Fair use - Knowledge

1216:. 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)." 1072:

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."

1174:

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

1051:

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.

1737:

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

51: 753: 934:, 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. 832:

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."

841: 1574:

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.

520:, 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: 546: 1094:. 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. 4433: 621:" 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 1510:, 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". 1862:

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."

1240:

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

1888:

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

736:

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".

823:, 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 1368:

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

1265:

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

1173:

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

1050:

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

1042:

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

739:

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

1769:

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

967:

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

894:

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

347:. 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. 1736:

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

1679:

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

1071:

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

937:

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

1705:

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

1573:

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

603:

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

350:

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

1721:

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,

1239:

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

743:

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

735:

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

1887:

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

573:

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

1602:

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

831:

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

1861:

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

1630:

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

1046:

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.

414:

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.

1252:

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

1102:

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

594:

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.

334:

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

1812:

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.

1394:" 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 1870:

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

1706:

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.

1338:

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

770:

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.

1402:, 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. 914:

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

577:

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.

962:

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,

1256:

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

569:, 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: 740:(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. 1821:

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.

4720: 1849:

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

1582:

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

4890: 1343:, 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. 4403: 946:

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.

488:

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."

663:

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.

4177:

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,

3703: 1638:

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

4912: 4646: 875:

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

1659:

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.

778:—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 1266:

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.

484:(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 3471: 895:

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.

4878: 4592: 3527: 1770:

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.

1195:

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

422:

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

386:

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

4307: 1037:

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

4801: 4629: 1025:

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.

848:

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.

1688:

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.

4813: 886:'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. 744:

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.

681:, 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 3823: 1012:

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

4703: 3008: 1354:

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),

1186: 1523:, 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." 725:

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.

3693: 467:, 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 3887: 1103:

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.

693:" 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. 1298:

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

1054:

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.

728:

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

1614:(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 3497: 671:

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,

2795: 1680:

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.

3755: 3531: 2847: 1261:

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

958:

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

4747: 4362: 1911: 4907: 4820: 4715: 4398: 4374: 4808: 4330: 3790: 1466: 2389: 1603:

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

994:

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

4641: 2415: 1454: 1424: 1224: 2975: 4885: 4873: 4759: 4624: 4519: 4482: 4386: 3090: 2709: 1294: 4796: 4587: 4302: 3725: 2603: 2598: 2578: 2285: 1406: 1229: 919:

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.

696:

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

673: 3397: 1607:

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

1416: 1170: 865: 115: 3237: 3186: 2949: 2628: 1284:

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

641:, 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 4264: 872:

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".

2311: 1798:

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

1318:

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

706:

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.

5045: 4391: 1826: 1738: 852:

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

541:

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.

372:

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

2769: 3016: 2743: 1774: 1030:(SLAPP) cases that allege copyright infringement, patent infringement, defamation, or libel may come into conflict with the defendant's right to 310: 2084: 359:

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

4708: 4078: 1027: 1701:

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:

3891: 2927: 3038: 1889: 1611: 2511: 339:

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

100: 4367: 3472:"US Government Threatening To Kill Free Trade With South Africa After Hollywood Complained It Was Adopting American Fair Use Principles" 1731: 718:

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

3106: 1314: 856:

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

3505: 3297: 1631:

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

1500:

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

1034:, and that possibility has prompted some jurisdictions to pass anti-SLAPP legislation that raises the plaintiff's burdens and risk. 526:

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

2799: 1855: 1358:

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

1112: 4126: 3767: 1304:

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

5035: 4934: 4292: 1588: 1275: 411: 218: 3150: 2453: 2433: 2425: 4257: 1892:, who attended the Library Code of Best Practices Capstone Event and had originally purchased the domain name fairuseweek.org. 1758: 1022:

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

3073: 2573: 2254: 2176: 1974: 1591:. Many countries have some reference to an exemption for educational use, though the extent of this exemption varies widely. 1429: 1411: 878: 645:

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

432: 176: 2822: 5040: 3652: 3356: 3327: 1647: 233: 135: 4379: 3258: 3130: 1308:

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

4961: 4739: 4477: 4415: 3888:"Computer and Communications Industry Association. "Fair Use Economy Represents One-Sixth of US GDP". September 12, 2007" 1506: 396: 303: 3797: 922:

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

574:

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

4514: 3667: 2447: 2280: 1807: 1091: 982: 783: 719: 583: 513: 505: 494: 400: 361: 2895: 1131:, announced a similar defense. However, the Court in the case at bar rejected the idea that file-sharing is fair use. 4999: 4929: 4250: 3217: 2982: 1872: 4048: 3824:"Book Publishers Whine To USTR That It's Just Not Fair That Canada Recognizes Fair Dealing For Educational Purposes" 3398:"Richard Prince ordered to pay damages to photographers in copyright infringement lawsuits over Instagram portraits" 3164: 1945:, an additional law for educational and governmental institutions that provides some additional copyright exceptions 4832: 4764: 4673: 4547: 4297: 3763: 3379: 1742: 1374: 1258: 1213: 677:, the Supreme Court had stated that "every commercial use of copyrighted material is presumptively ... unfair." In 637: 265: 90: 4335: 3733: 443:" archive was established in 2002 as a coalition of several law school clinics and the EFF to document the use of 4190: 3941: 2102: 1002:

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

213: 4752: 1162:

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

4524: 4487: 2535: 1163: 428: 424: 296: 3194: 2953: 1178:

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

1090:

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

4678: 4422: 4230: 3417: 1931: 1191: 480: 451:" (FUP) to help artists, particularly filmmakers, fight lawsuits brought against them by large corporations. 20: 2659:

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

4986: 4946: 4619: 4614: 4494: 4127:"Fair Use as Market Failure: A Structural and Economic Analysis of the 'Betamax' Case and Its Predecessors" 3970: 2326: 1698: 1087: 828: 436: 5030: 4902: 4825: 4693: 4609: 4557: 4552: 3729: 3607: 1791: 1515: 1405:

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

1158:, Arriba Soft's use of thumbnail pictures and inline linking from Kelly's website in Arriba Soft's image 698: 460: 2729: 376:. The Statute of Anne did not provide for legal unauthorized use of material protected by copyright. In 4981: 4683: 4577: 4567: 4531: 4447: 4287: 1641: 1449: 1141: 1098: 646: 31: 3438:

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

3042: 582:

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

4698: 4668: 4636: 4499: 4347: 3698: 2088: 1779: 722:

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

532:

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

120: 4214: 3456: 2135: 1453:

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

4919: 4897: 4868: 4842: 4786: 4776: 4653: 4457: 4410: 4342: 4314: 4111: 4098: 3554: 2713: 1235: 1019: 955:

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

815: 762: 416: 4022: 1594:

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

1532: 1244:

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

968:

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

5025: 4951: 4941: 4924: 4852: 4837: 4781: 4771: 4604: 4504: 4467: 4462: 3919: 1783: 1765: 1746: 1197: 590:. They were intended by Congress to restate, but not replace, the prior judge-made law. As Judge 125: 95: 85: 4204: 4847: 4791: 4688: 4658: 4599: 4572: 4562: 4472: 4357: 4352: 4282: 4093: 1795: 1787: 775: 373: 336: 196: 2695: 2679: 2646: 2374:

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

4663: 4509: 3443: 2607: 2582: 2541: 2289: 1906: 1378:

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

1289: 991: 352: 42: 3270: 2260: 4956: 4452: 3579: 2872: 2610: 1673: 882:, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a news article's quotation of fewer than 400 words from 631: 2358: 844:

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

8: 3791:"Why Canada Should Not Adopt Fair Use: A Joint Submission to the Copyright Consultations" 3555:"Israeli Judge Permits Unlicensed Sports Event Streaming—FAPL v. Ploni (Guest Blog Post)" 1936: 1595: 1538: 977: 713: 475: 186: 1212:, the owner of the copyright to the song, ordered YouTube to remove the video under the 4164: 4156: 2585: 2292: 2235: 2218: 1997: 1884: 1880: 1838: 1443: 774:

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

356: 270: 80: 60: 4107: 3848: 5020: 4582: 4168: 3223: 3069: 2691: 1970: 1546: 1542: 1438: 1201: 1159: 1031: 903: 790:

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

559:

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

535:

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

383: 50: 24: 3914: 3112: 1119:

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

760:'s letters was a key issue in the court's analysis of the second fair use factor in 4146: 4138: 4103: 2227: 1921: 1842: 1570: 1550: 1391: 1383: 1281: 1175: 1155: 1043:

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

729: 690: 655:

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

448: 444: 181: 2033: 517: 3144: 2352: 2149: 2078: 1964: 1926: 1520: 1360: 1209: 927: 801: 651: 609: 591: 587: 565: 551: 509: 498: 485: 440: 404: 191: 1200:, who made a home video of her thirteen-month-old son dancing to Prince's song " 4209: 3427:. American University Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property. 2027: 1566: 1151: 1120: 1116: 810: 757: 378: 327: 238: 201: 130: 75: 2469: 910:

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

629:

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

5014: 3238:"The Authors Guild Loses (Again), and HathiTrust Wins–But What Does It Mean?" 2390:"If you publish Georgia's state laws, you'll get sued for copyright and lose" 1128: 857: 798:

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

779: 707: 660: 260: 155: 3009:"Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for Scholarly Research in Communication" 1618:

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

4242: 4233:, a compilation of national statutes that refer to fair use or fair dealing 4122: 1716: 1584: 1554: 1519:, a case derived from the same digitization project mentioned above. Judge 1347: 1182: 1082: 926:

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

752: 614: 560: 410:

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

388: 340: 286: 255: 250: 223: 145: 105: 4236: 1901: 1749:(PC) were with reference to strengthening Australia's "digital economy". 1497: 1489: 1488:

The transformative nature of computer based analytical processes such as

1387: 1379: 1124: 997: 883: 686: 245: 171: 140: 3380:"Artist Richard Prince Sells Instagram Photos That Aren't His For $ 90K" 4160: 3006: 2976:"Statement on the Fair Use of Images for Teaching, Research, and Study" 2239: 2050:

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

1669: 1615: 1501: 1493: 1365: 1300: 1285: 1241: 1220: 1147: 1003: 987: 959: 656: 468: 344: 4239:, a repository of copyright educational resources for higher education 4151: 3945: 1877:

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

474:

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

4176: 2770:"Lawyer: RIAA must pay back all "$ 100M+" it has allegedly collected" 2150:"17 U.S. Code § 107 – Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use" 1942: 1916: 1834: 1326:, practice had effectively shifted to eliminate unlicensed sampling. 939: 869: 447:

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

392: 331: 206: 150: 70: 4142: 2231: 1879:. While the idea was not taken up nationally, Copyright Advisor at 1018:

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

840: 3942:"Computer and Communications Industry Association. "CCIA Members."" 2557: 282: 65: 4224: 4000: 3629: 3528:"The Football Association Premier League Ltd. v. Ploni and others" 419:

jurisdictions have other limitations and exceptions to copyright.

3357:"Copyright Case Over Richard Prince Instagram Show to Go Forward" 2928:"Documentary Filmmakers' Statement of Best Practices in Fair Use" 1627: 1205: 1154:, and fair use. In the lower District Court case on a motion for 907: 3978: 4079:"Fair Use and Copyright Protection: A Price Theory Explanation" 3694:"Our copyright laws are holding us back, and there's a way out" 1854:. The study was conducted using a methodology developed by the 1846: 1830: 1399: 1355: 1351: 1340: 1335: 1263:

Documentary Filmmakers' Statement of Best Practices in Fair Use

795: 622: 545: 464: 391:. Fair use was a common-law (i.e. created by judges as a legal 110: 1441:

estate unsuccessfully brought suit to halt the publication of

439:, numerous clinical programs at law schools, and others. The " 3298:"The story of Richard Prince and his $ 100,000 Instagram art" 2744:"Harvard prof tells judge that P2P filesharing is "fair use"" 3165:"A Closer Look at the Google Books Library Project Decision" 2470:"Cariou v. Prince, 714 F.3d 694 | Casetext Search + Citator" 1472:

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

1912:

1634:

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

1587:

instead of fair use, while others use different systems of

906:, failed to provide any empirical evidence that the use of 4175:

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

4076: 2087:, No. 4901 (C.C.D. Mass. 1841), archived from 1447:, which reused many of the characters and situations from 395:) doctrine in the U.S. until it was incorporated into the 3726:"Productivity Commission Draft IP Report – the breakdown" 3066:

Reclaiming Fair Use: How to Put Balance Back in Copyright

2376:

Reclaiming Fair Use: How to Put Balance Back in Copyright

1966:

Reclaiming Fair Use: How to Put Balance Back in Copyright

1851: 1233:

that the posting of an entire editorial article from the

2642:

Princeton University Press v. Michigan Document Services

2494: 2492: 2490: 343:" rights known in most countries that inherited English 3095:, 780 F. Supp. 182 (S.D.N.Y. 1991). 2798:. Harvard Journal of Law and Technology. Archived from 2416:

United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

2216:

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

3091:

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

1537:

There is a substantial body of fair use law regarding

1513:

Text and data mining was subject to further review in

1295:

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

598: 4227:, a database of fair use cases in U.S. federal courts 3855:. Government of the United Kingdom. November 18, 2014 3328:"Richard Prince defends reuse of others' photographs" 3263: 2599:

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

2487: 2414:

Judge Story's decision was reversed on appeal by the

1636:

The Football Association Premier League Ltd. v. Ploni

1006:, for instance, then the plaintiff cannot make out a 854:

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

674:

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

23:. For the broadband bandwidth management policy, see 1786:

case that establishes the bounds of fair dealing in

747: 30:

For fair use of copyrighted works on Knowledge, see

2952:. Association of Research Libraries. Archived from 2796:"Sony BMG Music Entertainment et al. v. Tannenbaum" 2418:, which did not consider the question of fair use. 1722:South Africa and the United Kingdom, among others. 990:on copyright infringement, the defendant bears the 659:used a photograph taken by commercial photographer 3913:McBride, Sarah; Thompson, Adam (August 1, 2007). 3890:. Ccianet.org. September 12, 2007. Archived from 2568: 2566: 2554:New Era Publications Int'l v. Henry Holt & Co 2421:Code Revision Comm'n v. Public.Resource.Org, Inc. 1829:(CCIA), a group representing companies including 821:New Era Publications Int'l v. Henry Holt & Co 712:Code Revision Commission and State of Georgia v. 330:in United States law that permits limited use of 5012: 3788: 3271:"Coders' Rights Project Reverse Engineering FAQ" 3063: 2848:"Righthaven v. Hoehn (District Court of Nevada)" 2373: 1962: 1827:Computer and Communications Industry Association 976:The U.S. Supreme Court described fair use as an 786:, for example, was purchased and copyrighted by 702:, the court found that the noncommercial use of 3912: 3782: 2464: 2462: 2382: 1969:. University of Chicago Press. pp. 10–11. 1775:CCH Canadian Ltd v. Law Society of Upper Canada 1146:provides and develops the relationship between 1057: 835: 463:include commentary, search engines, criticism, 3906: 3815: 3653:"Copyright Law In Singapore: A Brief Overview" 3350: 3348: 2981:. Visual Resources Association. Archived from 2726:Wall Data v. Los Angeles County Sheriff's Dept 2563: 1028:Strategic lawsuit against public participation 889: 868:held that copying an entire photo to use as a 776:facts and ideas are not protected by copyright 4258: 3179: 3082: 3007:The International Communication Association. 2616: 2369: 2367: 2305: 2303: 2301: 2275: 2273: 2271: 2269: 304: 4272: 3650: 3552: 3546: 3064:Aufderheide, Patricia; Jaszi, Peter (2011). 2823:"Woman can sue over YouTube clip de-posting" 2459: 2036: (Court of Chancery (England) 1740). 1963:Aufderheide, Patricia; Jaszi, Peter (2011). 1741:(AUSFTA), while the most recent two, by the 1739:Australia–United States Free Trade Agreement 1612:International Intellectual Property Alliance 1577: 3915:"Google, Others Contest Copyright Warnings" 3882: 3880: 3878: 3876: 3874: 3872: 3870: 3411: 3409: 3407: 3345: 3057: 2634: 2512:Warner Bros. and J. K. Rowling v. RDR Books 1883:, launched the first ever Fair Use Week at 1247: 1111:In 2009, fair use appeared as a defense in 1013: 1007: 995: 504:Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 101:Integrated circuit layout design protection 4265: 4251: 4077:Depoorter, Ben; Parisi, Francesco (2002). 4014: 3668:"How will South Korea Implement fair use?" 3659: 3553:Lichtenstein, Yoram (September 21, 2009). 3489: 3321: 3319: 3126:Mattel Inc v. Walking Mountain Productions 2364: 2298: 2266: 1732:History of Fair Use proposals in Australia 1569:released an exhibit of photographs at the 311: 297: 4150: 4097: 4086:International Review of Law and Economics 4046: 3107:Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films 3041:. Center for Social Media. Archived from 3039:"Success of Fair Use Consensus Documents" 2896:"A Pattern-Oriented Approach to Fair Use" 2309: 2174: 2168: 1478:Williams v. Columbia Broadcasting Systems 1315:Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films 971: 4020: 3867: 3630:"Kiedy możemy korzystać z prawa cytatu?" 3587:World Intellectual Property Organization 3498:"Israel now has the right copyright law" 3404: 3235: 3068:. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 2767: 2741: 2211: 2209: 2207: 2205: 2072: 2070: 1856:World Intellectual Property Organization 1605:International Copyright Law and Practice 839: 751: 544: 454: 5046:United States intellectual property law 4021:Courtney, Kyle K. (February 24, 2014). 3821: 3789:Magazines Canada (September 15, 2009). 3756:"Reviews that have considered fair use" 3469: 3325: 3316: 3295: 2893: 2887: 2378:. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 2100: 2021: 2019: 2004:. Harvard Office of the General Counsel 1589:limitations and exceptions to copyright 1483: 1398:court also distinguished parodies from 1276:Legal issues surrounding music sampling 1134: 412:limitations and exceptions to copyright 219:Limitations and exceptions to copyright 5013: 4121: 3965: 3963: 3706:from the original on December 14, 2016 3691: 3415: 3163:Rosati, Eleonora (November 17, 2013). 3162: 3136: 3133: (9th Cir. December 29, 2003). 3118: 2930:. Center for Media & Social Impact 2820: 2631: (3d Cir. September 19, 2000). 2574:Harper & Row v. Nation Enterprises 2255:Harper & Row v. Nation Enterprises 2139:, 801 F.3d 1126, 1133 (9th Cir. 2015). 1759:Fair dealing in Canadian copyright law 1526: 1421:Mattel v. Walking Mountain Productions 879:Harper & Row v. Nation Enterprises 16:Concept in United States copyright law 4246: 3226: (S.D.N.Y. October 10, 2012). 3209: 2793: 2515:, 575 F. Supp. 2d 513 (S.D.N.Y. 2008) 2215: 2202: 2142: 2067: 1430:Suntrust Bank v. Houghton Mifflin Co. 1412:Leibovitz v. Paramount Pictures Corp. 1086:series were served with a lawsuit by 1080:In April 2006, the filmmakers of the 950: 433:National Coalition Against Censorship 177:Artificial intelligence and copyright 4225:U.S. Copyright Office Fair Use Index 3520: 3495: 3418:"The Fair Use/Fair Dealing Handbook" 3377: 3354: 2950:"Code of Best Practices in Fair Use" 2677: 2658: 2591: 2501:, 714 F.3d 694, 707 (2d. Cir. 2013). 2361: (2d Cir. October 26, 2006). 2184:Journal of Intellectual Property Law 2016: 1648:Perfect 10, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc. 1469:injunction against its publication. 1390:in 1989 for their use of Orbison's " 1075: 1069:Oracle America, Inc. v. Google, Inc. 136:Supplementary protection certificate 3960: 3692:Martin, Peter (December 15, 2016). 3665: 3580:"Copyright (Amendment) Act of 2012" 3326:Gilbert, Laura (October 10, 2018). 3259:b:Reverse Engineering/Legal Aspects 3000: 2873:"Righthaven v. Hoehn (9th Circuit)" 2175:Patterson, L. Ray (April 1, 1998). 1816: 1533:Reverse engineering § Legality 1507:Authors Guild, Inc. v. Google, Inc. 1166:, who argued that it was fair use. 900:Sony Corp v. Universal City Studios 599:1. Purpose and character of the use 529:the nature of the copyrighted work; 13: 4070: 4047:Clobridge, Abby (March 10, 2015). 3651:George Hwang (December 19, 2017). 3470:Masnick, Mike (November 4, 2019). 3437: 3416:Band, Jonathan; Gerafi, Jonathan. 3013:Center for Media and Social Impact 2448:Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. 2428:, 1233 (11th Cir. 2018)., 2281:Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. 1808:Fair dealing in United Kingdom law 983:Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. 784:assassination of President Kennedy 720:Official Code of Georgia Annotated 549:Joseph Story wrote the opinion in 362:Google LLC v. Oracle America, Inc. 351:when the U.S. Congress passed the 14: 5057: 5000:Category:Copyright law by country 4184: 3559:Technology and Marketing Law Blog 3496:Band, Jonathan (March 26, 2008). 3355:Chow, Andrew R. (July 20, 2017). 3218:Authors Guild, Inc. v. HathiTrust 3153: (2d Cir. April 2, 1992). 2055: 1956: 1801: 1269: 748:2. Nature of the copyrighted work 4431: 4298:International copyright treaties 3764:Australian Law Reform Commission 3296:Plaugic, Lizzie (May 30, 2015). 3236:Anderson, Rick (July 21, 2014). 2794:Engle, Eric (October 17, 2009). 2524:293 F. Supp. 130 (S.D.N.Y. 1968) 2177:"Folsom v. Marsh and Its Legacy" 2101:Netanei, Neil Weinstock (2011). 1865: 1743:Australian Law Reform Commission 1375:Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music Inc 1214:Digital Millennium Copyright Act 1062: 917:Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music Inc 862:Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corporation 638:Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music Inc 266:Outline of intellectual property 91:Indigenous intellectual property 49: 19:For fair use trademark law, see 4040: 3993: 3934: 3841: 3748: 3732:. June 16, 2016. Archived from 3718: 3685: 3644: 3622: 3608:"Dz.U.2016.666 t.j. – prawo.pl" 3600: 3572: 3463: 3431: 3390: 3371: 3289: 3252: 3229: 3156: 3098: 3031: 2968: 2942: 2920: 2865: 2840: 2821:Egelko, Bob (August 21, 2008). 2814: 2787: 2768:Anderson, Nate (May 22, 2009). 2761: 2742:Anderson, Nate (May 18, 2009). 2735: 2719: 2702: 2671: 2652: 2547: 2527: 2518: 2504: 2439: 2408: 2344: 2246: 2156:. Cornell University Law School 1710: 1560: 1187:Northern District of California 1127:, defending alleged filesharer 1106: 938:market already existed for the 5036:Legal doctrines and principles 3822:Masnick, Mike (May 28, 2015). 3766:. June 4, 2013. Archived from 3275:Electronic Frontier Foundation 3115:, 398 (6th Cir. 2004). 2536:Salinger v. Random House, Inc. 2263: (2d Cir. 1985-05-20). 2128: 2094: 2039: 1990: 1692: 1626:In November 2007, the Israeli 1259:errors and omissions insurance 1171:Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals 1164:Electronic Frontier Foundation 733:, 714 F.3d 694 (2d. Cir. 2013) 685:court held that hip-hop group 429:American Civil Liberties Union 425:Electronic Frontier Foundation 1: 4288:Copyright case law by country 4108:10.1016/S0144-8188(01)00071-0 4049:"Every Week Is Fair Use Week" 3944:. Ccianet.org. Archived from 3632:(in Polish). December 1, 2013 2624:Video Pipeline v. Buena Vista 2136:Lenz v. Universal Music Corp. 2052:, 621 F.2d 57 (2d Cir. 1980). 1949: 1932:Fair use (U.S. trademark law) 1465:was fair use and vacated the 1192:Lenz v. Universal Music Corp. 1139:A U.S. court case from 2003, 992:burden of raising and proving 481:Lenz v. Universal Music Corp. 21:Fair use (U.S. trademark law) 4293:Copyright lengths by country 4215:Resources in other libraries 4027:Copyright at Harvard Library 3378:Sola, Katie (May 27, 2015). 2894:Madison, Michael J. (2004). 2110:Lewis & Clark Law Review 1725: 1683: 1557:and access control systems. 1437:case, Suntrust Bank and the 1113:lawsuits against filesharing 1058:Fair use in particular areas 1004:borrowed only a small amount 836:3. Amount and substantiality 437:American Library Association 7: 5041:United States copyright law 3730:Australian Digital Alliance 3187:"Google's Fair Use Victory" 2903:William and Mary Law Review 2154:Legal Information Institute 2034:3 Atk 143;26 ER 489 1895: 1825:On September 12, 2007, the 1792:Law Society of Upper Canada 1654: 1516:Authors Guild v. HathiTrust 1253:communications professors. 890:4. Effect upon work's value 699:L.A. Times v. Free Republic 607:In the 1841 copyright case 461:United States copyright law 214:Idea–expression distinction 10: 5062: 4231:The Fair Use/Fair Handbook 2310:Samuelson, Pamela (2009). 2103:"Making Sense of Fair Use" 1805: 1756: 1729: 1714: 1642:Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corp. 1530: 1273: 1204:" and posted the video on 1142:Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corp. 1099:This Film Is Not Yet Rated 930:for the original work. In 756:The unpublished nature of 647:Toward a Fair Use Standard 367: 32:Knowledge:Non-free content 29: 18: 4995: 4974: 4861: 4738: 4731: 4540: 4440: 4429: 4323: 4283:Copyright acts by country 4278: 4210:Resources in your library 3849:"Exceptions to copyright" 3699:The Sydney Morning Herald 3666:Ben (February 23, 2013). 3224:902 F.Supp.2d 445 2728:(9th Cir. May 17, 2006) ( 2684:Michigan State Law Review 2649: (6th Cir. 1996). 1752: 1663: 1621: 1578:Influence internationally 1334:Producers or creators of 1329: 4315:Rule of the shorter term 4273:Copyright law by country 2714:Audio Home Recording Act 2544: (2d Cir. 1987). 1998:"Copyright and Fair Use" 1248:Professional communities 1236:Las Vegas Review-Journal 1020:Audio Home Recording Act 816:Salinger v. Random House 809:In the decisions of the 763:Salinger v. Random House 459:Examples of fair use in 3920:The Wall Street Journal 3240:. the scholarly kitchen 2827:San Francisco Chronicle 2434:139 S. Ct. 2746 1784:Supreme Court of Canada 1766:Copyright Act of Canada 1747:Productivity Commission 1198:Gallitzin, Pennsylvania 1088:Jules and Gédéon Naudet 902:, the copyright owner, 689:'s parody of the song " 635:. In the 1994 decision 126:Plant genetic resources 96:Industrial design right 86:Geographical indication 4117:on September 14, 2006. 3451:Cite journal requires 2312:"Unbundling Fair Uses" 1796:copyright infringement 1788:Canadian copyright law 1708: 1672:and is covered by the 1288:'s appropriation of a 1181:In August 2008, Judge 1014: 1008: 996: 972:Procedure and practice 942:of course-pack copies. 845: 767: 627: 580: 556: 543: 337:copyright infringement 197:Criticism of copyright 121:Plant breeders' rights 4023:"About Fair Use Week" 2678:Reid, Amanda (2019). 2661:U.C. Davis Law Review 2556:, 695 F. Supp. 1493 ( 2426:906 F.3d 1229 2085:9 F. Cas. 342 1907:Berne three-step test 1703: 1274:Further information: 1208:. Four months later, 843: 825:droit moral d'artiste 755: 619: 571: 548: 491: 455:U.S. fair use factors 397:Copyright Act of 1976 353:Copyright Act of 1976 43:Intellectual property 4704:United Arab Emirates 4001:"Fair Use Week 2015" 3981:on November 20, 2015 3770:on December 21, 2016 3736:on February 20, 2017 3197:on November 17, 2015 3151:960 F.2d 301 3131:353 F.3d 792 3113:383 F.3d 390 3019:on November 16, 2015 2956:on November 17, 2015 2710:USC October 17, 1008 2647:99 F.3d 1381 2629:342 F.3d 191 2454:510 U.S. 569 2359:467 F.3d 244 2261:723 F.2d 195 1699:Korean Copyright Act 1674:Polish copyright law 1565:In May 2015, artist 1484:Text and data mining 1219:In June 2011, Judge 1135:Internet publication 615:Justice Joseph Story 4131:Columbia Law Review 3655:. Asia Law Network. 3534:on January 14, 2010 3508:on January 28, 2012 3400:. January 26, 2024. 3384:The Huffington Post 2988:on January 17, 2016 2680:"Deciding Fair Use" 2542:811 F.2d 90 2332:on January 19, 2013 2062:Nimmer on Copyright 2046:Nimmer on Copyright 1676:articles 23 to 35. 1668:Fair use exists in 1596:American University 1539:reverse engineering 1527:Reverse engineering 1230:Righthaven v. Hoehn 986:This means that in 978:affirmative defense 714:Public.Resource.Org 710:similarly ruled in 476:affirmative defense 374:Stationers' Company 187:Copyright abolition 5031:Equitable defenses 4935:Russian Federation 4478:Dominican Republic 3502:The Jerusalem Post 2732:at Ninth Circuit). 2319:Fordham Law Review 2219:Harvard Law Review 1885:Harvard University 1881:Harvard University 1839:Oracle Corporation 1463:The Wind Done Gone 1450:Gone with the Wind 1444:The Wind Done Gone 1346:For example, when 1290:Gilbert O'Sullivan 1225:District of Nevada 1092:World Trade Center 951:Additional factors 846: 768: 557: 357:U.S. Supreme Court 279:Higher categories: 271:Outline of patents 5008: 5007: 4970: 4969: 4191:Library resources 4053:Information Today 3948:on March 31, 2008 3894:on April 15, 2008 3332:The Art Newspaper 3075:978-0-226-03228-3 3045:on April 14, 2013 2712:, amended by the 2456:, 584 (1994). 2048:§ 13.05, quoting 1976:978-0-226-03228-3 1551:network protocols 1543:computer software 1439:Margaret Mitchell 1292:song in the case 1076:Documentary films 1032:freedom of speech 912:Harper & Row, 704:Los Angeles Times 384:Court of Chancery 321: 320: 25:Fair Usage Policy 5053: 4916: 4894: 4882: 4829: 4817: 4805: 4768: 4756: 4736: 4735: 4724: 4712: 4650: 4633: 4596: 4528: 4491: 4435: 4434: 4419: 4407: 4395: 4383: 4371: 4339: 4267: 4260: 4253: 4244: 4243: 4172: 4154: 4137:(8): 1600–1657. 4123:Gordon, Wendy J. 4118: 4116: 4110:. Archived from 4101: 4083: 4064: 4063: 4061: 4059: 4044: 4038: 4037: 4035: 4033: 4018: 4012: 4011: 4009: 4007: 3997: 3991: 3990: 3988: 3986: 3977:. Archived from 3967: 3958: 3957: 3955: 3953: 3938: 3932: 3931: 3929: 3927: 3910: 3904: 3903: 3901: 3899: 3884: 3865: 3864: 3862: 3860: 3845: 3839: 3838: 3836: 3834: 3819: 3813: 3812: 3810: 3808: 3803:on April 3, 2016 3802: 3796:. Archived from 3795: 3786: 3780: 3779: 3777: 3775: 3752: 3746: 3745: 3743: 3741: 3722: 3716: 3715: 3713: 3711: 3689: 3683: 3682: 3680: 3678: 3663: 3657: 3656: 3648: 3642: 3641: 3639: 3637: 3626: 3620: 3619: 3617: 3615: 3604: 3598: 3597: 3595: 3593: 3584: 3576: 3570: 3569: 3567: 3565: 3550: 3544: 3543: 3541: 3539: 3530:. Archived from 3524: 3518: 3517: 3515: 3513: 3504:. Archived from 3493: 3487: 3486: 3484: 3482: 3467: 3461: 3460: 3454: 3449: 3447: 3439: 3435: 3429: 3428: 3422: 3413: 3402: 3401: 3394: 3388: 3387: 3375: 3369: 3368: 3366: 3364: 3359:. New York Times 3352: 3343: 3342: 3340: 3338: 3323: 3314: 3313: 3311: 3309: 3304:. Vox Media, Inc 3293: 3287: 3286: 3284: 3282: 3277:. August 6, 2008 3267: 3261: 3256: 3250: 3249: 3247: 3245: 3233: 3227: 3221: 3213: 3207: 3206: 3204: 3202: 3193:. Archived from 3183: 3177: 3176: 3174: 3172: 3160: 3154: 3148: 3140: 3134: 3128: 3122: 3116: 3110: 3102: 3096: 3094: 3086: 3080: 3079: 3061: 3055: 3054: 3052: 3050: 3035: 3029: 3028: 3026: 3024: 3015:. Archived from 3004: 2998: 2997: 2995: 2993: 2987: 2980: 2972: 2966: 2965: 2963: 2961: 2946: 2940: 2939: 2937: 2935: 2924: 2918: 2917: 2915: 2913: 2900: 2891: 2885: 2884: 2882: 2880: 2869: 2863: 2862: 2860: 2858: 2852: 2844: 2838: 2837: 2835: 2833: 2818: 2812: 2811: 2809: 2807: 2791: 2785: 2784: 2782: 2780: 2765: 2759: 2758: 2756: 2754: 2739: 2733: 2723: 2717: 2706: 2700: 2699: 2675: 2669: 2668: 2656: 2650: 2644: 2638: 2632: 2626: 2620: 2614: 2595: 2589: 2570: 2561: 2551: 2545: 2539: 2531: 2525: 2522: 2516: 2508: 2502: 2499:Cariou v. Prince 2496: 2485: 2484: 2482: 2480: 2466: 2457: 2451: 2443: 2437: 2423: 2412: 2406: 2405: 2403: 2401: 2396:. March 30, 2017 2386: 2380: 2379: 2371: 2362: 2356: 2348: 2342: 2341: 2339: 2337: 2331: 2325:. Archived from 2316: 2307: 2296: 2277: 2264: 2258: 2250: 2244: 2243: 2226:(5): 1105–1136. 2213: 2200: 2199: 2197: 2195: 2181: 2172: 2166: 2165: 2163: 2161: 2146: 2140: 2132: 2126: 2125: 2123: 2121: 2107: 2098: 2092: 2082: 2074: 2065: 2059: 2053: 2043: 2037: 2031: 2023: 2014: 2013: 2011: 2009: 1994: 1988: 1987: 1985: 1983: 1960: 1922:Creative Commons 1843:Sun Microsystems 1817:Policy arguments 1571:Gagosian Gallery 1467:district court's 1455:Eleventh Circuit 1392:Oh, Pretty Woman 1384:Acuff-Rose Music 1312:doctrine in the 1176:default judgment 1156:summary judgment 1017: 1011: 1001: 898:For example, in 731:Cariou v. Prince 691:Oh, Pretty Woman 486:exclusive rights 449:Fair Use Project 445:cease and desist 441:Chilling Effects 313: 306: 299: 182:Brand protection 116:Peasants' rights 53: 39: 38: 5061: 5060: 5056: 5055: 5054: 5052: 5051: 5050: 5011: 5010: 5009: 5004: 4991: 4966: 4910: 4888: 4876: 4862:Other countries 4857: 4823: 4811: 4799: 4762: 4750: 4727: 4718: 4706: 4644: 4627: 4590: 4536: 4522: 4485: 4436: 4432: 4427: 4413: 4401: 4389: 4377: 4365: 4333: 4319: 4274: 4271: 4221: 4220: 4219: 4199: 4198: 4194: 4187: 4143:10.2307/1122296 4114: 4081: 4073: 4071:Further reading 4068: 4067: 4057: 4055: 4045: 4041: 4031: 4029: 4019: 4015: 4005: 4003: 3999: 3998: 3994: 3984: 3982: 3969: 3968: 3961: 3951: 3949: 3940: 3939: 3935: 3925: 3923: 3911: 3907: 3897: 3895: 3886: 3885: 3868: 3858: 3856: 3847: 3846: 3842: 3832: 3830: 3820: 3816: 3806: 3804: 3800: 3793: 3787: 3783: 3773: 3771: 3760:www.alrc.gov.au 3754: 3753: 3749: 3739: 3737: 3724: 3723: 3719: 3709: 3707: 3690: 3686: 3676: 3674: 3664: 3660: 3649: 3645: 3635: 3633: 3628: 3627: 3623: 3613: 3611: 3606: 3605: 3601: 3591: 3589: 3582: 3578: 3577: 3573: 3563: 3561: 3551: 3547: 3537: 3535: 3526: 3525: 3521: 3511: 3509: 3494: 3490: 3480: 3478: 3468: 3464: 3452: 3450: 3441: 3440: 3436: 3432: 3425:infojustice.org 3420: 3414: 3405: 3396: 3395: 3391: 3376: 3372: 3362: 3360: 3353: 3346: 3336: 3334: 3324: 3317: 3307: 3305: 3294: 3290: 3280: 3278: 3269: 3268: 3264: 3257: 3253: 3243: 3241: 3234: 3230: 3215: 3214: 3210: 3200: 3198: 3185: 3184: 3180: 3170: 3168: 3161: 3157: 3145:Rogers v. Koons 3142: 3141: 3137: 3124: 3123: 3119: 3104: 3103: 3099: 3088: 3087: 3083: 3076: 3062: 3058: 3048: 3046: 3037: 3036: 3032: 3022: 3020: 3005: 3001: 2991: 2989: 2985: 2978: 2974: 2973: 2969: 2959: 2957: 2948: 2947: 2943: 2933: 2931: 2926: 2925: 2921: 2911: 2909: 2898: 2892: 2888: 2878: 2876: 2871: 2870: 2866: 2856: 2854: 2853:. June 20, 2011 2850: 2846: 2845: 2841: 2831: 2829: 2819: 2815: 2805: 2803: 2802:on July 8, 2010 2792: 2788: 2778: 2776: 2766: 2762: 2752: 2750: 2740: 2736: 2724: 2720: 2707: 2703: 2676: 2672: 2657: 2653: 2640: 2639: 2635: 2622: 2621: 2617: 2596: 2592: 2571: 2564: 2552: 2548: 2533: 2532: 2528: 2523: 2519: 2509: 2505: 2497: 2488: 2478: 2476: 2468: 2467: 2460: 2445: 2444: 2440: 2419: 2413: 2409: 2399: 2397: 2388: 2387: 2383: 2372: 2365: 2353:Blanch v. Koons 2350: 2349: 2345: 2335: 2333: 2329: 2314: 2308: 2299: 2278: 2267: 2252: 2251: 2247: 2232:10.2307/1341457 2214: 2203: 2193: 2191: 2179: 2173: 2169: 2159: 2157: 2148: 2147: 2143: 2133: 2129: 2119: 2117: 2105: 2099: 2095: 2079:Folsom v. Marsh 2076: 2075: 2068: 2060: 2056: 2044: 2040: 2025: 2024: 2017: 2007: 2005: 2002:ogc.harvard.edu 1996: 1995: 1991: 1981: 1979: 1977: 1961: 1957: 1952: 1927:Derivative work 1898: 1868: 1819: 1810: 1804: 1761: 1755: 1745:(ALRC) and the 1734: 1728: 1719: 1713: 1695: 1686: 1666: 1657: 1624: 1600:infojustice.org 1580: 1563: 1535: 1529: 1486: 1474:Blanch v. Koons 1433:). In the 2001 1361:Rogers v. Koons 1332: 1278: 1272: 1250: 1210:Universal Music 1169:On appeal, the 1137: 1109: 1078: 1065: 1060: 974: 953: 892: 838: 750: 652:Blanch v. Koons 610:Folsom v. Marsh 601: 592:Pierre N. Leval 566:Folsom v. Marsh 552:Folsom v. Marsh 457: 370: 317: 281: 277: 192:Copyright troll 81:Farmers' rights 61:Authors' rights 35: 28: 17: 12: 11: 5: 5059: 5049: 5048: 5043: 5038: 5033: 5028: 5026:Digital rights 5023: 5006: 5005: 5003: 5002: 4996: 4993: 4992: 4990: 4989: 4984: 4978: 4976: 4972: 4971: 4968: 4967: 4965: 4964: 4962:United Kingdom 4959: 4954: 4949: 4944: 4939: 4938: 4937: 4932: 4922: 4917: 4905: 4900: 4895: 4883: 4871: 4865: 4863: 4859: 4858: 4856: 4855: 4850: 4845: 4840: 4835: 4830: 4818: 4806: 4794: 4789: 4784: 4779: 4774: 4769: 4757: 4744: 4742: 4740:European Union 4733: 4729: 4728: 4726: 4725: 4713: 4701: 4696: 4691: 4686: 4681: 4676: 4671: 4666: 4661: 4656: 4651: 4639: 4634: 4622: 4617: 4612: 4607: 4602: 4597: 4585: 4580: 4575: 4570: 4565: 4560: 4555: 4550: 4544: 4542: 4538: 4537: 4535: 4534: 4529: 4517: 4512: 4507: 4502: 4497: 4492: 4480: 4475: 4470: 4465: 4460: 4455: 4450: 4444: 4442: 4438: 4437: 4430: 4428: 4426: 4425: 4420: 4408: 4396: 4384: 4372: 4360: 4355: 4350: 4345: 4340: 4327: 4325: 4321: 4320: 4318: 4317: 4312: 4311: 4310: 4308:related rights 4305: 4295: 4290: 4285: 4279: 4276: 4275: 4270: 4269: 4262: 4255: 4247: 4241: 4240: 4234: 4228: 4218: 4217: 4212: 4207: 4201: 4200: 4189: 4188: 4186: 4185:External links 4183: 4182: 4181: 4173: 4119: 4099:10.1.1.196.423 4092:(4): 453–473. 4072: 4069: 4066: 4065: 4039: 4013: 3992: 3959: 3933: 3905: 3866: 3840: 3814: 3781: 3747: 3717: 3684: 3658: 3643: 3621: 3599: 3571: 3545: 3519: 3488: 3462: 3453:|journal= 3430: 3403: 3389: 3370: 3344: 3315: 3288: 3262: 3251: 3228: 3208: 3191:Law Down Under 3178: 3155: 3135: 3117: 3097: 3081: 3074: 3056: 3030: 2999: 2967: 2941: 2919: 2886: 2864: 2839: 2813: 2786: 2760: 2734: 2718: 2701: 2670: 2651: 2633: 2615: 2590: 2562: 2546: 2526: 2517: 2503: 2486: 2458: 2438: 2407: 2381: 2363: 2343: 2297: 2265: 2245: 2201: 2167: 2141: 2127: 2093: 2066: 2054: 2038: 2028:Gyles v Wilcox 2015: 1989: 1975: 1954: 1953: 1951: 1948: 1947: 1946: 1940: 1937:Scènes à faire 1934: 1929: 1924: 1919: 1914: 1909: 1904: 1897: 1894: 1867: 1864: 1818: 1815: 1806:Main article: 1803: 1802:United Kingdom 1800: 1782:is a landmark 1757:Main article: 1754: 1751: 1730:Main article: 1727: 1724: 1715:Main article: 1712: 1709: 1694: 1691: 1685: 1682: 1665: 1662: 1656: 1653: 1623: 1620: 1579: 1576: 1567:Richard Prince 1562: 1559: 1531:Main article: 1528: 1525: 1485: 1482: 1369:the use fair. 1331: 1328: 1271: 1270:Music sampling 1268: 1249: 1246: 1202:Let's Go Crazy 1152:inline linking 1136: 1133: 1121:Joel Tenenbaum 1117:Charles Nesson 1108: 1105: 1077: 1074: 1064: 1061: 1059: 1056: 973: 970: 952: 949: 944: 943: 935: 891: 888: 884:President Ford 837: 834: 811:Second Circuit 758:J. D. Salinger 749: 746: 632:transformative 600: 597: 584:17 U.S.C. 539: 538: 537: 536: 533: 530: 527: 514:17 U.S.C. 506:17 U.S.C. 502: 501: 495:17 U.S.C. 456: 453: 401:17 U.S.C. 379:Gyles v Wilcox 369: 366: 319: 318: 316: 315: 308: 301: 293: 290: 289: 276: 275: 274: 273: 263: 258: 253: 248: 243: 242: 241: 239:Right to quote 236: 231: 226: 216: 211: 210: 209: 202:Bioprospecting 199: 194: 189: 184: 179: 174: 166: 165: 164:Related topics 161: 160: 159: 158: 153: 148: 143: 138: 133: 131:Related rights 128: 123: 118: 113: 108: 103: 98: 93: 88: 83: 78: 76:Database right 73: 68: 63: 55: 54: 46: 45: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 5058: 5047: 5044: 5042: 5039: 5037: 5034: 5032: 5029: 5027: 5024: 5022: 5019: 5018: 5016: 5001: 4998: 4997: 4994: 4988: 4985: 4983: 4980: 4979: 4977: 4973: 4963: 4960: 4958: 4955: 4953: 4950: 4948: 4945: 4943: 4940: 4936: 4933: 4931: 4928: 4927: 4926: 4923: 4921: 4918: 4914: 4909: 4906: 4904: 4901: 4899: 4896: 4892: 4887: 4884: 4880: 4875: 4872: 4870: 4867: 4866: 4864: 4860: 4854: 4851: 4849: 4846: 4844: 4841: 4839: 4836: 4834: 4831: 4827: 4822: 4819: 4815: 4810: 4807: 4803: 4798: 4795: 4793: 4790: 4788: 4785: 4783: 4780: 4778: 4775: 4773: 4770: 4766: 4761: 4758: 4754: 4749: 4746: 4745: 4743: 4741: 4737: 4734: 4730: 4722: 4717: 4714: 4710: 4705: 4702: 4700: 4697: 4695: 4692: 4690: 4687: 4685: 4682: 4680: 4677: 4675: 4672: 4670: 4667: 4665: 4662: 4660: 4657: 4655: 4652: 4648: 4643: 4640: 4638: 4635: 4631: 4626: 4623: 4621: 4618: 4616: 4613: 4611: 4608: 4606: 4603: 4601: 4598: 4594: 4589: 4586: 4584: 4581: 4579: 4576: 4574: 4571: 4569: 4566: 4564: 4561: 4559: 4556: 4554: 4551: 4549: 4546: 4545: 4543: 4539: 4533: 4530: 4526: 4521: 4518: 4516: 4515:United States 4513: 4511: 4508: 4506: 4503: 4501: 4498: 4496: 4493: 4489: 4484: 4481: 4479: 4476: 4474: 4471: 4469: 4466: 4464: 4461: 4459: 4456: 4454: 4451: 4449: 4446: 4445: 4443: 4439: 4424: 4421: 4417: 4412: 4409: 4405: 4400: 4397: 4393: 4388: 4385: 4381: 4376: 4373: 4369: 4364: 4361: 4359: 4356: 4354: 4351: 4349: 4346: 4344: 4341: 4337: 4332: 4329: 4328: 4326: 4322: 4316: 4313: 4309: 4306: 4304: 4301: 4300: 4299: 4296: 4294: 4291: 4289: 4286: 4284: 4281: 4280: 4277: 4268: 4263: 4261: 4256: 4254: 4249: 4248: 4245: 4238: 4235: 4232: 4229: 4226: 4223: 4222: 4216: 4213: 4211: 4208: 4206: 4203: 4202: 4197: 4192: 4179: 4174: 4170: 4166: 4162: 4158: 4153: 4148: 4144: 4140: 4136: 4132: 4128: 4124: 4120: 4113: 4109: 4105: 4100: 4095: 4091: 4087: 4080: 4075: 4074: 4054: 4050: 4043: 4028: 4024: 4017: 4002: 3996: 3980: 3976: 3975:Fair Use Week 3972: 3966: 3964: 3947: 3943: 3937: 3922: 3921: 3916: 3909: 3893: 3889: 3883: 3881: 3879: 3877: 3875: 3873: 3871: 3854: 3850: 3844: 3829: 3825: 3818: 3799: 3792: 3785: 3769: 3765: 3761: 3757: 3751: 3735: 3731: 3727: 3721: 3705: 3701: 3700: 3695: 3688: 3673: 3672:The 1709 Blog 3669: 3662: 3654: 3647: 3631: 3625: 3609: 3603: 3588: 3581: 3575: 3560: 3556: 3549: 3533: 3529: 3523: 3507: 3503: 3499: 3492: 3477: 3473: 3466: 3458: 3445: 3434: 3426: 3419: 3412: 3410: 3408: 3399: 3393: 3385: 3381: 3374: 3358: 3351: 3349: 3333: 3329: 3322: 3320: 3303: 3299: 3292: 3276: 3272: 3266: 3260: 3255: 3239: 3232: 3225: 3220: 3219: 3212: 3196: 3192: 3188: 3182: 3166: 3159: 3152: 3147: 3146: 3139: 3132: 3127: 3121: 3114: 3109: 3108: 3101: 3093: 3092: 3085: 3077: 3071: 3067: 3060: 3044: 3040: 3034: 3018: 3014: 3010: 3003: 2984: 2977: 2971: 2955: 2951: 2945: 2929: 2923: 2908: 2904: 2897: 2890: 2875:. May 9, 2013 2874: 2868: 2849: 2843: 2828: 2824: 2817: 2801: 2797: 2790: 2775: 2771: 2764: 2749: 2745: 2738: 2731: 2727: 2722: 2715: 2711: 2705: 2697: 2693: 2689: 2685: 2681: 2674: 2666: 2662: 2655: 2648: 2643: 2637: 2630: 2625: 2619: 2612: 2609: 2605: 2601: 2600: 2594: 2587: 2584: 2580: 2576: 2575: 2569: 2567: 2559: 2555: 2550: 2543: 2538: 2537: 2530: 2521: 2514: 2513: 2507: 2500: 2495: 2493: 2491: 2475: 2471: 2465: 2463: 2455: 2450: 2449: 2442: 2435: 2431: 2430:cert. granted 2427: 2422: 2417: 2411: 2395: 2391: 2385: 2377: 2370: 2368: 2360: 2355: 2354: 2347: 2328: 2324: 2320: 2313: 2306: 2304: 2302: 2294: 2291: 2287: 2283: 2282: 2276: 2274: 2272: 2270: 2262: 2257: 2256: 2249: 2241: 2237: 2233: 2229: 2225: 2221: 2220: 2212: 2210: 2208: 2206: 2189: 2185: 2178: 2171: 2155: 2151: 2145: 2138: 2137: 2131: 2115: 2111: 2104: 2097: 2090: 2086: 2081: 2080: 2073: 2071: 2063: 2058: 2051: 2047: 2042: 2035: 2030: 2029: 2022: 2020: 2003: 1999: 1993: 1978: 1972: 1968: 1967: 1959: 1955: 1944: 1941: 1938: 1935: 1933: 1930: 1928: 1925: 1923: 1920: 1918: 1915: 1913: 1910: 1908: 1905: 1903: 1900: 1899: 1893: 1891: 1886: 1882: 1878: 1874: 1866:Fair Use Week 1863: 1859: 1857: 1853: 1848: 1844: 1840: 1836: 1832: 1828: 1823: 1814: 1809: 1799: 1797: 1794:was sued for 1793: 1789: 1785: 1781: 1778:1 S.C.R. 339, 1777: 1776: 1771: 1768: 1767: 1760: 1750: 1748: 1744: 1740: 1733: 1723: 1718: 1707: 1702: 1700: 1690: 1681: 1677: 1675: 1671: 1661: 1652: 1650: 1649: 1644: 1643: 1637: 1632: 1629: 1619: 1617: 1613: 1608: 1606: 1601: 1597: 1592: 1590: 1586: 1575: 1572: 1568: 1558: 1556: 1552: 1548: 1544: 1540: 1534: 1524: 1522: 1518: 1517: 1511: 1509: 1508: 1503: 1499: 1495: 1491: 1481: 1479: 1475: 1470: 1468: 1464: 1461:, found that 1460: 1456: 1452: 1451: 1446: 1445: 1440: 1436: 1435:Suntrust Bank 1432: 1431: 1426: 1422: 1418: 1414: 1413: 1408: 1403: 1401: 1397: 1393: 1389: 1385: 1381: 1377: 1376: 1370: 1367: 1363: 1362: 1357: 1353: 1350:appropriated 1349: 1344: 1342: 1337: 1327: 1325: 1321: 1320:Grand Upright 1317: 1316: 1311: 1307: 1303: 1302: 1297: 1296: 1291: 1287: 1283: 1280:Before 1991, 1277: 1267: 1264: 1260: 1254: 1245: 1243: 1238: 1237: 1232: 1231: 1226: 1222: 1217: 1215: 1211: 1207: 1203: 1199: 1194: 1193: 1188: 1184: 1179: 1177: 1172: 1167: 1165: 1161: 1160:search engine 1157: 1153: 1149: 1145: 1143: 1132: 1130: 1129:Jammie Thomas 1126: 1122: 1118: 1114: 1104: 1101: 1100: 1095: 1093: 1089: 1085: 1084: 1073: 1070: 1063:Computer code 1055: 1052: 1048: 1044: 1041: 1035: 1033: 1029: 1023: 1021: 1016: 1010: 1005: 1000: 999: 993: 989: 985: 984: 979: 969: 966: 961: 956: 948: 941: 936: 933: 929: 925: 924: 923: 920: 918: 913: 909: 905: 901: 896: 887: 885: 881: 880: 873: 871: 867: 866:Ninth Circuit 863: 859: 858:time-shifting 855: 850: 842: 833: 830: 826: 822: 818: 817: 812: 807: 805: 803: 797: 793: 789: 785: 781: 780:Zapruder film 777: 772: 765: 764: 759: 754: 745: 741: 737: 734: 732: 726: 723: 721: 717: 715: 709: 708:Richard Story 705: 701: 700: 694: 692: 688: 684: 680: 676: 675: 670: 665: 662: 661:Andrea Blanch 658: 654: 653: 648: 644: 640: 639: 634: 633: 626: 624: 618: 616: 612: 611: 605: 596: 593: 589: 585: 579: 575: 570: 568: 567: 562: 554: 553: 547: 542: 534: 531: 528: 525: 524: 523: 522: 521: 519: 515: 511: 507: 500: 496: 493: 492: 490: 487: 483: 482: 477: 472: 470: 466: 462: 452: 450: 446: 442: 438: 434: 430: 427:("EFF"), the 426: 420: 418: 413: 408: 406: 402: 398: 394: 390: 385: 381: 380: 375: 365: 364: 363: 358: 354: 348: 346: 342: 338: 333: 329: 325: 314: 309: 307: 302: 300: 295: 294: 292: 291: 288: 284: 280: 272: 269: 268: 267: 264: 262: 261:Public domain 259: 257: 254: 252: 249: 247: 244: 240: 237: 235: 232: 230: 227: 225: 222: 221: 220: 217: 215: 212: 208: 205: 204: 203: 200: 198: 195: 193: 190: 188: 185: 183: 180: 178: 175: 173: 170: 169: 168: 167: 163: 162: 157: 156:Utility model 154: 152: 149: 147: 144: 142: 139: 137: 134: 132: 129: 127: 124: 122: 119: 117: 114: 112: 109: 107: 104: 102: 99: 97: 94: 92: 89: 87: 84: 82: 79: 77: 74: 72: 69: 67: 64: 62: 59: 58: 57: 56: 52: 48: 47: 44: 41: 40: 37: 33: 26: 22: 4679:Saudi Arabia 4423:South Africa 4205:Online books 4195: 4134: 4130: 4112:the original 4089: 4085: 4058:December 29, 4056:. Retrieved 4052: 4042: 4032:November 18, 4030:. Retrieved 4026: 4016: 4006:November 16, 4004:. Retrieved 3995: 3985:November 18, 3983:. Retrieved 3979:the original 3974: 3950:. Retrieved 3946:the original 3936: 3926:November 16, 3924:. Retrieved 3918: 3908: 3896:. Retrieved 3892:the original 3857:. Retrieved 3852: 3843: 3833:November 16, 3831:. Retrieved 3827: 3817: 3807:November 16, 3805:. Retrieved 3798:the original 3784: 3772:. Retrieved 3768:the original 3759: 3750: 3738:. Retrieved 3734:the original 3720: 3708:. Retrieved 3697: 3687: 3677:November 18, 3675:. Retrieved 3671: 3661: 3646: 3636:December 30, 3634:. Retrieved 3624: 3614:December 30, 3612:. Retrieved 3602: 3590:. Retrieved 3586: 3574: 3564:November 16, 3562:. Retrieved 3558: 3548: 3538:November 16, 3536:. Retrieved 3532:the original 3522: 3512:November 16, 3510:. Retrieved 3506:the original 3501: 3491: 3479:. Retrieved 3475: 3465: 3444:cite journal 3433: 3424: 3392: 3383: 3373: 3361:. Retrieved 3335:. Retrieved 3331: 3306:. Retrieved 3301: 3291: 3281:November 16, 3279:. Retrieved 3274: 3265: 3254: 3244:November 15, 3242:. Retrieved 3231: 3216: 3211: 3201:November 16, 3199:. Retrieved 3195:the original 3190: 3181: 3171:November 15, 3169:. Retrieved 3158: 3143: 3138: 3125: 3120: 3105: 3100: 3089: 3084: 3065: 3059: 3049:September 2, 3047:. Retrieved 3043:the original 3033: 3023:November 16, 3021:. Retrieved 3017:the original 3012: 3002: 2992:November 18, 2990:. Retrieved 2983:the original 2970: 2960:November 18, 2958:. Retrieved 2954:the original 2944: 2934:November 18, 2932:. Retrieved 2922: 2912:November 16, 2910:. Retrieved 2906: 2902: 2889: 2877:. Retrieved 2867: 2855:. Retrieved 2842: 2832:November 16, 2830:. Retrieved 2826: 2816: 2804:. Retrieved 2800:the original 2789: 2777:. Retrieved 2774:Ars Technica 2773: 2763: 2751:. Retrieved 2748:Ars Technica 2747: 2737: 2725: 2721: 2704: 2687: 2683: 2673: 2664: 2660: 2654: 2641: 2636: 2623: 2618: 2597: 2593: 2572: 2553: 2549: 2534: 2529: 2520: 2510: 2506: 2498: 2477:. Retrieved 2474:casetext.com 2473: 2446: 2441: 2436: (2019). 2429: 2420: 2410: 2398:. Retrieved 2394:Ars Technica 2393: 2384: 2375: 2351: 2346: 2336:November 18, 2334:. Retrieved 2327:the original 2322: 2318: 2279: 2253: 2248: 2223: 2217: 2192:. Retrieved 2190:(2): 431–452 2187: 2183: 2170: 2160:November 16, 2158:. Retrieved 2153: 2144: 2134: 2130: 2118:. Retrieved 2113: 2109: 2096: 2089:the original 2077: 2061: 2057: 2049: 2045: 2041: 2026: 2006:. Retrieved 2001: 1992: 1980:. Retrieved 1965: 1958: 1876: 1869: 1860: 1824: 1820: 1811: 1773: 1772: 1764: 1762: 1735: 1720: 1717:Fair dealing 1711:Fair dealing 1704: 1696: 1687: 1678: 1667: 1658: 1646: 1640: 1635: 1633: 1625: 1609: 1604: 1599: 1593: 1585:fair dealing 1581: 1564: 1561:Social media 1536: 1514: 1512: 1505: 1487: 1477: 1473: 1471: 1462: 1458: 1448: 1442: 1434: 1428: 1420: 1410: 1404: 1395: 1373: 1371: 1359: 1348:Tom Forsythe 1345: 1333: 1323: 1319: 1313: 1309: 1305: 1299: 1293: 1279: 1262: 1255: 1251: 1234: 1228: 1218: 1190: 1183:Jeremy Fogel 1180: 1168: 1140: 1138: 1110: 1107:File sharing 1097: 1096: 1083:Loose Change 1081: 1079: 1068: 1066: 1053: 1049: 1045: 1039: 1036: 1024: 981: 975: 964: 957: 954: 945: 931: 921: 916: 911: 899: 897: 893: 877: 874: 861: 853: 851: 847: 829:moral rights 824: 820: 814: 808: 802:Bernard Geis 800:Time Inc v. 799: 791: 787: 773: 769: 761: 742: 738: 730: 727: 724: 711: 703: 697: 695: 682: 678: 672: 668: 666: 650: 642: 636: 630: 628: 620: 608: 606: 602: 581: 576: 572: 564: 561:Joseph Story 558: 550: 540: 503: 479: 473: 458: 421: 409: 389:fair dealing 377: 371: 360: 349: 341:fair dealing 323: 322: 287:Property law 278: 256:Pirate Party 251:Patent troll 234:Paraphrasing 228: 224:Fair dealing 146:Trade secret 106:Moral rights 36: 4987:New Zealand 4947:Switzerland 4911: [ 4889: [ 4877: [ 4833:Netherlands 4824: [ 4812: [ 4800: [ 4763: [ 4751: [ 4719: [ 4707: [ 4674:Philippines 4645: [ 4628: [ 4620:South Korea 4615:North Korea 4591: [ 4548:Afghanistan 4523: [ 4495:El Salvador 4486: [ 4414: [ 4402: [ 4390: [ 4378: [ 4366: [ 4363:Ivory Coast 4334: [ 3710:February 6, 3610:(in Polish) 3592:October 21, 3481:November 4, 3167:. The IPKAT 2690:: 601–649. 2613: (1984) 2588: (1985) 2479:October 27, 2295: (1994) 1902:Abandonware 1780:2004 SCC 13 1693:South Korea 1521:Harold Baer 1498:data mining 1490:text mining 1457:, applying 1423:); and the 1388:2 Live Crew 1386:, had sued 1380:Roy Orbison 1125:Kiwi Camara 1015:prima facie 1009:prima facie 998:prima facie 687:2 Live Crew 518:§ 106A 332:copyrighted 246:Orphan work 172:Abandonware 141:Trade dress 5015:Categories 4908:Kyrgyzstan 4903:Kazakhstan 4821:Luxembourg 4716:Uzbekistan 4694:Tajikistan 4610:Kazakhstan 4558:Bangladesh 4553:Azerbaijan 4399:Mozambique 4375:Madagascar 4303:by country 4152:2144/22971 2008:August 23, 1950:References 1890:Pia Hunter 1670:Polish law 1616:common law 1555:encryption 1502:Denny Chin 1494:web mining 1427:Circuits ( 1366:Jeff Koons 1324:Bridgeport 1310:de minimis 1306:de minimis 1301:de minimis 1286:Biz Markie 1242:Righthaven 1221:Philip Pro 1148:thumbnails 988:litigation 960:plagiarism 928:substitute 804:Associates 657:Jeff Koons 588:§ 107 510:§ 106 499:§ 107 405:§ 107 345:Common Law 4982:Australia 4809:Lithuania 4684:Sri Lanka 4578:Indonesia 4568:Hong Kong 4532:Venezuela 4448:Argentina 4169:151080880 4094:CiteSeerX 3859:April 16, 3828:Tech Dirt 3363:August 5, 3337:August 5, 3308:August 5, 3302:The Verge 2400:March 30, 2120:April 16, 1982:April 16, 1943:TEACH Act 1917:Copyfraud 1835:Microsoft 1726:Australia 1684:Singapore 1227:ruled in 1189:ruled in 940:licensing 904:Universal 870:thumbnail 794:tried to 478:, but in 417:Civil law 393:precedent 207:Biopiracy 151:Trademark 71:Copyright 5021:Fair use 4699:Thailand 4669:Pakistan 4642:Mongolia 4637:Malaysia 4500:Honduras 4441:Americas 4348:Cameroon 4196:Fair use 4125:(1982). 3952:June 16, 3898:June 16, 3774:March 8, 3740:March 7, 3704:Archived 3476:Techdirt 2879:April 2, 2857:April 2, 2806:June 16, 2779:June 16, 2753:June 16, 2611:417, 451 2558:S.D.N.Y. 2194:March 6, 2116:(3): 715 2064:§ 13.05. 1939:doctrine 1896:See also 1655:Malaysia 1547:hardware 1459:Campbell 1425:Eleventh 1396:Campbell 1336:parodies 1282:sampling 932:Campbell 683:Campbell 679:Campbell 669:Campbell 643:Campbell 328:doctrine 324:Fair use 283:Property 229:Fair use 66:Copyleft 4975:Oceania 4957:Ukraine 4920:Moldova 4898:Georgia 4886:Belarus 4874:Armenia 4869:Albania 4843:Romania 4787:Ireland 4777:Germany 4760:Belgium 4748:Austria 4654:Myanmar 4625:Lebanon 4520:Uruguay 4483:Ecuador 4458:Bolivia 4453:Bermuda 4411:Senegal 4387:Morocco 4343:Burundi 4161:1122296 3971:"About" 2696:3498352 2240:1341457 1628:Knesset 1415:); the 1223:of the 1206:YouTube 1185:of the 908:Betamax 819:and in 782:of the 617:wrote: 368:History 4952:Turkey 4942:Serbia 4925:Russia 4853:Sweden 4838:Poland 4797:Latvia 4782:Greece 4772:France 4732:Europe 4605:Jordan 4588:Israel 4505:Panama 4468:Canada 4463:Brazil 4324:Africa 4193:about 4167: 4159: 4096: 3853:Gov.UK 3222:, 3149:, 3129:, 3111:, 3072: 2694: 2667:: 483. 2645:, 2627:, 2602:, 2577:, 2540:, 2452:, 2424:, 2357:, 2284:, 2259:, 2238: 2083:, 2032:, 1973: 1847:Yahoo! 1837:Inc., 1833:Inc., 1831:Google 1790:. The 1753:Canada 1664:Poland 1622:Israel 1407:Second 1400:satire 1356:Mattel 1352:Barbie 1341:satire 1330:Parody 864:, the 796:enjoin 716:, Inc. 623:piracy 586: 516: 508: 497: 465:parody 435:, the 431:, the 403: 382:, the 355:. The 111:Patent 4915:] 4893:] 4881:] 4848:Spain 4828:] 4816:] 4804:] 4792:Italy 4767:] 4755:] 4723:] 4711:] 4689:Syria 4659:Nepal 4649:] 4632:] 4600:Japan 4595:] 4573:India 4563:China 4527:] 4490:] 4473:Chile 4418:] 4406:] 4394:] 4382:] 4370:] 4358:Egypt 4353:Ghana 4338:] 4331:Benin 4237:CHEER 4165:S2CID 4157:JSTOR 4115:(PDF) 4082:(PDF) 3801:(PDF) 3794:(PDF) 3583:(PDF) 3421:(PDF) 2986:(PDF) 2979:(PDF) 2899:(PDF) 2851:(PDF) 2606: 2581: 2560:1988) 2330:(PDF) 2315:(PDF) 2288: 2236:JSTOR 2180:(PDF) 2106:(PDF) 1417:Ninth 860:. In 604:new. 326:is a 4930:USSR 4664:Oman 4583:Iran 4541:Asia 4510:Peru 4178:2014 4060:2016 4034:2015 4008:2015 3987:2015 3954:2009 3928:2015 3900:2009 3861:2018 3835:2015 3809:2015 3776:2017 3742:2017 3712:2017 3679:2015 3638:2016 3616:2016 3594:2018 3566:2015 3540:2015 3514:2015 3483:2019 3457:help 3365:2019 3339:2019 3310:2019 3283:2015 3246:2014 3203:2015 3173:2014 3070:ISBN 3051:2013 3025:2015 2994:2015 2962:2015 2936:2015 2914:2015 2881:2016 2859:2016 2834:2015 2808:2009 2781:2009 2755:2009 2708:See 2692:SSRN 2688:2019 2608:U.S. 2583:U.S. 2481:2022 2402:2017 2338:2015 2290:U.S. 2196:2011 2162:2015 2122:2018 2010:2024 1984:2018 1971:ISBN 1763:The 1697:The 1645:and 1610:The 1496:and 1476:and 1382:'s, 1322:and 1067:The 792:Time 788:Time 667:The 512:and 469:test 285:and 4147:hdl 4139:doi 4104:doi 2730:PDF 2604:464 2586:539 2579:471 2293:569 2286:510 2228:doi 2224:103 1875:'s 1873:ARL 1852:GDP 1598:'s 1541:of 1504:in 1372:In 1040:any 980:in 965:not 813:in 563:in 5017:: 4913:ru 4891:ru 4879:ru 4826:de 4814:ru 4802:ru 4765:fr 4753:de 4721:ru 4709:de 4647:ru 4630:ru 4593:ru 4525:es 4488:es 4416:fr 4404:ru 4392:fr 4380:fr 4368:fr 4336:fr 4163:. 4155:. 4145:. 4135:82 4133:. 4129:. 4102:. 4090:21 4088:. 4084:. 4051:. 4025:. 3973:. 3962:^ 3917:. 3869:^ 3851:. 3826:. 3762:. 3758:. 3728:. 3702:. 3696:. 3670:. 3585:. 3557:. 3500:. 3474:. 3448:: 3446:}} 3442:{{ 3423:. 3406:^ 3382:. 3347:^ 3330:. 3318:^ 3300:. 3273:. 3189:. 3011:. 2907:45 2905:. 2901:. 2825:. 2772:. 2746:. 2686:. 2682:. 2665:44 2663:. 2565:^ 2489:^ 2472:. 2461:^ 2432:, 2392:. 2366:^ 2323:77 2321:. 2317:. 2300:^ 2268:^ 2234:. 2222:. 2204:^ 2186:. 2182:. 2152:. 2114:15 2112:. 2108:. 2069:^ 2018:^ 2000:. 1858:. 1845:, 1841:, 1651:. 1553:, 1549:, 1545:, 1492:, 1480:. 1364:, 1150:, 1123:. 1115:. 806:. 649:. 625:." 613:, 471:. 407:. 399:, 4266:e 4259:t 4252:v 4180:. 4171:. 4149:: 4141:: 4106:: 4062:. 4036:. 4010:. 3989:. 3956:. 3930:. 3902:. 3863:. 3837:. 3811:. 3778:. 3744:. 3714:. 3681:. 3640:. 3618:. 3596:. 3568:. 3542:. 3516:. 3485:. 3459:) 3455:( 3386:. 3367:. 3341:. 3312:. 3285:. 3248:. 3205:. 3175:. 3078:. 3053:. 3027:. 2996:. 2964:. 2938:. 2916:. 2883:. 2861:. 2836:. 2810:. 2783:. 2757:. 2716:. 2698:. 2483:. 2404:. 2340:. 2242:. 2230:: 2198:. 2188:5 2164:. 2124:. 2091:. 2012:. 1986:. 1419:( 1409:( 1144:, 827:( 766:. 555:. 312:e 305:t 298:v 34:. 27:.

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