Footnotes (71)



Fair Use as a Matter of Law

Ned Snow

University of South Carolina

August 16, 2010

Denver University Law Review, Forthcoming

Courts have recently abandoned the centuries-old practice of construing fair use as an issue of fact for the jury. Fair use now stands as an issue of law for the judge. This change is threatening traditional contours of copyright law that protect fair-use speech. Courts, then, must reform their current construction of fair use by returning to its origins — fair use as a factual matter for the jury. Yet even if courts do construe fair use as a matter of fact, the question remains whether courts should ever decide fair use as a matter of law. To answer this question, I examine whether appellate courts should ever review fair use under a de novo standard and whether trial courts should ever decide fair use on summary judgment. I conclude that both appellate and trial courts should decide fair use as a matter of law under specific circumstances: appellate courts should review constitutional findings under a de novo standard only where a bench trial occurs or where a jury verdict favors the copyright holder; trial courts should rule on summary judgment only in favor of fair users. In short, ruling as a matter of law must serve the speech-protective function of fair use. Fair use as a matter of law must favor fair users.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 46

Keywords: Copyright, Fair Use, Speech, Jury, Independent Review, Bose

Open PDF in Browser Download This Paper

Date posted: August 18, 2010 ; Last revised: February 2, 2012

Suggested Citation

Snow, Ned, Fair Use as a Matter of Law (August 16, 2010). Denver University Law Review, Forthcoming. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1659857

Contact Information

Ned Snow (Contact Author)
University of South Carolina ( email )
701 Main Street
Columbia, SC 29208
United States
(803) 777-8064 (Phone)
HOME PAGE: http://law.sc.edu/faculty/snow/
Feedback to SSRN

Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 1,790
Downloads: 171
Download Rank: 138,684
Footnotes:  71
Paper comments
No comments have been made on this paper