For publishers of client newsletters
QUICK SUMMARY
You can reproduce portions of copyrighted material for limited purposes, such
as news reporting, teaching, and criticism.
NAVIGATION
Contact Newsletter Strategy Session
Return to home page
Definition: What's a client newsletter?
© 2001 D.M. Freedman
Updated 5/5/08
Article
The Fair Use Doctrine
What writers and editors need
to know – in simple language
By David M. Freedman
and Joseph V. Norvell, Attorney
About the authors
In most cases, you may not reproduce
copyrighted material for your own commercial or promotional use,
unless you have permission to do so from the copyright owner. Getting
permission is not always possible, though. Fortunately for us
journalists, there are some exceptions to the copyright law which
allow us limited use of copyrighted material for certain purposes,
even without the knowledge or consent of the copyright owner. Those
exceptions fall under the fair use doctrine.
By the way, company newsletters, even those that are distributed free, are generally considered commercial or promotional, because their ultimate purpose is to further the business interests of the companies that publish them.
Section 107
The fair use doctrine in the United States derives
from the First Amendment to the Constitution, but it was
codified in Section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Act in 1976. The
doctrine is an attempt to balance the interests of copyright holders,
information users, and the public. The doctrine's theory is that we
ought to be able to quote portions of copyrighted material in order to
report on it (if it's newsworthy), teach it, review it, recommend it,
criticize it, or comment upon it.
Fair use analysis
If you reproduce copyrighted material in your newsletter without
permission, under the assumption that it qualified as fair use, and
the copyright owner sues you for infringement, you may attempt to use
the fair use doctrine as an affirmative defense. Just because you
think your use of the material was fair, however, doesn't mean the
judge will too. You'll have to persuade the judge that the following
two statements are true:
- Your use of the material benefited the readers of your newsletter.
- The use resulted in a better understanding or appreciation of the original work.
In addition, the judge will base his or her decision on the following four factors:
- Commercial vs. educational nature of the use. The judge is more likely to rule in your favor if you used the copyrighted material for educational purposes rather than to promote a product or service. Judges do understand, of course, that almost all publications have some commercial or promotional purpose, and your use of the material may fall somewhere between purely commercial and purely educational. The U.S. Supreme Court has held, however, that a use that is clearly for a commercial purpose is presumed to be unfair1.
- Fiction vs. non-fiction. It's generally fairer to use factual material, especially if it consists of public-domain information, than fictional material. Courts recognize that the public has an interest in the dissemination of important facts.
- The amount used. The judge will compare the amount and substantiality of the portion that was used with the entire original work. The less you use, the better. There is no fixed percentage or rule of thumb, and courts will decide on a case-by-case basis what amount is too much. The best policy is to use no more of the work than necessary to make the discussion accompanying it comprehensible.
- Effect on market value of the original work. A use is generally unfair if it results in a lower market value of the original work. That would happen if, for example, the reproduced version of the material is very widely disseminated and serves as a substitute or synopsis of the original.
In the context of a newsletter, the question of fairness boils down to balancing the interests of the copyright holder, the newsletter publisher, and the newsletter readers. To play it safe, get advice from an intellectual property lawyer before you use a substantial portion of any copyrighted material. Better yet, get permission from the copyright holder – not only is that the best protection against an infringement suit, it's also good journalism.
Footnote
1. Harper & Row Publishers, Inc., v. Nation Enterprises, 471 U.S. 539 (1985)
About the authors
David M. Freedman is a Chicago-based legal and financial writer and newsletter developer. He is the founder of Newsletter Strategy Session. You can contact him by e-mail or visit www.freedman-chicago.com.
Joseph V. Norvell is an attorney and founding partner of Norvell IP, LLC, in Chicago, which focuses on intellectual property. (www.norvellip.com)