On 5/19/06, Anthony DiPierro wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
Nor do I. You find a source, I'll find two. We could keep it up for a long time, but suffice it to say it seems like there's not a consensus, among lawyers or among the general public, on whether or not fair use is a right.
Regardless, the meaning of the statement, whether or not you agree with the diction, still stands.
Searching google for "fair use is a right" I get 200 hits. Searching for "fair use is not a right" I get 99. Do we need to start going through and evaluating the credibility of the sources? Maybe see which ones are more impartial?
Hey, you're the one who cited the EFF. And yeah, if you search for something which is not in "the mantra", you won't find much of it. "Fair use is a banana" gets 0 hits, though "fair use is a mess" gets at least one.
Here's one from a publisher who wrote a popular book on copyright law as it applies to publishing: "Remember that fair use is a "defense" to copyright infringement, not a right." (http://copylaw.com/new_articles/fairuse.html)
Apparently you can sue, depending on the legal framework which you think is violating the second amendment. There are a few cases mentioned in our article on a second amendment rights group, [[Second Amendment Foundation]].
I'm sure if the mayor of New Orleans came and confiscated copies of Wikipedia you could sue for that too. I'm not sure either of those qualify, though.
Riiight... do you have a point in this argument anymore, or are you just doing it for sport?
Listen, I think it's a great idea to claim that we should all stand up and assert our fair use. Sounds great. But I'm not sure that's what WMF should do with its donations, and I'm not sure the O RLY? owl is the place to shed legal blood. There are copyright watchdogs out there, let them do that sort of work. We're trying to build a free encyclopedia here, last I checked, not serve as an anti-copyright activist network.
FF