[Wikipedia-l] 4 factor fair use test

[Jimmy Wales]

http://www.utsystem.edu/ogc/intellectualproperty/copypol2.htm#test

This is a nice summary of the "4 factor" fair use test.

Here's my interpretation of how we would argue for fair use in the
case of a photograph of a still-copyrighted artwork, like a painting
or sculpture in a museum.

1.  What is the character of the use?

Our use is nonprofit and educational.  Because the photo of the artwork would
naturally be accompanied by an article about the artwork, our use is criticism
and commentary.  Notice that even commercial use can be o.k., if the use is
generally educational, commentary, criticism.

2.  What is the nature of the work to be used?

In general, this factor will not help us.  The nature of the work is
'imaginative'.  I'm not sure if a work of art in a museum is
considered 'published' from this perspective or not.

3.  How much of the work will you use?

Here we are in very good shape.  A small web image of a statue or a
painting is a relatively small use.  A recent U.S. Appeals court
decision (Arriba) said that search engines can use thumbnails of web
photos that are copyrighted, for example, in Google's image search.

This is similar.  A small web image is not a full and complete reproduction
of the work.

4. If this kind of use were widespread, what effect would it have on
the market for the original or for permissions?

This seems to lean heavily in our favor.  It seems unlikely that our
use would detract from the market for the original or for permission
for real reproductions (posters and the like), so long as our images
are kept small.  If we offered massive and extremely accurate digital
files which would permit the end user to print a nice poster, this
would weigh against us.

But a small web image is not going to damage the market for posters.

--Jimbo