Mike Bilow wrote: > > Do not put too much emphasis on the "fair use" concept. It is > deliberately very vague, much like the concept of "due process of law." > Exactly what it means in any particular situation can be very hard to pin > down without actually litigating the issue. > > I would argue that there are extreme cases where "fair use" would allow > the publication of an entire work over the objections of an author where > questions of historical importance or public policy were at stake. A > "fair use" claim cannot be decided by the extent of the excerpt. > > To give a notorious example, Adolf Hitler died in 1945, meaning that "Mein > Kampf" would have fallen into the public domain in the US only in 1995.
I don't know where you get the time, but I appreciate the responses. This thing with Hitler is pretty interesting. Is there jurisprudence on the specific topic of how the fair use exception relates to making personal copies? >From the LaMacchia case and the "No Electronic Theft Act" of 1997 it seems there isn't much room left in criminal cases for anything but the statute. Do you know if that is true and if it is different in civil cases? Paul Serice
