Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The court found that Meltwater failed to justify its fair use claim under 17 U.S.C. § 107. Under 17 U.S.C. § 107, Meltwater failed to satisfy the four criteria for a fair use defense: [1] "The purpose and character of the use." The court determined that the purpose and character of use was not substantially transformative.
Fair use analysis includes multiple factors, one of which is the "nature of the copyright work," and some courts find that factual works provide greater leeway for fair use than fictional works. [10] Nonfiction literary works, such as history books, newspaper articles, and biographies, are treated as factual works with similarly narrow ...
The existence of some copyright-infringing information in a rote reference work does not entitle the original author to seek an injunction against the printing the later article when the later article's contents demonstrate significant original work.
"Article 5.1 [of the European Directive Directive 2001/29/EC which covers "temporary copies" [1]: item 9, 11 ] is an exception to the copyright owner’s right to control the reproduction of his work. It necessarily operates to authorize certain copying which would otherwise be an infringement of the copyright owner’s rights." [1]: item 36
In Perfect 10, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 508 F.3d 1146 (9th Cir. 2007), the Ninth Circuit held that when Google stored thumbnail versions of Perfect 10's magazine images on its server to communicate them to Google's users, Google prima facie violated Perfect 10's copyright. But the court also held that Google had a valid fair use defense. Id. at ...
They can be used on Wikipedia, if the photo itself is the subject of the article. You would expect to see [[Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima on our article for Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima. Since this article is talking about the historical impact and effects of the image itself, it is a transformative use, allowed under our policies.
OTTAWA (Reuters) -Five Canadian news media companies filed a legal action on Friday against ChatGPT owner OpenAI, accusing the artificial-intelligence company of regularly breaching copyright and ...
The plaintiffs moved for partial summary adjudication on defendants' fair use defense on October 4, 1999, and cross-filed for summary judgment citing a First Amendment defense on October 19 under seal. Judge Margaret M. Morrow issued a preliminary ruling on November 8, 1999, rejecting the "fair use" argument. [6]