The fair use doctrine: History, application, and implications for (new media) writing teachers

Computers and Composition

Volumn 24, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 154-178

  Rife, Martine Courant ^a  

^a Lansing Community College   (United States)

Author keywords

Alphabetic text; Copyright; Digital writing; Fair use; Grokster; History; Infrastructure; Intellectual property; Moral rights; Napster; New media; Pedagogy; Plagiarism; Public domain; Sony; Technology; The four factor test

Indexed keywords

EID: 34248571263     PISSN: 87554615     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.compcom.2007.02.002     Document Type: Article

References (103)

1. A&M Records Inc. v. Napster, Inc. (2001). 239 F.3d 1004 (9th Cir.).
2. American Library Association [ALA]. (2004). Information literacy competency standards for higher education. Chicago: The Association of College and Research Libraries. Retrieved June 24, 2006, from
3. Arnstein v. Marks Music Corporation. (1936). 82 F. 2d 275 (2 Cir.).
4. Band, Jonathon. (2005). The Grokster scorecard. Retrieved November 20, 2005, from
5. Bartow A. Educational fair use in copyright: Reclaiming the right to photocopy freely. University of Pittsburgh Law Review 60 (1998) 149-230
6. Basic Books Inc. v. Kinko's Graphic Corp. (1991). 758 F. Supp. 1522, 1528-29 (S.D.N.Y.).
7. Ben-Tech Industrial Automation, et al. v. Oakland University and Donald Mayer, & Eric Kaczor. (2005, January 11). State of Michigan Court of Appeals. Unpublished, Oakland Circuit Court, N. 247471. 2005 Mich. App. LEXIS 32.
8. Billings R. Plagiarism in academia and beyond: What is the role of the courts?. University of San Francisco Law Review 38 (2003, August) 391-430
9. Brandfonbrener, Eric D. (1986). Note, fair use and university photocopying: Addison-Wesley Publishing v. New York University. U. Mich. J.L. Reform, 19, 669-683.
10. Brockmann R.J. Does Clio have a place in technical writing?. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication 18 (1988) 297-304
11. Brockmann R.J. From Millwrights to shipwrights to the twenty-first century: Explorations in a history of technical communication in the United States (1998), Hampton, Creskill, NJ
12. Brockmann R.J. Oliver Evans and his antebellum wrestling with theoretical arrangement. In: Teresa C.K., and Michael G.M. (Eds). Three keys to the past: The history of technical communication (1999), Ablex, Stamford, CT 63-89
13. Bulun Bulun v. R&T Textiles Pty. Ltd. (1998). 41 I.P.R. 513.
14. Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. (1994). 510 U.S. 569, 583-585.
15. Cary v. Kearsley. (1802). 4 Esp. 168, 170 Eng. Rep. 679.
16. Creative Commons license wins first legal challenge. (2006, March 17). Retrieved June 24, 2006, from
17. Creative Commons. Retrieved March 29, 2007, from
18. Darrell v. Joe Morris Music Co. (1940). 113 F. 2d 80 (2nd Cir.).
19. DeVoss D.N., Cushman E., and Grabill J.T. Infrastructure and composing: The when of new-media writing. College Composition and Communication 57 1 (2005) 14-44
20. DeVoss, Dànielle Nicole, & Porter, James E. (2006a). Rethinking plagiarism in the digital age: Remixing as a means for economic develop? (WIDE Conference paper). Retrieved June 24, 2006, from
21. DeVoss D.N., and Porter J.E. Why Napster matters to writing: Filesharing as a new ethic of digital delivery. Computers and Composition 23 2 (2006) 178-210
22. DeVoss D., and Rosati A.C. It wasn't me was it? Plagiarism and the Web. Computers and Composition 19 (2002) 191-203
23. Dodsely v. Kinnersley. (1761). 27 Eng. Rep. 270, (Ch. 1761).
24. Duhl G.E. Old lyrics, knock-off videos, and copycat comic books: The fourth fair use factor in U.S. Copyright Law. Syracuse Law Review 54 (2004) 665-738
25. Durack K.T. Gender, technology, and the history of technical communication. Technical Communication Quarterly 6 (1997) 249-260
26. Durack K.T. Research opportunities in the US patent record. Journal of Business and Technical Communication 15 4 (2001) 490-510
27. Durscht J.S. Judicial plagiarism: It may be fair use but is it ethical?. Cardozo Law Review 18 (1996) 1253-1297
28. Encyclopedia, Britannica Educational Corp. v. Crooks. (1982). 542 F. Supp. 1156 (W.D.N.Y.).
29. Fisher, William W., & McGeveran, William. (2006, August). The digital learning challenge: Obstacles to educational uses of copyrighted material in the digital age. The Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School. Retrieved November 19, 2006, from
30. Folsom v. Marsh. (1841). 9 F.Cas. 342, 6 Hunt Mer. Mag. 175. Retrieved April 17, 2005, from
31. Gasaway, Lolly, J. D. (2003). When works pass into the public domain. University of North Carolina. Retrieved January 7, 2006, from
32. Gellar P.E. Copyright history and the future: What's culture got to do with it?. Journal of the Copyright Society of the USA 47 (2000) 209-264
33. Green S.P. Plagiarism, norms, and the limits of theft law: Some observations on the use of criminal sanctions in enforcing intellectual property rights. Hastings Law Journal 54 (2002, November) 167-242
34. Gurak, Laura J. (2005). Ethics and technical communication in a digital age. Technical Communication and the World Wide Web (pp. 209-221). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
35. Gurak, Laura J., & Johnson-Eilola, Johndan (Eds.). (1998). Intellectual property [Special issue]. Computers and Composition, 15(2).
36. Gyles v. Wilcox. (1740). 26 Eng. Rep. 489 (Ch. 1740).
37. Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enters. (1985). 471 U.S. 539, 589-90.
38. Heins, Marjorie, & Beckles, Tricia. (2005, December). Will fair use survive? Free expression in the age of copyright control a public policy report. Brennan Center for Justice. Retrieved February 27, 2006, from
39. Herrington T. The unseen "other" of intellectual property law or intellectual property is not property: Debunking the myths of IP law. Kairos 3 1 (1997, Spring). http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/3.1/binder2.html?coverweb/ty/kip.html Retrieved March 29, 2007 from
40. Herrington T. The interdependence of fair use and the first amendment. Computers and Composition 15 2 (1998) 125-143
41. Herrington T. Controlling voices: Intellectual property, humanistic studies, and Internet (2001), Southern Illinois UP, Carbondale
42. Hesse D.D. Who owns writing?. College Composition and Communication 57 2 (2005) 335-357
43. Howard R.M. Plagiarisms, authorships, and the academic death penalty. College English 57 (1995) 788-806
44. Howard R.M. Sexuality, textuality: The cultural work of plagiarism. College English 62 (2000) 473-491
45. In re Aimster Copyright Litigation. (2003). 334 F.3d 643 (7th Cir.).
46. Indiana University Policy on Fair Use of Copyrighted Works for Education and Research Statement of Supporting Principles. Retrieved January 9, 2006, from
47. Johnson-Eilola J. Intellectual property: Questions and answers. Kairos 3 1 (1997, Spring). http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/3.1/binder2.html?coverweb/johndan.html Retrieved on March 29, 2007, from
48. Katz Z. Pitfalls of open licensing: An analysis of Creative Commons licensing. IDEA: The Intellectual Property Law Review 46 (2006) 391-413
49. Kent-Drury R. Finding a place to stand: Negotiating the spatial configuration of the networked computer classroom. Computers and Composition 15 (1998) 387-407
50. Kitalong K.S. A web of symbolic violence. Computers and Composition 15 (1998) 253-263
51. Klausman J. Teaching about plagiarism in the age of the Internet. Teaching English in the Two-Year College 27 2 (1999) 209-212
52. Lardner J. Fast forward Hollywood, the Japanese, and the VCR wars (1987), W.W. Norton & Company, New York
53. Lawrence v. Dana. (1869). 15 F. Cas. 26, 40 (C.C.D. Mass. 1869) (No. 8136).
54. Lessig L. Code and other laws of cyberspace (1999), Basic Books, New York
55. Lessig L. The future of ideas the fate of the commons in a connected world (2002), Vintage Books, New York
56. Lessig L. Free culture how big media uses technology and the law to lock down culture and control creativity (2004), The Penguin Press, New York
57. Lessig, Lawrence. (2004b, May 12). Witness testimony. H.R. 107, the digital media consumers' rights act of 2003 subcommittee on commerce, trade, and consumer protection. Retrieved June 23, 2006, from
58. Logie, John. (2005). Parsing codes: Intellectual property, technical communication, and the World Wide Web. Technical communication and the World Wide Web (pp. 223-241). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
59. Logie, John. (2006). Copyright in increasingly digital academic contexts: What it takes (WIDE paper #7). Retrieved June 24, 2006, from
60. Lunsford A. Rhetoric, feminism, and the politics of textual ownership. College English 61 5 (1999) 1-16
61. Lunsford A. Authorship and intellectual property. In: Linda S., Rebecca H., Sandra J., and Robert S. (Eds). Coming of age: The advanced writing curriculum (2000), Boynton Cook/Heinemann, Portsmouth, NH 156-168
62. Lunsford A., Rickly R., Salvo M., and West S. What matters who writes? What matters who responds? Issues of ownership in the writing classroom. Kairos 1 1 (1996, Spring). http://english.ttu.edu/kairos/1.1/features/lunsford/title.html Retrieved on March 29, 2007, from
63. Macmillan Co. v. King. (1914). 223 F. 862 (D. Mass.).
64. Mandich G. Venetian patents (1450-1550). Journal of the Patent Office Society 30 (1948) 166-223
65. Marcus v. Rowley. (1983). 695 F.2d 1171 (9th Cir.).
66. May C. The Venetian moment: New technologies, legal innovation and the institutional origins of intellectual property. Prometheus 20 2 (2002) 159-179
67. MGM v. Grokster. (2005, June). 545 U.S. _______. Retrieved June 27, 2005, from
68. Michigan State University University Relations Fair Use Guidelines. Retrieved January 9, 2006, from
69. Plagiarism Detection Services Bibliography. (2006). Retrieved September 9, 2006, from
70. Plagiarism.org. (2006). Retrieved September 9, 2006, from
71. Porter J.E. The chilling of digital Information: Technical communicators as public advocates. In: Day M., and Lipson C. (Eds). Technical communication and the World Wide Web in the new millennium (2005), Erlbaum, Mahway, NJ 243-259
72. Porter, Jim, & Rife, Martine. (2005, June). MGM v. Grokster: Implications for educators and writing teachers (WIDE paper #1). Retrieved June 28, 2005, from
73. Powell M. Down by the river, or how Susan La Flesche Picotte can teach us about alliance as a practice of survivance. College English 67 1 (2004, September) 38-60
74. Prager F.D. A history of intellectual property from 1545 to 1787. Journal of the Patent Office Society 26 (1944) 711-760
75. Princeton University Press v. Michigan Document Services, Inc. (1996). 1996 FED App. 0357P (6th Cir.). Retrieved April 17, 2005, from
76. Reyman J. Copyright, distance education, and the TEACH Act: Implications for teaching writing. College Composition and Communication 58 1 (2006) 30-45
77. Ricketson S. The birth of the Berne Union. Columbia VLA Journal of Law and Arts 11 (1986) 517-526
78. Rife, Martine Courant. (2006a). Local global literacies for judges: Canadian/US judicial opinion approaches to globalization in copyright contexts. Retrieved June 24, 2006, from
79. Rife, Martine Courant. (2006b, Fall) Why Kairos matters to writing: A reflection on our intellectual property conversation during the last ten years [Kairos Tenth Anniversary Issue, 11.1]. Retrieved September 12, 2006, from
80. Rife, Martine Courant. (2007, May). Technical communicators and digital writing risk assessment. Technical Communication.
81. Rife, Martine Courant, & DeVoss, Dànielle Nicole. (in press). Teaching plagiarism: Remix as composing. In Anne Meade Stockdell-Giesler, Tracy Ann Morse, Rebecca Ingalls, Michael Donnelly, & Joanna Castner (Eds.), Understanding plagiarism: Discussions for students and teachers.
82. Rife, Martine Courant, & Hart-Davidson, William. (2006). Digital composing and fair use: Exploring knowledge and understanding of fair use among teachers and students in a university professional writing program. Pilot study in progress sponsored by the WIDE Research Center. Unpublished.
83. Ringgold v. Black Entertainment Television, Inc. (1997). 126 F.3d 70 (2nd Cir.).
84. Robbins S. Distributed authorship: A feminist case-study framework for studying intellectual property. College English 66 2 (2003) 155-171
85. Rose, Mark. (1996, Summer). Mothers and authors: Johnson v. Colbert and the new children of our imaginations. Critical Inquiry, 22(4). Short excerpt retrieved November 20, 2005, from
86. Rose M. The author as proprietor: Donaldson v. Becket and the genealogy of modern authorship. Representations 23 (1988) 51-83
87. Roworth v. Wilkes. (1807). 170 Eng. Rep. 889.
88. Sandoval v. New Line Cinema Corp. (1998). 147 F.3d 215 (2nd Cir.).
89. Selber, Stuart. (2006). Beyond Napster: Institutional policies and digital economics (WIDE paper #6). Retrieved June 25, 2006, from
90. Sony Corp of America v. Universal Studios, Inc. (1984). 464 U.S. 417.
91. Stanford Copyright & Fair Use. (2005). Retrieved December 30, 2005, from
92. Stearns L. Copy wrong: Plagiarism, process, property and the law. California Law Review 80 (1992) 513-553
93. Stewart v. Abend. (1990). 495 U.S. 207, 237-38.
94. Turnitin. (2006). Retrieved September 9, 2006, from
95. United States Patent and Trademark Office. (2003). Frequently asked questions about the database of Native American Tribal Insignia. Retrieved April 2, 2005, from
96. University of Texas Systems. (2005). Fair use of copyrighted materials. Retrieved December 30, 2005, from
97. Vaidhyanathan S. The anarchist in the library: How the clash between freedom and control is hacking the real world and crashing the system (2004), Basic Books, New York
98. Westbrook S. Visual rhetoric in a culture of fear: Impediments to multimedia production. College English 68 5 (2006) 457-480
99. Wihtol v. Crow. (1962). 309 F.2d 777 (8th Cir.).
100. In: Woodmansee M., and Jaszi P. (Eds). The construction of authorship: Textual appropriation in law and literature (1994), Duke UP, Durham and London
101. Yu, Peter K. (2003). P2P and the future of private copying. University of Colorado Law Review (pp. 654-765). Legal Studies Research Paper Series (Research Paper No. 02-08).
102. Yu P.K. Symposium: Intellectual property at a crossroads: The use of the past in intellectual property jurisprudence: Current and crosscurrents in the international intellectual property regime. Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review 38 (2004) 323-443
103. Yu, Peter K. (2006). Web policy. Retrieved January 13, 2006, from