Editing Fair use (section)

== Fair dealing ==
{{Main|Fair dealing}}

Fair dealing allows specific exceptions to copyright protections. The open-ended concept of fair use is generally not observed in jurisdictions where fair dealing is in place, although this does vary.<ref name=handbook /> Fair dealing is established in legislation in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Singapore, India, South Africa and the United Kingdom, among others.<ref name=handbook />

=== Australia ===
{{Main|History of Fair Use proposals in Australia}}
While Australian copyright exceptions are based on the Fair Dealing system, since 1998 a series of Australian government inquiries have examined, and in most cases recommended, the introduction of a "flexible and open" Fair Use system into Australian copyright law. From 1998 to 2017 there have been eight Australian government inquiries which have considered the question of whether fair use should be adopted in Australia. Six reviews have recommended Australia adopt a "Fair Use" model of copyright exceptions:<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.smh.com.au/comment/productivity-commission-to-say-fair-use-could-get-us-ahead-and-end-the-copyright-protection-racket-20161214-gtau3u.html|title=Our copyright laws are holding us back, and there's a way out|last=Martin|first=Peter|date=December 15, 2016|work=[[The Sydney Morning Herald]]|access-date=February 6, 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161214223301/http://www.smh.com.au/comment/productivity-commission-to-say-fair-use-could-get-us-ahead-and-end-the-copyright-protection-racket-20161214-gtau3u.html|archive-date=December 14, 2016|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://digital.org.au/content/productivity-commission-draft-ip-report-breakdown|title=Productivity Commission Draft IP Report – the breakdown|date=June 16, 2016|publisher=[[Australian Digital Alliance]]|access-date=March 7, 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170220114151/http://digital.org.au/content/productivity-commission-draft-ip-report-breakdown|archive-date=February 20, 2017|url-status=dead}}</ref> two enquiries specifically into the Copyright Act (1998, 2014); and four broader reviews (both 2004, 2013, 2016). One review (2000) recommended against the introduction of fair use and another (2005) issued no final report.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.alrc.gov.au/publications/4-case-fair-use-australia/reviews-have-considered-fair-use|title=Reviews that have considered fair use|date=June 4, 2013|website=www.alrc.gov.au|publisher=[[Australian Law Reform Commission]]|access-date=March 8, 2017|archive-date=December 21, 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161221092927/http://www.alrc.gov.au/publications/4-case-fair-use-australia/reviews-have-considered-fair-use|url-status=dead}}</ref> Two of the recommendations were specifically in response to the stricter copyright rules introduced as part of the [[Australia–United States Free Trade Agreement]] (AUSFTA), while the most recent two, by the [[Australian Law Reform Commission]] (ALRC) and the [[Productivity Commission]] (PC) were with reference to strengthening Australia's "digital economy".

=== Canada ===
{{Main|Fair dealing in Canadian copyright law}}

The ''[[Copyright Act of Canada]]'' establishes fair dealing in Canada, which allows specific exceptions to copyright protection. In 1985, the Sub-Committee on the Revision of Copyright rejected replacing fair dealing with an open-ended system, and in 1986 the Canadian government agreed that "the present fair dealing provisions should not be replaced by the substantially wider 'fair use' concept".<ref name=MagazinesCanada>{{cite web|author1=Magazines Canada|title=Why Canada Should Not Adopt Fair Use: A Joint Submission to the Copyright Consultations|url=https://www.magazinescanada.ca/uploads/File/files/JOINT_SUBMISSION_FAIR_USE_final.pdf|access-date=November 16, 2015|date=September 15, 2009|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160403000037/https://www.magazinescanada.ca/uploads/File/files/JOINT_SUBMISSION_FAIR_USE_final.pdf|archive-date=April 3, 2016}}</ref> Since then, the Canadian fair dealing exception has broadened. It is now similar in effect to U.S. fair use, even though the frameworks are different.<ref name=PublishersUSTR>{{cite news|last1=Masnick|first1=Mike|title=Book Publishers Whine To USTR That It's Just Not Fair That Canada Recognizes Fair Dealing For Educational Purposes|url=https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150527/19333231131/book-publishers-whine-to-ustr-that-just-not-fair-that-canada-recognizes-fair-dealing-educational-purposes.shtml|access-date=November 16, 2015|work=Tech Dirt|date=May 28, 2015|archive-date=November 17, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151117014857/https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150527/19333231131/book-publishers-whine-to-ustr-that-just-not-fair-that-canada-recognizes-fair-dealing-educational-purposes.shtml|url-status=live}}</ref>

''[[CCH Canadian Ltd v. Law Society of Upper Canada]]'' [2004] 1 S.C.R. 339,{{Cite CanLII|source=scc|year=2004|num=13}} is a landmark [[Supreme Court of Canada]] case that establishes the bounds of fair dealing in [[Canadian copyright law]]. The [[Law Society of Upper Canada]] was sued for [[copyright infringement]] for providing photocopy services to researchers. The Court unanimously held that the Law Society's practice fell within the bounds of fair dealing.

=== United Kingdom ===
{{Main|Fair dealing in United Kingdom law}}
Within the United Kingdom, fair dealing is a legal doctrine that provides an exception to the nation's copyright law in cases where the copyright infringement is for the purposes of non-commercial research or study, criticism or review, or for the reporting of current events.<ref>{{cite web|title=Exceptions to copyright|url=https://www.gov.uk/guidance/exceptions-to-copyright|website=Gov.UK|publisher=Government of the United Kingdom|access-date=April 16, 2018|date=November 18, 2014|archive-date=April 17, 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180417063814/https://www.gov.uk/guidance/exceptions-to-copyright|url-status=live}}</ref>