Changes

Fair use does not apply to items that are in the "[[public domain]]" because there is no copyright holder, but physical access to the works may be controlled by a museum that does not allow reproductions. Texts and images published in the U.S. before January 1, 1923 are in the public domain. Work created by the federal government is in the public domain (but not work created by state of local governments). Before 1976 copyright expired after 28 years and had to be renewed; items that were not renewed are in the public domain.<ref> For a list of renewals see the Project Gutenberg collections at [http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/gutbook/lookup?num=11800], which cover ererything except music.</ref> Items that were published in the USA but never copyright in the first place are in the public domain in the USA. Items posted on web servers in the U.S. are covered only by American law.

Fair use does not apply to items that are in the "[[public domain]]" because there is no copyright holder, but physical access to the works may be controlled by a museum that does not allow reproductions. Texts and images published in the U.S. before January 1, 1923 are in the public domain. Work created by the federal government is in the public domain (but not work created by state of local governments). Before 1976 copyright expired after 28 years and had to be renewed; items that were not renewed are in the public domain.<ref> For a list of renewals see the Project Gutenberg collections at [http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/gutbook/lookup?num=11800], which cover ererything except music.</ref> Items that were published in the USA but never copyright in the first place are in the public domain in the USA. Items posted on web servers in the U.S. are covered only by American law.

==Rationale==

==Rationale==

The U.S. Constitution's copyright clause (Article I, Section 8) empowers the Congress to protect copyrights, citing as a rationale "to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts."  Since the primary stated purpose of copyright in the Constitution is thus to foster the dissemination of knowledge, U.S. courts decided users could make "fair use" of a creator's work in the interest of promoting knowledge, so long as the impact on the creator's rights was not too great. In contrast to most laws which are made by Congress, the basic points of fair use were created by the courts, and later codified by Congress.  The Supreme Court announced in 1994, "From the infancy of copyright protection, some opportunity for fair use of copyrighted materials has been thought necessary to fulfill copyright's very purpose, "[t]o promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts."<ref> Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569, 575 (1994) online at [http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/92-1292.ZO.html]</ref> The U.S. Federal Court of Appeals ruled in 1998, "The ultimate test of fair use ... is whether the copyright law's goal of promoting the Progress of Science and useful Arts would be better served by allowing the use than by preventing it."<ref> Castle Rock Entertainment v. Carol Publishing Group, 150 F.3d 132, 141 (2d Cir. 1998), online at [http://www.law.cornell.edu/copyright/cases/150_F3d_132.htm]</ref>

The U.S. Constitution's copyright clause allows a work to be copied in the public interest (to "promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts") without the permission of the copyright holder. Since the primary purpose of copyright is to foster the dissemination of knowledge rather than to protect the property rights of the creator, U.S. courts decided users could make "fair use" of a creator's work in the interest of promoting knowledge, so long as the impact on the creator's rights was not too great. Over the years the courts established factors to be weighed when judging whether a use was fair in any particular case. From the 1940s to the 1970s, when protection of property rights became progressively less important to judges compared to the promotion of other social interests, the courts broadened the definition of fair use. Therefore scholars had few problems quoting or photocopying reasonable amounts from the published works of others. Fair use doctrine is also supposed to protect free speech by preventing copyright holders from denying critics the right to quote from that which they are criticizing.  

 

From the 1940s to the 1970s, the "[[New Deal]]" era, when protection of property rights became progressively less important to judges compared to the promotion of other social interests, the courts broadened the definition of fair use. Under its rules scholars had few problems quoting or photocopying reasonable amounts from the published works of others. Fair use doctrine came to be seen as a protection of free speech by preventing copyright holders from denying certain critics the right to quote to make a point the copyright holder does not want to see in print.<ref> Kathleen K. Olson, "First Amendment Values in Fair Use Analysis." ''Journalism & Communication Monographs'' 2004 5(4): 159-202. Issn: 1522-6379.</ref>

 

In a broader sense, scholarship has always depended on exact quotations and fair use rights have been central to most scholarly books and articles. As Patrick Parrinder, a professor of English literature at the University of Reading in UK  argues, "Without the act of quotation there is little possibility of free discussion, rational debate or open reporting. Direct and acknowledged quotation is essential to scholarship since it provides both quoter and quotee with a guarantee against misrepresentation."<ref>Patrick Parrinder, "Quote unquote" ''Textual Practice'' 14#1 (2000) p. 138.</ref>

== See also ==

== See also ==