Source: https://si.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use
Timestamp: 2019-04-24 03:51:42+00:00

Document:
fair use in trademark law සඳහා, Fair use (U.S. trademark law) බලන්න. the broadband bandwidth management policy සඳහා, Fair Access Policy බලන්න. fair use of copyrighted works on Wikipedia සඳහා, Wikipedia:Fair use බලන්න.
The legal concept of "Test copyright" was first ratified by the Kingdom of Great Britain's Statute of Anne of 1709. As room was not made for the authorized reproduction of copyrighted content within this newly formulated statutory right, the courts created a doctrine of "fair abridgment" in Gyles v Wilcox, which eventually evolved into the modern concept of "fair use," that recognized the utility of such actions. The doctrine only existed in the U.S. as common law until it was incorporated into the Copyright Act of 1976, සැකිල්ල:UnitedStatesCode.
Once these factors were codified as guidelines in සැකිල්ල:USC, they were not rendered exclusive. The section was intended by Congress to restate, but not replace, the prior judge-made law. Courts are still entitled to consider other factors as well.
The third factor assesses the quantity or percentage of the original copyrighted work that has been imported into the new work. In general, the less that is used in relation to the whole, e.g., a few sentences of a text for a book review, the more likely that the sample will be considered fair use. Yet see Sony Corp. v. Universal City Studios for a case in which substantial copying—entire programs for private viewing—was upheld as fair use, at least when the copying is done for the purposes of time-shifting. Likewise, see Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corporation, where the Ninth Circuit held that copying an entire photo to use as a thumbnail in online search results did not weigh against fair use, "if the secondary user only copies as much as is necessary for his or her intended use." Conversely, in Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enters, the use of fewer than 400 words from President Ford's memoir by a political opinion magazine was interpreted as infringement because those few words represented "the heart of the book" and were, as such, substantial.
The fourth factor measures the effect that the allegedly infringing use has had on the copyright owner's ability to exploit his or her original work. The court not only investigates whether the defendant's specific use of the work has significantly harmed the copyright owner's market, but also whether such uses in general, if widespread, would harm the potential market of the original. The burden of proof here rests on the defendant for commercial uses, but on the copyright owner for noncommercial uses. See Sony Corp. v. Universal City Studios, where the copyright owner, Universal, failed to provide any empirical evidence that the use of Betamax had either reduced their viewership or negatively impacted their business. In the aforementioned Nation case regarding President Ford's memoirs, the Supreme Court labeled this factor "the single most important element of fair use" and it has indeed enjoyed some level of primacy in fair use analyses ever since. Yet the Supreme Court's more recent announcement in Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. that "all [four factors] are to be explored, and the results weighed together, in light of the purposes of copyright" has helped modulate this emphasis in interpretation.
A balanced copyright law provides an economic benefit to many high tech businesses such as search engines and software developers. Fair Use is also crucial to non-technology industries such as insurance, legal services, and newspaper publishers. On September 12, 2007, the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA), a group representing companies including Google Inc., Microsoft Inc., Oracle Corporation, Sun Microsystems, Yahoo and other high tech companies, released a study that found that Fair Use exceptions to US copyright laws were responsible for more than $4,500 billion dollars in annual revenue for the United States economy representing one-sixth of the total U.S. GDP. The study was conducted using a methodology developed by the World Intellectual Property Organization. The study found that fair use dependent industries are directly responsible for more than 18% of U.S. economic growth and nearly 11 million American jobs. “As the United States economy becomes increasingly knowledge-based, the concept of fair use can no longer be discussed and legislated in the abstract. It is the very foundation of the digital age and a cornerstone of our economy,” said Ed Black, President and CEO of CCIA. “Much of the unprecedented economic growth of the past ten years can actually be credited to the doctrine of fair use, as the Internet itself depends on the ability to use content in a limited and nonlicensed manner."
CCH Canadian Ltd. v. Law Society of Upper Canada  1 S.C.R. 339, සැකිල්ල:Canlii-scc is the landmark Supreme Court of Canada case that establishes the bounds of fair dealing in Canadian copyright law. The Law Society of Upper Canada was sued for copyright infringement for providing photocopy services to researchers. The Court unanimously held that the Law Society's practice fell within the bounds of fair dealing.
විකිසරසවිය සතුව Fair use පිළිබඳ ඉගෙනුම් මූලාශ්‍ර ඇත.
fair use , යන්න නිදහස් ශබ්දකෝෂය වන වික්ෂනරිය දී සොයා බලන්න.
↑ "US CODE: Title 17,107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use". .law.cornell.edu. 2009-05-20. සම්ප්‍රවේශය 2009-06-16.
↑ Leval, Pierre N. (1990). "Toward a Fair Use Standard". Harvard Law Review. 103 (5): 1105–1136. doi:10.2307/1341457.
↑ Anderson, Nate (2009-05-18). "Harvard prof tells judge that P2P filesharing is "fair use"". Ars Technica. සම්ප්‍රවේශය 2009-06-16.
↑ Anderson, Nate (2009-05-22). "Lawyer: RIAA must pay back all "$100M+" it has allegedly collected". Ars Technica. සම්ප්‍රවේශය 2009-06-16.
↑ 23.0 23.1 23.2 23.3 23.4 23.5 23.6 "Computer and Communications Industry Association. "Fair Use Economy Represents One-Sixth of U.S. GDP." September 12, 2007". Ccianet.org. 2007-09-12. Archived from the original on April 15, 2008. සම්ප්‍රවේශය 2009-06-16.
↑ "Wall Street Journal. "Google, Others Contest Copyright Warnings" by Sarah McBride and Adam Thompson. August 1, 2007". Online.wsj.com. 2007-08-01. සම්ප්‍රවේශය 2009-06-16.
↑ "Computer and Communications Industry Association. "CCIA Members."". Ccianet.org. Archived from the original on March 31, 2008. සම්ප්‍රවේශය 2009-06-16.
↑ Egelko, Bob (August 21, 2008). "Woman can sue over YouTube clip de-posting". San Francisco Chronicle. සම්ප්‍රවේශය 2008-08-25.
↑ Harper & Row v. Nation Enterprises, සැකිල්ල:Ussc.
↑ Wall Data v. Los Angeles County Sheriff's Dept. (9th Cir. May 17, 2006) (PDF at Ninth Circuit).
↑ Gellar, Paul. "International Copyright Law and Practice" (2009 ed.). Matthew Bender & Company, Inc.
↑ "International exemptions for education with links to relevant laws". Teflpedia.com. 2009-05-25. සම්ප්‍රවේශය 2009-06-16.
Gordon, Wendy J. (1982). "Fair Use as Market Failure: A Structural and Economic Analysis of the ‘Betamax’ Case and Its Predecessors". Columbia Law Review. 82 (8): 1600–1657. doi:10.2307/1122296.
Samuelson, Pamela (1995). "Copyright’s fair use doctrine and digital data". Publishing Research Quarterly. 11 (1): 27–39. doi:10.1007/BF02680415.
මේ පිටුව අන්තිමට සැකසුවේ 27 අගෝස්තු 2014 දින දී, 00:24 වේලාවෙහිදීය.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.