Re:what next? (Score 1)

"we are talking about advocation of communist ideals. Fair use is just window dressing to make such ideals appeal to people who normally think of themselves as being capitalists."

i disagree that fair use is *just* window dressing for communist ideals. fair use might serve that purpose; but fair use is *also* an american ideal, grounded in the first amendment.

so, you say, fair-use-as-an-american-ideal is suspect because people also rely on fair use to advance a communist agenda. if we accept that reasoning, then the bounding-fair-use argument is also suspect: although people might use it to fight a communist agenda, people might also use it to advance an unamerican, absolutist property position.

fair use and anti-fair-use should be evaluated not by examining the questionable motives their advocates might possess, but by considering their own merits. and fair use has merit as an american ideal, independent of any communist agenda.