Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
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 [copyright] law is designed to foster."
Toward a Fair Use Standard", 103 Harv. L. Rev. 1105 (1990), is a law review article on the fair use doctrine in US copyright law, written by then-District Court Judge Pierre N. Leval. The article argued that the most critical element of the fair use analysis is the transformativeness of a work, the first of the statutory factors listed in the ...
Additionally, the fair use defense to copyright infringement was codified for the first time in section 107 of the 1976 Act. Fair use was not a novel proposition in 1976, however, as federal courts had been using a common law form of the doctrine since the 1840s (an English version of fair use appeared much earlier). The Act codified this ...
Fair use is the use of limited amounts of copyrighted material in such a way as to not be an infringement. It is codified at 17 U.S.C. § 107, and states that "the fair use of a copyrighted work ... is not an infringement of copyright." The section lists four factors that must be assessed to determine whether a particular use is fair.
The Supreme Court was the source of a number of concepts in the field, including fair use, the idea-expression divide, the useful articles or separability doctrine, and the uncopyrightability of federal documents.
Although its formulation in Section 107 tracks very closely the iterations in modern case law, the factors themselves are essentially the same as set forth by Judge Story in 1841. Consequently, the Folsom v. Marsh case is regarded as establishing the principle of fair use in American copyright law.
"There's a doctrine that says creative expression is copyrightable, but facts and ideas are not," Kortz, who teaches at Harvard's Cyberlaw Clinic, said. ... training AI is an allowable "fair use ...
The FAIR USE Act is Boucher’s third attempt at reforming provisions within the DMCA, the previous two being the Digital Media Consumers' Rights Acts (DMCRA) of 2003 and 2005. [3] Previously, Boucher co-sponsored the “ Benefit Authors without Limiting Advancement or Net Consumer Expectations ,” or “BALANCE Act,” which sought to amend ...