 3709: 2113: 1013:

case of copyright infringement. If the work was not copyrightable, the term had expired, or the defendant's work

131: 4763: 1173:

was found not to be fair use. That decision was appealed and contested by Internet rights activists such as the

4930: 4908: 4879: 4853: 4797: 4787: 4664: 4535: 4498: 4468: 4421: 4353: 4325: 2724: 1246: 1030: 826: 773: 427: 4758: 4373: 3205: 2964: 1189:

after Arriba Soft had experienced significant financial problems and failed to reach a negotiated settlement.

1101:

over the film's use of their footage, specifically footage of the firefighters discussing the collapse of the

4918: 4831: 4726: 4409: 4385: 4241: 3428: 462:" (FUP) to help artists, particularly filmmakers, fight lawsuits brought against them by large corporations. 5036: 4962: 4952: 4935: 4863: 4848: 4819: 4792: 4782: 4615: 4515: 4478: 4473: 4341: 3930: 2670:

Snow, Ned (2010). "Judges playing jury: constitutional conflicts in deciding fair use on summary judgment".

1794: 1776: 1757: 1208: 136: 106: 96: 4652: 4138:"Fair Use as Market Failure: A Structural and Economic Analysis of the 'Betamax' Case and Its Predecessors" 3981: 2337: 4896: 4884: 4858: 4802: 4770: 4699: 4669: 4635: 4610: 4583: 4573: 4530: 4493: 4483: 4397: 4368: 4363: 4293: 4104: 1806: 1798: 786: 384: 347: 207: 4836: 4807: 4598: 3618: 1416:

A number of appellate decisions have recognized that a parody may be a protected fair use, including the

1240: 1169:, Arriba Soft's use of thumbnail pictures and inline linking from Kelly's website in Arriba Soft's image 4674: 4520: 3454: 2740: 2618: 2593: 2300: 1917: 1002: 387:. The Statute of Anne did not provide for legal unauthorized use of material protected by copyright. In 363: 53: 1300: 61: 3449:

Geller, Paul. "International Copyright Law and Practice" (2009 ed.). Matthew Bender & Co Inc.

3053: 593:

The statutory fair use factors quoted above come from the Copyright Act of 1976, which is codified at

4967: 4463: 2099: 1947: 1790: 1684: 733:

because of "the attention, recognition, and contributions" it received in association with the work.

642: 543:

the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

4225: 2146: 1464:

but told the events from the point of view of the enslaved people rather than the slaveholders. The

4122: 4109: 3565: 1606: 1549: 1543: 988: 966:

As explained by Judge Leval, courts are permitted to include additional factors in their analysis.

724: 486: 197: 4033: 1605:

Sources differ on whether fair use is fully recognized by countries other than the United States.

1255:

did not even have the standing needed to sue Hoehn for copyright infringement in the first place.

979:

permission, while citing the original author, would be copyright infringement but not plagiarism.

4175: 4167: 2246: 2229: 1895: 1891: 1849: 1454: 601:. They were intended by Congress to restate, but not replace, the prior judge-made law. As Judge 367: 281: 4215: 1900: 91: 71: 5031: 4593: 3080: 2706: 2702: 2690: 2657: 2385:

Aufderheide, Patricia; Jaszi, Peter (2011). "Appendix D: Myths and Realities About Fair Use".

1981: 1557: 1553: 1449: 1212: 1170: 1042: 914: 394: 35: 2552: 1389:

the U.S. Supreme Court recognized parody as a potential fair use, even when done for profit.

4157: 4149: 4114: 3281: 2271: 2238: 1932: 1853: 1581: 1561: 1402: 1394: 1292: 1186: 1166: 740: 701: 459: 455: 192: 3590: 2883: 2621: 893:, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a news article's quotation of fewer than 400 words from 3467: 3155: 2369: 2363: 2089: 1937: 1531: 1371: 1220: 938: 855:

The Ninth Circuit has held that the use of thumbnails in image search engines is fair use.

812: 763: 662: 620: 602: 576: 562: 496: 451: 202: 3802:"Why Canada Should Not Adopt Fair Use: A Joint Submission to the Copyright Consultations" 3566:"Israeli Judge Permits Unlicensed Sports Event Streaming—FAPL v. Ploni (Guest Blog Post)" 1223:, the owner of the copyright to the song, ordered YouTube to remove the video under the 2596: 2303: 2038: 2008: 1577: 1162: 1131: 1127: 821: 785:

To prevent the private ownership of work that rightfully belongs in the public domain,

768: 389: 338: 249: 212: 141: 86: 4118: 3859: 5025: 4179: 3234: 1139: 868: 801:

magazine. Yet its copyright was not upheld, in the name of the public interest, when

790: 718: 671: 570:

The four factors of analysis for fair use set forth above derive from the opinion of

546:

the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

271: 166: 3925: 3123: 1130:

argued that file-sharing qualifies as fair use in his defense of alleged filesharer

771:'s letters was a key issue in the court's analysis of the second fair use factor in 4133: 1727: 1595: 1565: 1358: 1193: 1093: 1054:

the publication of a work in which a publisher has invested significant resources.

666:

is another example of a fair use case that focused on transformativeness. In 2006,

625: 571: 399: 351: 297: 266: 261: 234: 156: 116: 2044: 528: 2160: 1975: 598: 520: 509: 415: 1912: 1508: 1500: 1398: 1390: 1211:, who made a home video of her thirteen-month-old son dancing to Prince's song " 1135: 1008: 894: 851: 697: 256: 182: 151: 4220: 3438:. American University Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property. 2480: 1680: 1626: 1512: 1504: 1376: 1311: 1296: 1252: 1231: 1158: 1014: 998: 970: 921:

had either reduced their viewership or negatively impacted their business. In

667: 640:

A key consideration in later fair use cases is the extent to which the use is

479: 355: 3249:"The Authors Guild Loses (Again), and HathiTrust Wins–But What Does It Mean?" 2401:"If you publish Georgia's state laws, you'll get sued for copyright and lose" 809:

the reproduction of stills from the film in a history book on the subject in

3020:"Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for Scholarly Research in Communication" 1953: 1927: 1845: 1629:

and long-term legal precedent that may not exist outside the United States.

950: 880: 403: 342: 217: 161: 81: 4253: 4244:, a compilation of national statutes that refer to fair use or fair dealing 1530:, a case derived from the same digitization project mentioned above. Judge 937:

First, courts consider whether the use in question acts as a direct market

421:

The term "fair use" originated in the United States. Although related, the

556: 4247: 2568: 1760:(PC) were with reference to strengthening Australia's "digital economy". 1499:

The transformative nature of computer based analytical processes such as

293: 76: 3391:"Artist Richard Prince Sells Instagram Photos That Aren't His For $ 90K" 17: 4171: 2987:"Statement on the Fair Use of Images for Teaching, Research, and Study" 2250: 2061:

Iowa State Research Foundation, Inc. v. American Broadcasting Companies

1638: 1216: 918: 4250:, a repository of copyright educational resources for higher education 4162: 3956: 1888:

Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for Academic and Research Libraries

485:

The U.S. Supreme Court has traditionally characterized fair use as an

4187: 2781:"Lawyer: RIAA must pay back all "$ 100M+" it has allegedly collected" 2161:"17 U.S. Code § 107 – Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use" 1857: 1841: 1410: 1366: 1362: 1351: 1346: 1337:, practice had effectively shifted to eliminate unlicensed sampling. 806: 633: 475: 458:

letters. In 2006 Stanford University began an initiative called the "

121: 4153: 2242: 1890:. While the idea was not taken up nationally, Copyright Advisor at 1029:

case can be defeated without relying on fair use. For instance, the

3953:"Computer and Communications Industry Association. "CCIA Members."" 4235: 4011: 3640: 3539:"The Football Association Premier League Ltd. v. Ploni and others" 850: 762: 555: 430:

jurisdictions have other limitations and exceptions to copyright.

3368:"Copyright Case Over Richard Prince Instagram Show to Go Forward" 2939:"Documentary Filmmakers' Statement of Best Practices in Fair Use" 1165:, and fair use. In the lower District Court case on a motion for 3989: 4257: 4090:"Fair Use and Copyright Protection: A Price Theory Explanation" 3705:"Our copyright laws are holding us back, and there's a way out" 1865:. The study was conducted using a methodology developed by the 1274:

Documentary Filmmakers' Statement of Best Practices in Fair Use

402:. Fair use was a common-law (i.e. created by judges as a legal 1862: 1452:

estate unsuccessfully brought suit to halt the publication of

450:, numerous clinical programs at law schools, and others. The " 3309:"The story of Richard Prince and his $ 100,000 Instagram art" 2755:"Harvard prof tells judge that P2P filesharing is "fair use"" 3176:"A Closer Look at the Google Books Library Project Decision" 2481:"Cariou v. Prince, 714 F.3d 694 | Casetext Search + Citator" 1483:

Cases in which a satirical use was found to be fair include

1923:

1645:

On September 2, 2009, the Tel Aviv District court ruled in

1598:

instead of fair use, while others use different systems of

917:, failed to provide any empirical evidence that the use of 4186:

United States. Congress. House of Representatives (2014).

2098:, No. 4901 (C.C.D. Mass. 1841), archived from 1458:, which reused many of the characters and situations from 406:) doctrine in the U.S. until it was incorporated into the 3737:"Productivity Commission Draft IP Report – the breakdown" 3077:

Reclaiming Fair Use: How to Put Balance Back in Copyright

2387:

Reclaiming Fair Use: How to Put Balance Back in Copyright

1977:

Reclaiming Fair Use: How to Put Balance Back in Copyright

1244:

that the posting of an entire editorial article from the

2653:

Princeton University Press v. Michigan Document Services

2505: 2503: 2501: 354:" rights known in most countries that inherited English 3106:, 780 F. Supp. 182 (S.D.N.Y. 1991). 2809:. Harvard Journal of Law and Technology. Archived from 2427:

United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

2227:

Leval, Pierre N. (1990). "Toward a Fair Use Standard".

3102:

Grand Upright Music, Ltd. v. Warner Bros. Records Inc.

1548:

There is a substantial body of fair use law regarding

1524:

Text and data mining was subject to further review in

1306:

Grand Upright Music, Ltd. v. Warner Bros. Records Inc.

4238:, a database of fair use cases in U.S. federal courts 3866:. Government of the United Kingdom. November 18, 2014 3339:"Richard Prince defends reuse of others' photographs" 2610:

Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc.

2425:

Judge Story's decision was reversed on appeal by the

1647:

The Football Association Premier League Ltd. v. Ploni

1017:, for instance, then the plaintiff cannot make out a 865:

Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc.

685:

Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc.

34:. For the broadband bandwidth management policy, see 1797:

case that establishes the bounds of fair dealing in

41:

For fair use of copyrighted works on Knowledge, see

4985: 4872: 4749: 4742: 4551: 4451: 4334: 2963:. Association of Research Libraries. Archived from 2807:"Sony BMG Music Entertainment et al. v. Tannenbaum" 2429:, which did not consider the question of fair use. 1733:South Africa and the United Kingdom, among others. 1001:on copyright infringement, the defendant bears the 670:used a photograph taken by commercial photographer 3924:McBride, Sarah; Thompson, Adam (August 1, 2007). 3901:. Ccianet.org. September 12, 2007. Archived from 2579: 2577: 2565:New Era Publications Int'l v. Henry Holt & Co 2432:Code Revision Comm'n v. Public.Resource.Org, Inc. 1840:(CCIA), a group representing companies including 832:New Era Publications Int'l v. Henry Holt & Co 723:Code Revision Commission and State of Georgia v. 341:in United States law that permits limited use of 3282:"Coders' Rights Project Reverse Engineering FAQ" 2859:"Righthaven v. Hoehn (District Court of Nevada)" 1838:Computer and Communications Industry Association 987:The U.S. Supreme Court described fair use as an 797:, for example, was purchased and copyrighted by 713:, the court found that the noncommercial use of 2475: 2473: 1980:. University of Chicago Press. pp. 10–11. 1786:CCH Canadian Ltd v. Law Society of Upper Canada 1714: 1157:provides and develops the relationship between 630: 582: 502: 474:include commentary, search engines, criticism, 3664:"Copyright Law In Singapore: A Brief Overview" 3361: 3359: 2992:. Visual Resources Association. Archived from 2737:Wall Data v. Los Angeles County Sheriff's Dept 1039:Strategic lawsuit against public participation 879:held that copying an entire photo to use as a 787:facts and ideas are not protected by copyright 4269: 3018:The International Communication Association. 2380: 2378: 2316: 2314: 2312: 2286: 2284: 2282: 2280: 315: 8: 3075:Aufderheide, Patricia; Jaszi, Peter (2011). 2834:"Woman can sue over YouTube clip de-posting" 2047: (Court of Chancery (England) 1740). 1974:Aufderheide, Patricia; Jaszi, Peter (2011). 1752:(AUSFTA), while the most recent two, by the 1750:Australia–United States Free Trade Agreement 1623:International Intellectual Property Alliance 3926:"Google, Others Contest Copyright Warnings" 3893: 3891: 3889: 3887: 3885: 3883: 3881: 3422: 3420: 3418: 2523:Warner Bros. and J. K. Rowling v. RDR Books 1894:, launched the first ever Fair Use Week at 1122:In 2009, fair use appeared as a defense in 1024: 1018: 1006: 515:Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 112:Integrated circuit layout design protection 4746: 4276: 4262: 4254: 4088:Depoorter, Ben; Parisi, Francesco (2002). 3679:"How will South Korea Implement fair use?" 3564:Lichtenstein, Yoram (September 21, 2009). 3332: 3330: 3137:Mattel Inc v. Walking Mountain Productions 1743:History of Fair Use proposals in Australia 1580:released an exhibit of photographs at the 322: 308: 49: 4161: 4108: 4097:International Review of Law and Economics 3118:Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films 3052:. Center for Social Media. Archived from 3050:"Success of Fair Use Consensus Documents" 2907:"A Pattern-Oriented Approach to Fair Use" 1489:Williams v. Columbia Broadcasting Systems 1326:Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films 3641:"Kiedy możemy korzystać z prawa cytatu?" 3598:World Intellectual Property Organization 3509:"Israel now has the right copyright law" 3079:. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 2222: 2220: 2218: 2216: 2083: 2081: 1867:World Intellectual Property Organization 1616:International Copyright Law and Practice 5057:United States intellectual property law 4032:Courtney, Kyle K. (February 24, 2014). 3800:Magazines Canada (September 15, 2009). 3767:"Reviews that have considered fair use" 2389:. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 2032: 2030: 2015:. Harvard Office of the General Counsel 1966: 1600:limitations and exceptions to copyright 1409:court also distinguished parodies from 1287:Legal issues surrounding music sampling 423:limitations and exceptions to copyright 230:Limitations and exceptions to copyright 174: 52: 3976: 3974: 3717:from the original on December 14, 2016 3463: 3452: 3174:Rosati, Eleonora (November 17, 2013). 3144: (9th Cir. December 29, 2003). 2941:. Center for Media & Social Impact 2642: (3d Cir. September 19, 2000). 2585:Harper & Row v. Nation Enterprises 2266:Harper & Row v. Nation Enterprises 2150:, 801 F.3d 1126, 1133 (9th Cir. 2015). 1770:Fair dealing in Canadian copyright law 1432:Mattel v. Walking Mountain Productions 890:Harper & Row v. Nation Enterprises 27:Concept in United States copyright law 3237: (S.D.N.Y. October 10, 2012). 2526:, 575 F. Supp. 2d 513 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) 1441:Suntrust Bank v. Houghton Mifflin Co. 1423:Leibovitz v. Paramount Pictures Corp. 1097:series were served with a lawsuit by 1091:In April 2006, the filmmakers of the 444:National Coalition Against Censorship 188:Artificial intelligence and copyright 7: 4236:U.S. Copyright Office Fair Use Index 3429:"The Fair Use/Fair Dealing Handbook" 2961:"Code of Best Practices in Fair Use" 2512:, 714 F.3d 694, 707 (2d. Cir. 2013). 2372: (2d Cir. October 26, 2006). 2195:Journal of Intellectual Property Law 1659:Perfect 10, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc. 1480:injunction against its publication. 1401:in 1989 for their use of Orbison's " 1080:Oracle America, Inc. v. Google, Inc. 147:Supplementary protection certificate 3703:Martin, Peter (December 15, 2016). 3591:"Copyright (Amendment) Act of 2012" 3337:Gilbert, Laura (October 10, 2018). 3270:b:Reverse Engineering/Legal Aspects 2884:"Righthaven v. Hoehn (9th Circuit)" 2186:Patterson, L. Ray (April 1, 1998). 1544:Reverse engineering § Legality 1518:Authors Guild, Inc. v. Google, Inc. 1177:, who argued that it was fair use. 911:Sony Corp v. Universal City Studios 610:1. Purpose and character of the use 540:the nature of the copyrighted work; 4058:Clobridge, Abby (March 10, 2015). 3662:George Hwang (December 19, 2017). 3481:Masnick, Mike (November 4, 2019). 3427:Band, Jonathan; Gerafi, Jonathan. 3024:Center for Media and Social Impact 2459:Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. 2439:, 1233 (11th Cir. 2018)., 2292:Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. 1819:Fair dealing in United Kingdom law 994:Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. 795:assassination of President Kennedy 731:Official Code of Georgia Annotated 560:Joseph Story wrote the opinion in 373:Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc. 362:when the U.S. Congress passed the 25: 5011:Category:Copyright law by country 3570:Technology and Marketing Law Blog 3507:Band, Jonathan (March 26, 2008). 3366:Chow, Andrew R. (July 20, 2017). 3229:Authors Guild, Inc. v. HathiTrust 3164: (2d Cir. April 2, 1992). 759:2. Nature of the copyrighted work 4442: 4309:International copyright treaties 3775:Australian Law Reform Commission 3307:Plaugic, Lizzie (May 30, 2015). 3247:Anderson, Rick (July 21, 2014). 2805:Engle, Eric (October 17, 2009). 2535:293 F. Supp. 130 (S.D.N.Y. 1968) 2188:"Folsom v. Marsh and Its Legacy" 2112:Netanei, Neil Weinstock (2011). 1754:Australian Law Reform Commission 1386:Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music Inc 1225:Digital Millennium Copyright Act 928:Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music Inc 873:Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corporation 649:Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music Inc 277:Outline of intellectual property 102:Indigenous intellectual property 60: 30:For fair use trademark law, see 3743:. June 16, 2016. Archived from 3619:"Dz.U.2016.666 t.j. – prawo.pl" 2832:Egelko, Bob (August 21, 2008). 2779:Anderson, Nate (May 22, 2009). 2753:Anderson, Nate (May 18, 2009). 2167:. Cornell University Law School 1198:Northern District of California 1138:, defending alleged filesharer 949:market already existed for the 5047:Legal doctrines and principles 3833:Masnick, Mike (May 28, 2015). 3777:. June 4, 2013. Archived from 3286:Electronic Frontier Foundation 3126:, 398 (6th Cir. 2004). 2547:Salinger v. Random House, Inc. 2274: (2d Cir. 1985-05-20). 1637:In November 2007, the Israeli 1270:errors and omissions insurance 1182:Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals 1175:Electronic Frontier Foundation 744:, 714 F.3d 694 (2d. Cir. 2013) 696:court held that hip-hop group 440:American Civil Liberties Union 436:Electronic Frontier Foundation 1: 4299:Copyright case law by country 4119:10.1016/S0144-8188(01)00071-0 4060:"Every Week Is Fair Use Week" 3955:. Ccianet.org. Archived from 3643:(in Polish). December 1, 2013 2635:Video Pipeline v. Buena Vista 2147:Lenz v. Universal Music Corp. 2063:, 621 F.2d 57 (2d Cir. 1980). 1943:Fair use (U.S. trademark law) 1476:was fair use and vacated the 1203:Lenz v. Universal Music Corp. 1150:A U.S. court case from 2003, 1003:burden of raising and proving 492:Lenz v. Universal Music Corp. 32:Fair use (U.S. trademark law) 4304:Copyright lengths by country 4226:Resources in other libraries 4038:Copyright at Harvard Library 3389:Sola, Katie (May 27, 2015). 2905:Madison, Michael J. (2004). 2121:Lewis & Clark Law Review 1568:and access control systems. 1448:case, Suntrust Bank and the 1124:lawsuits against filesharing 1069:Fair use in particular areas 1015:borrowed only a small amount 847:3. Amount and substantiality 448:American Library Association 5052:United States copyright law 3741:Australian Digital Alliance 3198:"Google's Fair Use Victory" 2914:William and Mary Law Review 2165:Legal Information Institute 2045:3 Atk 143;26 ER 489 1836:On September 12, 2007, the 1803:Law Society of Upper Canada 1527:Authors Guild v. HathiTrust 1264:communications professors. 901:4. Effect upon work's value 710:L.A. Times v. Free Republic 618:In the 1841 copyright case 472:United States copyright law 225:Idea–expression distinction 5073: 4242:The Fair Use/Fair Handbook 2321:Samuelson, Pamela (2009). 2114:"Making Sense of Fair Use" 1816: 1767: 1740: 1725: 1653:Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corp. 1541: 1284: 1215:" and posted the video on 1153:Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corp. 1110:This Film Is Not Yet Rated 941:for the original work. In 767:The unpublished nature of 658:Toward a Fair Use Standard 43:Knowledge:Non-free content 40: 29: 5006: 4440: 4294:Copyright acts by country 4289: 4221:Resources in your library 3860:"Exceptions to copyright" 3710:The Sydney Morning Herald 3677:Ben (February 23, 2013). 3235:902 F.Supp.2d 445 2739:(9th Cir. May 17, 2006) ( 2695:Michigan State Law Review 2660: (6th Cir. 1996). 1589:Influence internationally 1345:Producers or creators of 4326:Rule of the shorter term 4284:Copyright law by country 2725:Audio Home Recording Act 2555: (2d Cir. 1987). 2009:"Copyright and Fair Use" 1259:Professional communities 1247:Las Vegas Review-Journal 1031:Audio Home Recording Act 827:Salinger v. Random House 820:In the decisions of the 774:Salinger v. Random House 470:Examples of fair use in 3931:The Wall Street Journal 3251:. the scholarly kitchen 2838:San Francisco Chronicle 2445:139 S. Ct. 2746 1795:Supreme Court of Canada 1777:Copyright Act of Canada 1758:Productivity Commission 1209:Gallitzin, Pennsylvania 1099:Jules and Gédéon Naudet 913:, the copyright owner, 700:'s parody of the song " 646:. In the 1994 decision 137:Plant genetic resources 107:Industrial design right 97:Geographical indication 4128:on September 14, 2006. 3462:Cite journal requires 2323:"Unbundling Fair Uses" 1807:copyright infringement 1799:Canadian copyright law 1719: 1683:and is covered by the 1299:'s appropriation of a 1192:In August 2008, Judge 1025: 1019: 1007: 983:Procedure and practice 953:of course-pack copies. 856: 778: 638: 591: 567: 554: 348:copyright infringement 208:Criticism of copyright 132:Plant breeders' rights 4034:"About Fair Use Week" 2689:Reid, Amanda (2019). 2672:U.C. Davis Law Review 2567:, 695 F. Supp. 1493 ( 2437:906 F.3d 1229 2096:9 F. Cas. 342 1918:Berne three-step test 1285:Further information: 1219:. Four months later, 900: 854: 836:droit moral d'artiste 766: 559: 466:U.S. fair use factors 408:Copyright Act of 1976 364:Copyright Act of 1976 54:Intellectual property 4715:United Arab Emirates 4012:"Fair Use Week 2015" 3992:on November 20, 2015 3781:on December 21, 2016 3747:on February 20, 2017 3208:on November 17, 2015 3162:960 F.2d 301 3142:353 F.3d 792 3124:383 F.3d 390 3030:on November 16, 2015 2967:on November 17, 2015 2721:USC October 17, 1008 2658:99 F.3d 1381 2640:342 F.3d 191 2465:510 U.S. 569 2370:467 F.3d 244 2272:723 F.2d 195 1710:Korean Copyright Act 1685:Polish copyright law 1576:In May 2015, artist 1495:Text and data mining 1230:In June 2011, Judge 1146:Internet publication 626:Justice Joseph Story 4142:Columbia Law Review 3666:. Asia Law Network. 3545:on January 14, 2010 3519:on January 28, 2012 3411:. January 26, 2024. 3395:The Huffington Post 2999:on January 17, 2016 2691:"Deciding Fair Use" 2553:811 F.2d 90 2343:on January 19, 2013 2073:Nimmer on Copyright 2057:Nimmer on Copyright 1687:articles 23 to 35. 1679:Fair use exists in 1607:American University 1550:reverse engineering 1538:Reverse engineering 1241:Righthaven v. Hoehn 997:This means that in 989:affirmative defense 725:Public.Resource.Org 721:similarly ruled in 487:affirmative defense 385:Stationers' Company 198:Copyright abolition 5042:Equitable defenses 4946:Russian Federation 4489:Dominican Republic 3513:The Jerusalem Post 2743:at Ninth Circuit). 2330:Fordham Law Review 2230:Harvard Law Review 1896:Harvard University 1892:Harvard University 1850:Oracle Corporation 1474:The Wind Done Gone 1461:Gone with the Wind 1455:The Wind Done Gone 1357:For example, when 1301:Gilbert O'Sullivan 1236:District of Nevada 1103:World Trade Center 962:Additional factors 857: 779: 568: 368:U.S. Supreme Court 290:Higher categories: 282:Outline of patents 5019: 5018: 4981: 4980: 4202:Library resources 4064:Information Today 3959:on March 31, 2008 3905:on April 15, 2008 3343:The Art Newspaper 3086:978-0-226-03228-3 3056:on April 14, 2013 2723:, amended by the 2467:, 584 (1994). 2059:§ 13.05, quoting 1987:978-0-226-03228-3 1562:network protocols 1554:computer software 1450:Margaret Mitchell 1303:song in the case 1087:Documentary films 1043:freedom of speech 923:Harper & Row, 715:Los Angeles Times 395:Court of Chancery 332: 331: 36:Fair Usage Policy 16:(Redirected from 5064: 4927: 4905: 4893: 4840: 4828: 4816: 4779: 4767: 4747: 4735: 4723: 4661: 4644: 4607: 4539: 4502: 4446: 4445: 4430: 4418: 4406: 4394: 4382: 4350: 4278: 4271: 4264: 4255: 4183: 4165: 4148:(8): 1600–1657. 4134:Gordon, Wendy J. 4129: 4127: 4121:. Archived from 4112: 4094: 4075: 4074: 4072: 4070: 4055: 4049: 4048: 4046: 4044: 4029: 4023: 4022: 4020: 4018: 4008: 4002: 4001: 3999: 3997: 3988:. Archived from 3978: 3969: 3968: 3966: 3964: 3949: 3943: 3942: 3940: 3938: 3921: 3915: 3914: 3912: 3910: 3895: 3876: 3875: 3873: 3871: 3856: 3850: 3849: 3847: 3845: 3830: 3824: 3823: 3821: 3819: 3814:on April 3, 2016 3813: 3807:. Archived from 3806: 3797: 3791: 3790: 3788: 3786: 3763: 3757: 3756: 3754: 3752: 3733: 3727: 3726: 3724: 3722: 3700: 3694: 3693: 3691: 3689: 3674: 3668: 3667: 3659: 3653: 3652: 3650: 3648: 3637: 3631: 3630: 3628: 3626: 3615: 3609: 3608: 3606: 3604: 3595: 3587: 3581: 3580: 3578: 3576: 3561: 3555: 3554: 3552: 3550: 3541:. Archived from 3535: 3529: 3528: 3526: 3524: 3515:. Archived from 3504: 3498: 3497: 3495: 3493: 3478: 3472: 3471: 3465: 3460: 3458: 3450: 3446: 3440: 3439: 3433: 3424: 3413: 3412: 3405: 3399: 3398: 3386: 3380: 3379: 3377: 3375: 3370:. New York Times 3363: 3354: 3353: 3351: 3349: 3334: 3325: 3324: 3322: 3320: 3315:. Vox Media, Inc 3304: 3298: 3297: 3295: 3293: 3288:. August 6, 2008 3278: 3272: 3267: 3261: 3260: 3258: 3256: 3244: 3238: 3232: 3224: 3218: 3217: 3215: 3213: 3204:. Archived from 3194: 3188: 3187: 3185: 3183: 3171: 3165: 3159: 3151: 3145: 3139: 3133: 3127: 3121: 3113: 3107: 3105: 3097: 3091: 3090: 3072: 3066: 3065: 3063: 3061: 3046: 3040: 3039: 3037: 3035: 3026:. Archived from 3015: 3009: 3008: 3006: 3004: 2998: 2991: 2983: 2977: 2976: 2974: 2972: 2957: 2951: 2950: 2948: 2946: 2935: 2929: 2928: 2926: 2924: 2911: 2902: 2896: 2895: 2893: 2891: 2880: 2874: 2873: 2871: 2869: 2863: 2855: 2849: 2848: 2846: 2844: 2829: 2823: 2822: 2820: 2818: 2802: 2796: 2795: 2793: 2791: 2776: 2770: 2769: 2767: 2765: 2750: 2744: 2734: 2728: 2717: 2711: 2710: 2686: 2680: 2679: 2667: 2661: 2655: 2649: 2643: 2637: 2631: 2625: 2606: 2600: 2581: 2572: 2562: 2556: 2550: 2542: 2536: 2533: 2527: 2519: 2513: 2510:Cariou v. Prince 2507: 2496: 2495: 2493: 2491: 2477: 2468: 2462: 2454: 2448: 2434: 2423: 2417: 2416: 2414: 2412: 2407:. March 30, 2017 2397: 2391: 2390: 2382: 2373: 2367: 2359: 2353: 2352: 2350: 2348: 2342: 2336:. Archived from 2327: 2318: 2307: 2288: 2275: 2269: 2261: 2255: 2254: 2237:(5): 1105–1136. 2224: 2211: 2210: 2208: 2206: 2192: 2183: 2177: 2176: 2174: 2172: 2157: 2151: 2143: 2137: 2136: 2134: 2132: 2118: 2109: 2103: 2093: 2085: 2076: 2070: 2064: 2054: 2048: 2042: 2034: 2025: 2024: 2022: 2020: 2005: 1999: 1998: 1996: 1994: 1971: 1933:Creative Commons 1854:Sun Microsystems 1828:Policy arguments 1582:Gagosian Gallery 1478:district court's 1466:Eleventh Circuit 1403:Oh, Pretty Woman 1395:Acuff-Rose Music 1323:doctrine in the 1187:default judgment 1167:summary judgment 1028: 1022: 1012: 909:For example, in 742:Cariou v. Prince 702:Oh, Pretty Woman 497:exclusive rights 460:Fair Use Project 456:cease and desist 452:Chilling Effects 324: 317: 310: 193:Brand protection 127:Peasants' rights 64: 50: 21: 5072: 5071: 5067: 5066: 5065: 5063: 5062: 5061: 5022: 5021: 5020: 5015: 5002: 4977: 4921: 4899: 4887: 4873:Other countries 4868: 4834: 4822: 4810: 4773: 4761: 4738: 4729: 4717: 4655: 4638: 4601: 4547: 4533: 4496: 4447: 4443: 4438: 4424: 4412: 4400: 4388: 4376: 4344: 4330: 4285: 4282: 4232: 4231: 4230: 4210: 4209: 4205: 4198: 4154:10.2307/1122296 4132: 4125: 4092: 4087: 4084: 4082:Further reading 4079: 4078: 4068: 4066: 4057: 4056: 4052: 4042: 4040: 4031: 4030: 4026: 4016: 4014: 4010: 4009: 4005: 3995: 3993: 3980: 3979: 3972: 3962: 3960: 3951: 3950: 3946: 3936: 3934: 3923: 3922: 3918: 3908: 3906: 3897: 3896: 3879: 3869: 3867: 3858: 3857: 3853: 3843: 3841: 3832: 3831: 3827: 3817: 3815: 3811: 3804: 3799: 3798: 3794: 3784: 3782: 3771:www.alrc.gov.au 3765: 3764: 3760: 3750: 3748: 3735: 3734: 3730: 3720: 3718: 3702: 3701: 3697: 3687: 3685: 3676: 3675: 3671: 3661: 3660: 3656: 3646: 3644: 3639: 3638: 3634: 3624: 3622: 3617: 3616: 3612: 3602: 3600: 3593: 3589: 3588: 3584: 3574: 3572: 3563: 3562: 3558: 3548: 3546: 3537: 3536: 3532: 3522: 3520: 3506: 3505: 3501: 3491: 3489: 3480: 3479: 3475: 3461: 3451: 3448: 3447: 3443: 3436:infojustice.org 3431: 3426: 3425: 3416: 3407: 3406: 3402: 3388: 3387: 3383: 3373: 3371: 3365: 3364: 3357: 3347: 3345: 3336: 3335: 3328: 3318: 3316: 3306: 3305: 3301: 3291: 3289: 3280: 3279: 3275: 3268: 3264: 3254: 3252: 3246: 3245: 3241: 3226: 3225: 3221: 3211: 3209: 3196: 3195: 3191: 3181: 3179: 3173: 3172: 3168: 3156:Rogers v. Koons 3153: 3152: 3148: 3135: 3134: 3130: 3115: 3114: 3110: 3099: 3098: 3094: 3087: 3074: 3073: 3069: 3059: 3057: 3048: 3047: 3043: 3033: 3031: 3017: 3016: 3012: 3002: 3000: 2996: 2989: 2985: 2984: 2980: 2970: 2968: 2959: 2958: 2954: 2944: 2942: 2937: 2936: 2932: 2922: 2920: 2909: 2904: 2903: 2899: 2889: 2887: 2882: 2881: 2877: 2867: 2865: 2864:. June 20, 2011 2861: 2857: 2856: 2852: 2842: 2840: 2831: 2830: 2826: 2816: 2814: 2813:on July 8, 2010 2804: 2803: 2799: 2789: 2787: 2778: 2777: 2773: 2763: 2761: 2752: 2751: 2747: 2735: 2731: 2718: 2714: 2688: 2687: 2683: 2669: 2668: 2664: 2651: 2650: 2646: 2633: 2632: 2628: 2607: 2603: 2582: 2575: 2563: 2559: 2544: 2543: 2539: 2534: 2530: 2520: 2516: 2508: 2499: 2489: 2487: 2479: 2478: 2471: 2456: 2455: 2451: 2430: 2424: 2420: 2410: 2408: 2399: 2398: 2394: 2384: 2383: 2376: 2364:Blanch v. Koons 2361: 2360: 2356: 2346: 2344: 2340: 2325: 2320: 2319: 2310: 2289: 2278: 2263: 2262: 2258: 2243:10.2307/1341457 2226: 2225: 2214: 2204: 2202: 2190: 2185: 2184: 2180: 2170: 2168: 2159: 2158: 2154: 2144: 2140: 2130: 2128: 2116: 2111: 2110: 2106: 2090:Folsom v. Marsh 2087: 2086: 2079: 2071: 2067: 2055: 2051: 2036: 2035: 2028: 2018: 2016: 2013:ogc.harvard.edu 2007: 2006: 2002: 1992: 1990: 1988: 1973: 1972: 1968: 1963: 1938:Derivative work 1909: 1879: 1830: 1821: 1815: 1772: 1766: 1756:(ALRC) and the 1745: 1739: 1730: 1724: 1706: 1697: 1677: 1668: 1635: 1611:infojustice.org 1591: 1574: 1546: 1540: 1497: 1485:Blanch v. Koons 1444:). In the 2001 1372:Rogers v. Koons 1343: 1289: 1283: 1261: 1221:Universal Music 1180:On appeal, the 1148: 1120: 1089: 1076: 1071: 985: 964: 903: 849: 761: 663:Blanch v. Koons 621:Folsom v. Marsh 612: 603:Pierre N. Leval 577:Folsom v. Marsh 563:Folsom v. Marsh 468: 381: 328: 292: 288: 203:Copyright troll 92:Farmers' rights 72:Authors' rights 46: 39: 28: 23: 22: 15: 12: 11: 5: 5070: 5068: 5060: 5059: 5054: 5049: 5044: 5039: 5037:Digital rights 5034: 5024: 5023: 5017: 5016: 5014: 5013: 5007: 5004: 5003: 5001: 5000: 4995: 4989: 4987: 4983: 4982: 4979: 4978: 4976: 4975: 4973:United Kingdom 4970: 4965: 4960: 4955: 4950: 4949: 4948: 4943: 4933: 4928: 4916: 4911: 4906: 4894: 4882: 4876: 4874: 4870: 4869: 4867: 4866: 4861: 4856: 4851: 4846: 4841: 4829: 4817: 4805: 4800: 4795: 4790: 4785: 4780: 4768: 4755: 4753: 4751:European Union 4744: 4740: 4739: 4737: 4736: 4724: 4712: 4707: 4702: 4697: 4692: 4687: 4682: 4677: 4672: 4667: 4662: 4650: 4645: 4633: 4628: 4623: 4618: 4613: 4608: 4596: 4591: 4586: 4581: 4576: 4571: 4566: 4561: 4555: 4553: 4549: 4548: 4546: 4545: 4540: 4528: 4523: 4518: 4513: 4508: 4503: 4491: 4486: 4481: 4476: 4471: 4466: 4461: 4455: 4453: 4449: 4448: 4441: 4439: 4437: 4436: 4431: 4419: 4407: 4395: 4383: 4371: 4366: 4361: 4356: 4351: 4338: 4336: 4332: 4331: 4329: 4328: 4323: 4322: 4321: 4319:related rights 4316: 4306: 4301: 4296: 4290: 4287: 4286: 4283: 4281: 4280: 4273: 4266: 4258: 4252: 4251: 4245: 4239: 4229: 4228: 4223: 4218: 4212: 4211: 4200: 4199: 4197: 4196:External links 4194: 4193: 4192: 4184: 4130: 4110:10.1.1.196.423 4103:(4): 453–473. 4083: 4080: 4077: 4076: 4050: 4024: 4003: 3970: 3944: 3916: 3877: 3851: 3825: 3792: 3758: 3728: 3695: 3669: 3654: 3632: 3610: 3582: 3556: 3530: 3499: 3473: 3464:|journal= 3441: 3414: 3400: 3381: 3355: 3326: 3299: 3273: 3262: 3239: 3219: 3202:Law Down Under 3189: 3166: 3146: 3128: 3108: 3092: 3085: 3067: 3041: 3010: 2978: 2952: 2930: 2897: 2875: 2850: 2824: 2797: 2771: 2745: 2729: 2712: 2681: 2662: 2644: 2626: 2601: 2573: 2557: 2537: 2528: 2514: 2497: 2469: 2449: 2418: 2392: 2374: 2354: 2308: 2276: 2256: 2212: 2178: 2152: 2138: 2104: 2077: 2065: 2049: 2039:Gyles v Wilcox 2026: 2000: 1986: 1965: 1964: 1962: 1959: 1958: 1957: 1951: 1948:Scènes à faire 1945: 1940: 1935: 1930: 1925: 1920: 1915: 1908: 1905: 1878: 1875: 1829: 1826: 1817:Main article: 1814: 1813:United Kingdom 1811: 1793:is a landmark 1768:Main article: 1765: 1762: 1741:Main article: 1738: 1735: 1726:Main article: 1723: 1720: 1705: 1702: 1696: 1693: 1676: 1673: 1667: 1664: 1634: 1631: 1590: 1587: 1578:Richard Prince 1573: 1570: 1542:Main article: 1539: 1536: 1496: 1493: 1380:the use fair. 1342: 1339: 1282: 1281:Music sampling 1279: 1260: 1257: 1213:Let's Go Crazy 1163:inline linking 1147: 1144: 1132:Joel Tenenbaum 1128:Charles Nesson 1119: 1116: 1088: 1085: 1075: 1072: 1070: 1067: 984: 981: 963: 960: 955: 954: 946: 902: 899: 895:President Ford 848: 845: 822:Second Circuit 769:J. D. Salinger 760: 757: 643:transformative 611: 608: 595:17 U.S.C. 550: 549: 548: 547: 544: 541: 538: 525:17 U.S.C. 517:17 U.S.C. 513: 512: 506:17 U.S.C. 467: 464: 412:17 U.S.C. 390:Gyles v Wilcox 380: 377: 330: 329: 327: 326: 319: 312: 304: 301: 300: 287: 286: 285: 284: 274: 269: 264: 259: 254: 253: 252: 250:Right to quote 247: 242: 237: 227: 222: 221: 220: 213:Bioprospecting 210: 205: 200: 195: 190: 185: 177: 176: 175:Related topics 172: 171: 170: 169: 164: 159: 154: 149: 144: 142:Related rights 139: 134: 129: 124: 119: 114: 109: 104: 99: 94: 89: 87:Database right 84: 79: 74: 66: 65: 57: 56: 26: 24: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 5069: 5058: 5055: 5053: 5050: 5048: 5045: 5043: 5040: 5038: 5035: 5033: 5030: 5029: 5027: 5012: 5009: 5008: 5005: 4999: 4996: 4994: 4991: 4990: 4988: 4984: 4974: 4971: 4969: 4966: 4964: 4961: 4959: 4956: 4954: 4951: 4947: 4944: 4942: 4939: 4938: 4937: 4934: 4932: 4929: 4925: 4920: 4917: 4915: 4912: 4910: 4907: 4903: 4898: 4895: 4891: 4886: 4883: 4881: 4878: 4877: 4875: 4871: 4865: 4862: 4860: 4857: 4855: 4852: 4850: 4847: 4845: 4842: 4838: 4833: 4830: 4826: 4821: 4818: 4814: 4809: 4806: 4804: 4801: 4799: 4796: 4794: 4791: 4789: 4786: 4784: 4781: 4777: 4772: 4769: 4765: 4760: 4757: 4756: 4754: 4752: 4748: 4745: 4741: 4733: 4728: 4725: 4721: 4716: 4713: 4711: 4708: 4706: 4703: 4701: 4698: 4696: 4693: 4691: 4688: 4686: 4683: 4681: 4678: 4676: 4673: 4671: 4668: 4666: 4663: 4659: 4654: 4651: 4649: 4646: 4642: 4637: 4634: 4632: 4629: 4627: 4624: 4622: 4619: 4617: 4614: 4612: 4609: 4605: 4600: 4597: 4595: 4592: 4590: 4587: 4585: 4582: 4580: 4577: 4575: 4572: 4570: 4567: 4565: 4562: 4560: 4557: 4556: 4554: 4550: 4544: 4541: 4537: 4532: 4529: 4527: 4526:United States 4524: 4522: 4519: 4517: 4514: 4512: 4509: 4507: 4504: 4500: 4495: 4492: 4490: 4487: 4485: 4482: 4480: 4477: 4475: 4472: 4470: 4467: 4465: 4462: 4460: 4457: 4456: 4454: 4450: 4435: 4432: 4428: 4423: 4420: 4416: 4411: 4408: 4404: 4399: 4396: 4392: 4387: 4384: 4380: 4375: 4372: 4370: 4367: 4365: 4362: 4360: 4357: 4355: 4352: 4348: 4343: 4340: 4339: 4337: 4333: 4327: 4324: 4320: 4317: 4315: 4312: 4311: 4310: 4307: 4305: 4302: 4300: 4297: 4295: 4292: 4291: 4288: 4279: 4274: 4272: 4267: 4265: 4260: 4259: 4256: 4249: 4246: 4243: 4240: 4237: 4234: 4233: 4227: 4224: 4222: 4219: 4217: 4214: 4213: 4208: 4203: 4195: 4190: 4185: 4181: 4177: 4173: 4169: 4164: 4159: 4155: 4151: 4147: 4143: 4139: 4135: 4131: 4124: 4120: 4116: 4111: 4106: 4102: 4098: 4091: 4086: 4085: 4081: 4065: 4061: 4054: 4051: 4039: 4035: 4028: 4025: 4013: 4007: 4004: 3991: 3987: 3986:Fair Use Week 3983: 3977: 3975: 3971: 3958: 3954: 3948: 3945: 3933: 3932: 3927: 3920: 3917: 3904: 3900: 3894: 3892: 3890: 3888: 3886: 3884: 3882: 3878: 3865: 3861: 3855: 3852: 3840: 3836: 3829: 3826: 3810: 3803: 3796: 3793: 3780: 3776: 3772: 3768: 3762: 3759: 3746: 3742: 3738: 3732: 3729: 3716: 3712: 3711: 3706: 3699: 3696: 3684: 3683:The 1709 Blog 3680: 3673: 3670: 3665: 3658: 3655: 3642: 3636: 3633: 3620: 3614: 3611: 3599: 3592: 3586: 3583: 3571: 3567: 3560: 3557: 3544: 3540: 3534: 3531: 3518: 3514: 3510: 3503: 3500: 3488: 3484: 3477: 3474: 3469: 3456: 3445: 3442: 3437: 3430: 3423: 3421: 3419: 3415: 3410: 3404: 3401: 3396: 3392: 3385: 3382: 3369: 3362: 3360: 3356: 3344: 3340: 3333: 3331: 3327: 3314: 3310: 3303: 3300: 3287: 3283: 3277: 3274: 3271: 3266: 3263: 3250: 3243: 3240: 3236: 3231: 3230: 3223: 3220: 3207: 3203: 3199: 3193: 3190: 3177: 3170: 3167: 3163: 3158: 3157: 3150: 3147: 3143: 3138: 3132: 3129: 3125: 3120: 3119: 3112: 3109: 3104: 3103: 3096: 3093: 3088: 3082: 3078: 3071: 3068: 3055: 3051: 3045: 3042: 3029: 3025: 3021: 3014: 3011: 2995: 2988: 2982: 2979: 2966: 2962: 2956: 2953: 2940: 2934: 2931: 2919: 2915: 2908: 2901: 2898: 2886:. May 9, 2013 2885: 2879: 2876: 2860: 2854: 2851: 2839: 2835: 2828: 2825: 2812: 2808: 2801: 2798: 2786: 2782: 2775: 2772: 2760: 2756: 2749: 2746: 2742: 2738: 2733: 2730: 2726: 2722: 2716: 2713: 2708: 2704: 2700: 2696: 2692: 2685: 2682: 2677: 2673: 2666: 2663: 2659: 2654: 2648: 2645: 2641: 2636: 2630: 2627: 2623: 2620: 2616: 2612: 2611: 2605: 2602: 2598: 2595: 2591: 2587: 2586: 2580: 2578: 2574: 2570: 2566: 2561: 2558: 2554: 2549: 2548: 2541: 2538: 2532: 2529: 2525: 2524: 2518: 2515: 2511: 2506: 2504: 2502: 2498: 2486: 2482: 2476: 2474: 2470: 2466: 2461: 2460: 2453: 2450: 2446: 2442: 2441:cert. granted 2438: 2433: 2428: 2422: 2419: 2406: 2402: 2396: 2393: 2388: 2381: 2379: 2375: 2371: 2366: 2365: 2358: 2355: 2339: 2335: 2331: 2324: 2317: 2315: 2313: 2309: 2305: 2302: 2298: 2294: 2293: 2287: 2285: 2283: 2281: 2277: 2273: 2268: 2267: 2260: 2257: 2252: 2248: 2244: 2240: 2236: 2232: 2231: 2223: 2221: 2219: 2217: 2213: 2200: 2196: 2189: 2182: 2179: 2166: 2162: 2156: 2153: 2149: 2148: 2142: 2139: 2126: 2122: 2115: 2108: 2105: 2101: 2097: 2092: 2091: 2084: 2082: 2078: 2074: 2069: 2066: 2062: 2058: 2053: 2050: 2046: 2041: 2040: 2033: 2031: 2027: 2014: 2010: 2004: 2001: 1989: 1983: 1979: 1978: 1970: 1967: 1960: 1955: 1952: 1949: 1946: 1944: 1941: 1939: 1936: 1934: 1931: 1929: 1926: 1924: 1921: 1919: 1916: 1914: 1911: 1910: 1906: 1904: 1902: 1897: 1893: 1889: 1885: 1877:Fair Use Week 1876: 1874: 1870: 1868: 1864: 1859: 1855: 1851: 1847: 1843: 1839: 1834: 1827: 1825: 1820: 1812: 1810: 1808: 1805:was sued for 1804: 1800: 1796: 1792: 1789:1 S.C.R. 339, 1788: 1787: 1782: 1779: 1778: 1771: 1763: 1761: 1759: 1755: 1751: 1744: 1736: 1734: 1729: 1721: 1718: 1713: 1711: 1703: 1701: 1694: 1692: 1688: 1686: 1682: 1674: 1672: 1665: 1663: 1661: 1660: 1655: 1654: 1648: 1643: 1640: 1632: 1630: 1628: 1624: 1619: 1617: 1612: 1608: 1603: 1601: 1597: 1588: 1586: 1583: 1579: 1571: 1569: 1567: 1563: 1559: 1555: 1551: 1545: 1537: 1535: 1533: 1529: 1528: 1522: 1520: 1519: 1514: 1510: 1506: 1502: 1494: 1492: 1490: 1486: 1481: 1479: 1475: 1472:, found that 1471: 1467: 1463: 1462: 1457: 1456: 1451: 1447: 1446:Suntrust Bank 1443: 1442: 1437: 1433: 1429: 1425: 1424: 1419: 1414: 1412: 1408: 1404: 1400: 1396: 1392: 1388: 1387: 1381: 1378: 1374: 1373: 1368: 1364: 1361:appropriated 1360: 1355: 1353: 1348: 1340: 1338: 1336: 1332: 1331:Grand Upright 1328: 1327: 1322: 1318: 1314: 1313: 1308: 1307: 1302: 1298: 1294: 1291:Before 1991, 1288: 1280: 1278: 1275: 1271: 1265: 1258: 1256: 1254: 1249: 1248: 1243: 1242: 1237: 1233: 1228: 1226: 1222: 1218: 1214: 1210: 1205: 1204: 1199: 1195: 1190: 1188: 1183: 1178: 1176: 1172: 1171:search engine 1168: 1164: 1160: 1156: 1154: 1145: 1143: 1141: 1140:Jammie Thomas 1137: 1133: 1129: 1125: 1117: 1115: 1112: 1111: 1106: 1104: 1100: 1096: 1095: 1086: 1084: 1081: 1074:Computer code 1073: 1068: 1066: 1063: 1059: 1055: 1052: 1046: 1044: 1040: 1034: 1032: 1027: 1021: 1016: 1011: 1010: 1004: 1000: 996: 995: 990: 982: 980: 977: 972: 967: 961: 959: 952: 947: 944: 940: 936: 935: 934: 931: 929: 924: 920: 916: 912: 907: 898: 896: 892: 891: 884: 882: 878: 877:Ninth Circuit 874: 870: 869:time-shifting 866: 861: 853: 846: 844: 841: 837: 833: 829: 828: 823: 818: 816: 814: 808: 804: 800: 796: 792: 791:Zapruder film 788: 783: 776: 775: 770: 765: 758: 756: 752: 748: 745: 743: 737: 734: 732: 728: 726: 720: 719:Richard Story 716: 712: 711: 705: 703: 699: 695: 691: 687: 686: 681: 676: 673: 672:Andrea Blanch 669: 665: 664: 659: 655: 651: 650: 645: 644: 637: 635: 629: 627: 623: 622: 616: 609: 607: 604: 600: 596: 590: 586: 581: 579: 578: 573: 565: 564: 558: 553: 545: 542: 539: 536: 535: 534: 533: 532: 530: 526: 522: 518: 511: 507: 504: 503: 501: 498: 494: 493: 488: 483: 481: 477: 473: 465: 463: 461: 457: 453: 449: 445: 441: 438:("EFF"), the 437: 431: 429: 424: 419: 417: 413: 409: 405: 401: 396: 392: 391: 386: 378: 376: 375: 374: 369: 365: 359: 357: 353: 349: 344: 340: 336: 325: 320: 318: 313: 311: 306: 305: 303: 302: 299: 295: 291: 283: 280: 279: 278: 275: 273: 272:Public domain 270: 268: 265: 263: 260: 258: 255: 251: 248: 246: 243: 241: 238: 236: 233: 232: 231: 228: 226: 223: 219: 216: 215: 214: 211: 209: 206: 204: 201: 199: 196: 194: 191: 189: 186: 184: 181: 180: 179: 178: 173: 168: 167:Utility model 165: 163: 160: 158: 155: 153: 150: 148: 145: 143: 140: 138: 135: 133: 130: 128: 125: 123: 120: 118: 115: 113: 110: 108: 105: 103: 100: 98: 95: 93: 90: 88: 85: 83: 80: 78: 75: 73: 70: 69: 68: 67: 63: 59: 58: 55: 51: 48: 44: 37: 33: 19: 4690:Saudi Arabia 4434:South Africa 4216:Online books 4206: 4145: 4141: 4123:the original 4100: 4096: 4069:December 29, 4067:. Retrieved 4063: 4053: 4043:November 18, 4041:. Retrieved 4037: 4027: 4017:November 16, 4015:. Retrieved 4006: 3996:November 18, 3994:. Retrieved 3990:the original 3985: 3961:. Retrieved 3957:the original 3947: 3937:November 16, 3935:. Retrieved 3929: 3919: 3907:. Retrieved 3903:the original 3868:. Retrieved 3863: 3854: 3844:November 16, 3842:. Retrieved 3838: 3828: 3818:November 16, 3816:. Retrieved 3809:the original 3795: 3783:. Retrieved 3779:the original 3770: 3761: 3749:. Retrieved 3745:the original 3731: 3719:. Retrieved 3708: 3698: 3688:November 18, 3686:. Retrieved 3682: 3672: 3657: 3647:December 30, 3645:. Retrieved 3635: 3625:December 30, 3623:. Retrieved 3613: 3601:. Retrieved 3597: 3585: 3575:November 16, 3573:. Retrieved 3569: 3559: 3549:November 16, 3547:. Retrieved 3543:the original 3533: 3523:November 16, 3521:. Retrieved 3517:the original 3512: 3502: 3490:. Retrieved 3486: 3476: 3455:cite journal 3444: 3435: 3403: 3394: 3384: 3372:. Retrieved 3346:. Retrieved 3342: 3317:. Retrieved 3312: 3302: 3292:November 16, 3290:. Retrieved 3285: 3276: 3265: 3255:November 15, 3253:. Retrieved 3242: 3227: 3222: 3212:November 16, 3210:. Retrieved 3206:the original 3201: 3192: 3182:November 15, 3180:. Retrieved 3169: 3154: 3149: 3136: 3131: 3116: 3111: 3100: 3095: 3076: 3070: 3060:September 2, 3058:. Retrieved 3054:the original 3044: 3034:November 16, 3032:. Retrieved 3028:the original 3023: 3013: 3003:November 18, 3001:. Retrieved 2994:the original 2981: 2971:November 18, 2969:. Retrieved 2965:the original 2955: 2945:November 18, 2943:. Retrieved 2933: 2923:November 16, 2921:. Retrieved 2917: 2913: 2900: 2888:. Retrieved 2878: 2866:. Retrieved 2853: 2843:November 16, 2841:. Retrieved 2837: 2827: 2815:. Retrieved 2811:the original 2800: 2788:. Retrieved 2785:Ars Technica 2784: 2774: 2762:. Retrieved 2759:Ars Technica 2758: 2748: 2736: 2732: 2715: 2698: 2694: 2684: 2675: 2671: 2665: 2652: 2647: 2634: 2629: 2608: 2604: 2583: 2564: 2560: 2545: 2540: 2531: 2521: 2517: 2509: 2488:. Retrieved 2485:casetext.com 2484: 2457: 2452: 2447: (2019). 2440: 2431: 2421: 2409:. Retrieved 2405:Ars Technica 2404: 2395: 2386: 2362: 2357: 2347:November 18, 2345:. Retrieved 2338:the original 2333: 2329: 2290: 2264: 2259: 2234: 2228: 2203:. Retrieved 2201:(2): 431–452 2198: 2194: 2181: 2171:November 16, 2169:. Retrieved 2164: 2155: 2145: 2141: 2129:. Retrieved 2124: 2120: 2107: 2100:the original 2088: 2072: 2068: 2060: 2056: 2052: 2037: 2017:. Retrieved 2012: 2003: 1991:. Retrieved 1976: 1969: 1887: 1880: 1871: 1835: 1831: 1822: 1784: 1783: 1775: 1773: 1746: 1731: 1728:Fair dealing 1722:Fair dealing 1715: 1707: 1698: 1689: 1678: 1669: 1657: 1651: 1646: 1644: 1636: 1620: 1615: 1610: 1604: 1596:fair dealing 1592: 1575: 1572:Social media 1547: 1525: 1523: 1516: 1498: 1488: 1484: 1482: 1473: 1469: 1459: 1453: 1445: 1439: 1431: 1421: 1415: 1406: 1384: 1382: 1370: 1359:Tom Forsythe 1356: 1344: 1334: 1330: 1324: 1320: 1316: 1310: 1304: 1290: 1273: 1266: 1262: 1245: 1239: 1229: 1201: 1194:Jeremy Fogel 1191: 1179: 1151: 1149: 1121: 1118:File sharing 1108: 1107: 1094:Loose Change 1092: 1090: 1079: 1077: 1064: 1060: 1056: 1050: 1047: 1035: 992: 986: 975: 968: 965: 956: 942: 932: 927: 922: 910: 908: 904: 888: 885: 872: 864: 862: 858: 840:moral rights 835: 831: 825: 819: 813:Bernard Geis 811:Time Inc v. 810: 802: 798: 784: 780: 772: 753: 749: 741: 738: 735: 722: 714: 708: 706: 693: 689: 683: 679: 677: 661: 653: 647: 641: 639: 631: 619: 617: 613: 592: 587: 583: 575: 572:Joseph Story 569: 561: 551: 514: 490: 484: 469: 432: 420: 400:fair dealing 388: 382: 371: 360: 352:fair dealing 334: 333: 298:Property law 289: 267:Pirate Party 262:Patent troll 245:Paraphrasing 239: 235:Fair dealing 157:Trade secret 117:Moral rights 47: 4998:New Zealand 4958:Switzerland 4922: [ 4900: [ 4888: [ 4844:Netherlands 4835: [ 4823: [ 4811: [ 4774: [ 4762: [ 4730: [ 4718: [ 4685:Philippines 4656: [ 4639: [ 4631:South Korea 4626:North Korea 4602: [ 4559:Afghanistan 4534: [ 4506:El Salvador 4497: [ 4425: [ 4413: [ 4401: [ 4389: [ 4377: [ 4374:Ivory Coast 4345: [ 3721:February 6, 3621:(in Polish) 3603:October 21, 3492:November 4, 3178:. The IPKAT 2701:: 601–649. 2624: (1984) 2599: (1985) 2490:October 27, 2306: (1994) 1913:Abandonware 1791:2004 SCC 13 1704:South Korea 1532:Harold Baer 1509:data mining 1501:text mining 1468:, applying 1434:); and the 1399:2 Live Crew 1397:, had sued 1391:Roy Orbison 1136:Kiwi Camara 1026:prima facie 1020:prima facie 1009:prima facie 698:2 Live Crew 529:§ 106A 343:copyrighted 257:Orphan work 183:Abandonware 152:Trade dress 5026:Categories 4919:Kyrgyzstan 4914:Kazakhstan 4832:Luxembourg 4727:Uzbekistan 4705:Tajikistan 4621:Kazakhstan 4569:Bangladesh 4564:Azerbaijan 4410:Mozambique 4386:Madagascar 4314:by country 4163:2144/22971 2019:August 23, 1961:References 1901:Pia Hunter 1681:Polish law 1627:common law 1566:encryption 1513:Denny Chin 1505:web mining 1438:Circuits ( 1377:Jeff Koons 1335:Bridgeport 1321:de minimis 1317:de minimis 1312:de minimis 1297:Biz Markie 1253:Righthaven 1232:Philip Pro 1159:thumbnails 999:litigation 971:plagiarism 939:substitute 815:Associates 668:Jeff Koons 599:§ 107 521:§ 106 510:§ 107 416:§ 107 356:Common Law 4993:Australia 4820:Lithuania 4695:Sri Lanka 4589:Indonesia 4579:Hong Kong 4543:Venezuela 4459:Argentina 4180:151080880 4105:CiteSeerX 3870:April 16, 3839:Tech Dirt 3374:August 5, 3348:August 5, 3319:August 5, 3313:The Verge 2411:March 30, 2131:April 16, 1993:April 16, 1954:TEACH Act 1928:Copyfraud 1846:Microsoft 1737:Australia 1695:Singapore 1238:ruled in 1200:ruled in 951:licensing 915:Universal 881:thumbnail 805:tried to 489:, but in 428:Civil law 404:precedent 218:Biopiracy 162:Trademark 82:Copyright 5032:Fair use 4710:Thailand 4680:Pakistan 4653:Mongolia 4648:Malaysia 4511:Honduras 4452:Americas 4359:Cameroon 4207:Fair use 4136:(1982). 3963:June 16, 3909:June 16, 3785:March 8, 3751:March 7, 3715:Archived 3487:Techdirt 2890:April 2, 2868:April 2, 2817:June 16, 2790:June 16, 2764:June 16, 2622:417, 451 2569:S.D.N.Y. 2205:March 6, 2127:(3): 715 2075:§ 13.05. 1950:doctrine 1907:See also 1666:Malaysia 1558:hardware 1470:Campbell 1436:Eleventh 1407:Campbell 1347:parodies 1293:sampling 943:Campbell 694:Campbell 690:Campbell 680:Campbell 654:Campbell 339:doctrine 335:Fair use 294:Property 240:Fair use 77:Copyleft 18:Fair-use 4986:Oceania 4968:Ukraine 4931:Moldova 4909:Georgia 4897:Belarus 4885:Armenia 4880:Albania 4854:Romania 4798:Ireland 4788:Germany 4771:Belgium 4759:Austria 4665:Myanmar 4636:Lebanon 4531:Uruguay 4494:Ecuador 4469:Bolivia 4464:Bermuda 4422:Senegal 4398:Morocco 4354:Burundi 4172:1122296 3982:"About" 2707:3498352 2251:1341457 1639:Knesset 1426:); the 1234:of the 1217:YouTube 1196:of the 919:Betamax 830:and in 793:of the 628:wrote: 379:History 4963:Turkey 4953:Serbia 4936:Russia 4864:Sweden 4849:Poland 4808:Latvia 4793:Greece 4783:France 4743:Europe 4616:Jordan 4599:Israel 4516:Panama 4479:Canada 4474:Brazil 4335:Africa 4204:about 4178: 4170: 4107: 3864:Gov.UK 3233:, 3160:, 3140:, 3122:, 3083: 2705: 2678:: 483. 2656:, 2638:, 2613:, 2588:, 2551:, 2463:, 2435:, 2368:, 2295:, 2270:, 2249: 2094:, 2043:, 1984: 1858:Yahoo! 1848:Inc., 1844:Inc., 1842:Google 1801:. The 1764:Canada 1675:Poland 1633:Israel 1418:Second 1411:satire 1367:Mattel 1363:Barbie 1352:satire 1341:Parody 875:, the 807:enjoin 727:, Inc. 634:piracy 597: 527: 519: 508: 476:parody 446:, the 442:, the 414: 393:, the 366:. The 122:Patent 4926:] 4904:] 4892:] 4859:Spain 4839:] 4827:] 4815:] 4803:Italy 4778:] 4766:] 4734:] 4722:] 4700:Syria 4670:Nepal 4660:] 4643:] 4611:Japan 4606:] 4584:India 4574:China 4538:] 4501:] 4484:Chile 4429:] 4417:] 4405:] 4393:] 4381:] 4369:Egypt 4364:Ghana 4349:] 4342:Benin 4248:CHEER 4176:S2CID 4168:JSTOR 4126:(PDF) 4093:(PDF) 3812:(PDF) 3805:(PDF) 3594:(PDF) 3432:(PDF) 2997:(PDF) 2990:(PDF) 2910:(PDF) 2862:(PDF) 2617: 2592: 2571:1988) 2341:(PDF) 2326:(PDF) 2299: 2247:JSTOR 2191:(PDF) 2117:(PDF) 1428:Ninth 871:. In 615:new. 337:is a 4941:USSR 4675:Oman 4594:Iran 4552:Asia 4521:Peru 4189:2014 4071:2016 4045:2015 4019:2015 3998:2015 3965:2009 3939:2015 3911:2009 3872:2018 3846:2015 3820:2015 3787:2017 3753:2017 3723:2017 3690:2015 3649:2016 3627:2016 3605:2018 3577:2015 3551:2015 3525:2015 3494:2019 3468:help 3376:2019 3350:2019 3321:2019 3294:2015 3257:2014 3214:2015 3184:2014 3081:ISBN 3062:2013 3036:2015 3005:2015 2973:2015 2947:2015 2925:2015 2892:2016 2870:2016 2845:2015 2819:2009 2792:2009 2766:2009 2719:See 2703:SSRN 2699:2019 2619:U.S. 2594:U.S. 2492:2022 2413:2017 2349:2015 2301:U.S. 2207:2011 2173:2015 2133:2018 2021:2024 1995:2018 1982:ISBN 1774:The 1708:The 1656:and 1621:The 1507:and 1487:and 1393:'s, 1333:and 1078:The 803:Time 799:Time 678:The 523:and 480:test 296:and 4158:hdl 4150:doi 4115:doi 2741:PDF 2615:464 2597:539 2590:471 2304:569 2297:510 2239:doi 2235:103 1886:'s 1884:ARL 1863:GDP 1609:'s 1552:of 1515:in 1383:In 1051:any 991:in 976:not 824:in 574:in 5028:: 4924:ru 4902:ru 4890:ru 4837:de 4825:ru 4813:ru 4776:fr 4764:de 4732:ru 4720:de 4658:ru 4641:ru 4604:ru 4536:es 4499:es 4427:fr 4415:ru 4403:fr 4391:fr 4379:fr 4347:fr 4174:. 4166:. 4156:. 4146:82 4144:. 4140:. 4113:. 4101:21 4099:. 4095:. 4062:. 4036:. 3984:. 3973:^ 3928:. 3880:^ 3862:. 3837:. 3773:. 3769:. 3739:. 3713:. 3707:. 3681:. 3596:. 3568:. 3511:. 3485:. 3459:: 3457:}} 3453:{{ 3434:. 3417:^ 3393:. 3358:^ 3341:. 3329:^ 3311:. 3284:. 3200:. 3022:. 2918:45 2916:. 2912:. 2836:. 2783:. 2757:. 2697:. 2693:. 2676:44 2674:. 2576:^ 2500:^ 2483:. 2472:^ 2443:, 2403:. 2377:^ 2334:77 2332:. 2328:. 2311:^ 2279:^ 2245:. 2233:. 2215:^ 2197:. 2193:. 2163:. 2125:15 2123:. 2119:. 2080:^ 2029:^ 2011:. 1869:. 1856:, 1852:, 1662:. 1564:, 1560:, 1556:, 1503:, 1491:. 1375:, 1161:, 1134:. 1126:. 817:. 660:. 636:." 624:, 482:. 418:. 410:, 4277:e 4270:t 4263:v 4191:. 4182:. 4160:: 4152:: 4117:: 4073:. 4047:. 4021:. 4000:. 3967:. 3941:. 3913:. 3874:. 3848:. 3822:. 3789:. 3755:. 3725:. 3692:. 3651:. 3629:. 3607:. 3579:. 3553:. 3527:. 3496:. 3470:) 3466:( 3397:. 3378:. 3352:. 3323:. 3296:. 3259:. 3216:. 3186:. 3089:. 3064:. 3038:. 3007:. 2975:. 2949:. 2927:. 2894:. 2872:. 2847:. 2821:. 2794:. 2768:. 2727:. 2709:. 2494:. 2415:. 2351:. 2253:. 2241:: 2209:. 2199:5 2175:. 2135:. 2102:. 2023:. 1997:. 1430:( 1420:( 1155:, 838:( 777:. 566:. 323:e 316:t 309:v 45:. 38:. 20:)

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.