On 5/19/06, Fastfission fastfission@gmail.com wrote:
On 5/19/06, Anthony DiPierro wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
Why do people keep saying this? Fair use is a defense. It's also a right.
They keep saying it because that's the legal mantra about fair use (just like "you can't patent a fact" is one for patents), which is repeated in law books and by law professors and by lawyers on television. (I think I first heard it from a lawyer in a class I took. It's catchy -- catchier than "free as in speech, not as in beer" by a mile!)
Interesting. I tried looking this up, because hey, if it's repeated over and over it shouldn't be hard to find. The first Google hit I found was http://www.eff.org/cafe/gross1.html - Understanding Your Rights: The Public's Right of Fair Use. But I guess the EFF has no clue what they're talking about.
Anyway, actual written publications are a better search. But books.google gives me "Fair use is the right to use copyrighted material..." "Under the right of fair use..." "But the precious fair use right is under attack today..."
As I understand it, the real difference between a defense and a right is that you can sue somebody for violating a right, but a defense can only be used if you yourself are sued.
You have the right to bear arms. Who can you sue for violation that right? Perhaps we're talking about different definitions of the word "right". I tried looking for a legal dictionary with your definition in it though, and I couldn't find it.
You can't sue somebody for violating your "fair use" rights -- though I do wish that you could (it would revolutionize copyright legislation and really make it dangerous for a the mega-corporations to put the legal squeeze on small-timers).
What would it mean to sue somebody for violating your fair use rights? Moreover, what does it mean to violate someone's fair use rights in the first place?
Anthony