Template:Fair Use Explanation
Copyright 1959 Moosylvanian Swamp Media Group
Purpose of use: Illustrate their documentary on the political career of Rocky the Squirrel
Nature of original work: Nonfiction Documentary
Amount: Single frame
Commercial effect: Any negative impact on sales of a sixty year old documentary by a single frame are negligible. Value of old copies on EBay are likely to increase as people are made aware of its existence and try to acquire them.
{{Fair Use Explanation
| copyright = Who is the copyright owner and what is the date if known
| purpose = What is the purpose of this excerpt or inclusion
| nature = What is the nature of the work being copied from
| amount = How much is being taken from it
| effect = What is the potential effec9t on its commercial viability; will this compete with or replace the original in some fashion?
}}
All five items must be answered.
Copyright
What is the copyright date if known and who owns this work?
If it truly is unknown and simply presumed to still be in copyright, say unknown.
Purpose
For most of what we're using, we're trying to illustrate a physical or media event, a specific person or gathering, or similar.
Purpose can inform transformative changes, which can excuse a lot of things that might otherwise be verboten, but we're a historical site -- transformation is more in the purview of that which we cover, not what LPedia itself is expected to do.
Nature
What is the nature of the work being copied from? Is it coverage of an event? An interview? We'll have an easier time defending something of a nonfiction nature, especially as the purpose of LPedia itself is almost entirely nonfictional.
Amount
What is the amount being taken and how corle is it to the purpose of the work being copied from? Less is easier to defend as fair use. A single frame from an interview without even including the questions is a lot less of the core of the original work and easier to defend than including the opening riff of _Can't Get No Satisfaction_ with the key words from the refrain in an audio work.
Effect
What is the potential impart on the commercial viability of the work being copied from? This could potentially be positive by drawing attention to that work; most of the time it's likely to me negligible. Completely replacing the original so that people will want this version instead of the original would be detrimental to a fair use claim.