Editing Fair use (section)

== Influence internationally ==
While U.S. fair use law has been influential in some countries, some countries have fair use criteria drastically different from those in the U.S., and some countries do not have a fair use framework at all. Some countries have the concept of [[fair dealing]] instead of fair use, while others use different systems of [[limitations and exceptions to copyright]]. Many countries have some reference to an exemption for educational use, though the extent of this exemption varies widely.

Sources differ on whether fair use is fully recognized by countries other than the United States. [[American University]]'s ''infojustice.org'' published a compilation of portions of over 40 nations' laws that explicitly mention fair use or fair dealing, and asserts that some of the fair dealing laws, such as Canada's, have evolved (such as through judicial precedents) to be quite close to those of the United States. This compilation includes fair use provisions from Bangladesh, Israel, South Korea, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Uganda, and the United States.<ref name=handbook>{{cite web |url=http://infojustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/band-and-gerafi-2013.pdf |title=The Fair Use/Fair Dealing Handbook |work=infojustice.org |publisher=American University Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property |first1=Jonathan |last1=Band |first2=Jonathan |last2=Gerafi |access-date=March 28, 2013 |archive-date=November 13, 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181113013250/http://infojustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/band-and-gerafi-2013.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref> However, Paul Geller's 2009 ''International Copyright Law and Practice'' says that while some other countries recognize similar exceptions to copyright, only the United States and Israel fully recognize the concept of fair use.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Geller|first=Paul|title=International Copyright Law and Practice|publisher=Matthew Bender & Co Inc|edition=2009}}</ref>

The [[International Intellectual Property Alliance]] (IIPA), a lobby group of U.S. copyright industry bodies, has objected to international adoption of U.S.-style fair use exceptions, alleging that such laws have a dependency on [[common law]] and long-term legal precedent that may not exist outside the United States.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20191031/00591143300/us-government-threatening-to-kill-free-trade-with-south-africa-after-hollywood-complained-it-was-adopting-american-fair-use.shtml|title=US Government Threatening To Kill Free Trade With South Africa After Hollywood Complained It Was Adopting American Fair Use Principles|last=Masnick|first=Mike|website=Techdirt|date=November 4, 2019|access-date=November 4, 2019|archive-date=October 8, 2024|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20241008080706/https://www.techdirt.com/2019/11/04/us-government-threatening-to-kill-free-trade-with-south-africa-after-hollywood-complained-it-was-adopting-american-fair-use/|url-status=live}}</ref>

=== Israel ===
In November 2007, the Israeli [[Knesset]] passed a new copyright law that included a U.S.-style fair use exception. The law, which took effect in May 2008, permits the fair use of copyrighted works for purposes such as private study, research, criticism, review, news reporting, quotation, or instruction or testing by an educational institution. The law sets up four factors, similar to the U.S. fair use factors (see above), for determining whether a use is fair.<ref name=BandIsrael>{{cite news|last1=Band|first1=Jonathan|title=Israel now has the right copyright law|url=http://fr.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1206446110027&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull|access-date=November 16, 2015|work=The Jerusalem Post|date=March 26, 2008|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120128161746/http://fr.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1206446110027&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull|archive-date=January 28, 2012}}</ref>

On September 2, 2009, the Tel Aviv District court ruled in ''The Football Association Premier League Ltd. v. Ploni''<ref name=FAPL>{{cite web|title= The Football Association Premier League Ltd. v. Ploni and others|url=http://info1.court.gov.il/Prod03/ManamHTML5.nsf/03386E2BD41B4FF74225762500514826/$FILE/DC517C1BE60D537E42257486003ED1E6.html?OpenElement|access-date=November 16, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100114175243/http://info1.court.gov.il/Prod03/ManamHTML5.nsf/03386E2BD41B4FF74225762500514826/$FILE/DC517C1BE60D537E42257486003ED1E6.html?OpenElement|archive-date=January 14, 2010}}</ref> that fair use is a user right. The court also ruled that streaming of live soccer games on the Internet is fair use. In doing so, the court analyzed the four fair use factors adopted in 2007 and cited U.S. case law, including ''[[Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corp.]]'' and ''[[Perfect 10, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc.]]''.<ref name=Lichtenstein>{{cite web|last1=Lichtenstein|first1=Yoram|title=Israeli Judge Permits Unlicensed Sports Event Streaming—FAPL v. Ploni (Guest Blog Post)|url=http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2009/09/israeli_judge_p.htm|website=Technology and Marketing Law Blog|access-date=November 16, 2015|date=September 21, 2009|archive-date=July 26, 2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110726033932/http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2009/09/israeli_judge_p.htm|url-status=live}}</ref>

=== Malaysia ===
An amendment in 2012 to the section 13(2)(a) of the Copyright Act 1987 created an exception called 'fair dealing' which is not restricted in its purpose. The four factors for fair use as specified in US law are included.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.wipo.int/edocs/lexdocs/laws/en/my/my081en.pdf|title=Copyright (Amendment) Act of 2012|website=World Intellectual Property Organization|access-date=October 21, 2018|archive-date=November 13, 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181113013242/http://www.wipo.int/edocs/lexdocs/laws/en/my/my081en.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref>

=== Poland ===
{{Main|Fair use (Poland)}}
Fair use exists in [[Polish law]] and is covered by the [[Polish copyright law]] articles 23 to 35.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.prawo.pl/dz-u-akt/-/dokument/Dz.U.2016.666/16795787/2047977|title=Dz.U.2016.666 t.j. – prawo.pl|access-date=December 30, 2016|language=pl|archive-date=October 8, 2024|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20241008080726/https://www.prawo.pl/akty/dz-u-2022-2509-t-j,16795787.html|url-status=live}}</ref>

Compared to the United States, Polish fair use distinguishes between private and public use. In Poland, when the use is public, its use risks fines. The defendant must also prove that his use was private when accused that it was not, or that other mitigating circumstances apply. Finally, Polish law treats all cases in which private material was made public as a potential copyright infringement, where fair use can apply, but has to be proven by reasonable circumstances.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://techlaw.pl/prawo-cytatu/|title=Kiedy możemy korzystać z prawa cytatu?|date=December 1, 2013|access-date=December 30, 2016|language=pl|archive-date=January 20, 2014|archive-url=https://archive.today/20140120202637/http://techlaw.pl/prawo-cytatu/|url-status=live}}</ref>

=== Singapore ===
Section 35 of the Singaporean Copyright Act 1987 has been amended in 2004 to allow a 'fair dealing' exception for any purpose. The four fair use factors similar to US law are included in the new section 35.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://learn.asialawnetwork.com/2017/12/19/copyright-law-in-singapore-a-brief-overview/|title=Copyright Law In Singapore: A Brief Overview|publisher=Asia Law Network|date=December 19, 2017|author=George Hwang|access-date=February 10, 2020|archive-date=August 20, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200820141324/https://learn.asialawnetwork.com/2017/12/19/copyright-law-in-singapore-a-brief-overview/|url-status=live}}</ref>

=== South Korea ===
The [[Copyright law of South Korea|Korean Copyright Act]] was amended to include a fair use provision, Article 35–3, in 2012. The law outlines a four-factor test similar to that used under U.S. law:

{{blockquote|In determining whether art. 35-3(1) above applies to a use of copyrighted work, the following factors must be considered: the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is of a non profit nature; the type or purpose of the copyrighted work; the amount and importance of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; the effect of the use of the copyrighted work upon the current market or the current value of the copyrighted work or on the potential market or the potential value of the copyrighted work.<ref name=SouthKorea>{{cite web|author1=Ben|title=How will South Korea Implement fair use?|url=http://the1709blog.blogspot.com/2013/02/how-will-south-korea-implement-fair-use.html|website=The 1709 Blog|access-date=18 November 2015|date=2013-02-23|archive-date=November 20, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151120023300/http://the1709blog.blogspot.com/2013/02/how-will-south-korea-implement-fair-use.html|url-status=live}}</ref>}}