Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[novobarro]

I want to print and distribute photos from the plaintiff's website to show as an exhibit in a trial. There is a copyright notice on the website. First, is this even considered infringement. Second, if so, I'm guessing this would be fair use?

Thanks,

[Kaitlin]

This is one of those things that seems so obvious, you don't think you'll need a cite to justify it...until you do!
Was hard to turn up specific references with a general internet search, but I did find this letter from the New Mexico Environmental Law Center addressing the concern when raised by someone from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
It's available at http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML0037/ML003700407.pdf .  I've quoted the relevant section below. 

(Note, however, that this doesn't mean that you will have an easy time making exhibit copies in cases where you use a commercial photocopy business.  I remember having to get a letter from our client's inhouse counsel giving us as outside counsel permission before the copy shop would make photocopies of our client's brochure for use as an exhibit.)

Here's the quote with cites:

'Regardless of NRC policy, I write to allay whatever concerns you might have about the
filing of the copyrighted exhibits in this proceeding. Under the doctrine of "fair use," copyright
documents may be used without consent of the author in the course of an adjudicatory proceedings [sic]
In support of this proposition, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has cited
Nimmer on Copyright § 13.05[D] at 13-91 (1991), which states, "works are customarily
reproduced in various types of judicial proceedings ... and it seems inconceivable that any court
would hold such reproduction to constitute infringement either by the government or by the
individual parties responsible for offering the work in evidence." Religious Technology Center v.
Wollersheim, 971 F.2d 364, 367 (9th Cir. 1992). Further, the Supreme Court has stated that "use
that has no demonstrable effect upon the market for, or the value of, the copyrighted work need not
be prohibited in order to protect the author's incentive to create." Sony Corp. of America v.
Universal City Studios. Inc., 464 U.S. 417, 450 (1984). And finally, even an attorney's use of a
copyrighted photograph in a nationally televised criminal trial was deemed to be legal and proper
"fair use." See Kulik Photography v. Johnnie L. Cochran. Jr. and F. Lee Bailey, 975 F. Supp. 812,
814 (E.D.Va. 1997).'
Letter from G. Fettus, NM Env. Lw Ctr. to E. Julian, NRC, dtd 3/28/2000