Look pall, you might consider adopting a level of professionalism in your communicae, especially if you're endeavoring to enter this profession one day. And as a helpful pointer on drafting those law school finals you might one day encounter, copying a paragraph of text you obviously don't understand, and then writing a conclusory sentence, will not get you any points. Aside from that, it might help if you knew a little about copyright law before you start spouting assertions about it with a mightier-than-thou tone.

To start, i take issue with the court saying that there's fair use and in the same sentence that it's a non infringing use. There's no discussion of fair use in a copyright case when there's no infringement. That's because fair use is only a defense to Copyright infringement. The district court likely had an intern write it but the judge really should have reviewed it before posting.

So yes i see the opinion states it's a fair use but for the reasons above, i believe my initial confusion from reading one page was justified. But my initial point is still valid because the case only really was dismissed because the defendants had a subjective good faith belief that it was non infringing.

Actually, the more i think about this the more i think the opinion mistates the law (e.g., citing 9th cir. ) in the 2nd cir.) and could be overturned on appeal as a result. I'll have to read up some more tomorrow when I'm not on my tiny mobile screen on whether the good faith belief should be on non infringement or fair use. Iirc, I think it's the latter and the court apparently writes it's the former.