On 5/19/06, Fastfission <fastfission(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/19/06, Anthony DiPierro
<wikilegal(a)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