Re: Is Fair Use Dead?

On 3/1/1998, Leah Theriault <wheedle[_at_]uclink4.berkeley.edu> wrote:
>
> On 2/27/98, Eric Goldman <eschlach[_at_]netcom.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 26 Feb 1998, Leah Theriault <wheedle[_at_]uclink4.berkeley.edu> wrote:
> > >
> > > I would go even further than this: I think fair use is _completely_
> > > dead in the Internet context. If we take the Texaco approach and
> > > refuse to find fair use whenever markets _may_ develop, then I see
> > > no room for fair use.
> >
> > If fair use is dead on the Internet, it's not because of the wording
> > of Texaco, it's because of clickthrough agreements and (soon) UCC 2B
> > where the licensors negate any possible fair uses by contract. Eric.
>
> There are lots of ways to skin this cat, but the end result is the same:
> the patient is DOA at the online ramp. However, I find the attack on
> fair use to be most disturbing when it comes via an application of the
> statute itself. This is especially so when the plain words of section
> 107 indicate that fair use is about much more than market failure.
>
> I guess that I find contracts of adhesion (a la click-thru) and a basic
> misunderstanding of the difference between a copyright and a copy
> (a la UCC2b) less gripe-worthy (though just as damaging) as a clear
> misapplication of the very provision that was supposed to _protect_
> fair use.
>
> The danger of Texaco, of course, is that it risks destroying fair use
> completely, in both cyberspace _and_ realspace.

I've been away for some time and am trying to catch up: can someone point me to a site that describes/summarizes Texaco?

Many thanks, Andrea

Andrea A. Lunsford
<lunsfor1[_at_]leland.stanford.edu> Received on Mon Mar 02 1998 - 19:12:00 GMT