At 06:22 PM 1/28/00 -0600, Bettie Wood wrote: >This sounds to me like we're all ok??? Along with the actual federal copyright code, the on-line text includes historical and background information on the statute. http://www.rootsweb.com/~mikegoad/html/code.htm The fair use portion of the statute was included fairly recently to take the "fair use" concept out of common law (law that is commonly accepted and ruled on by the courts, but which is not in the written or statuatory laws) and incorporate it into legal statutes. It was intentionally left vague and was not intended to change the way that courts might regard as fair use: -quotation of excerpts in a review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment; -quotation of short passages in a scholarly or technical work, for illustration or clarification of the author's observations; -use in a parody of some of the content of the work parodied; -summary of an address or article, with brief quotations, in a news report; -reproduction by a library of a portion of a work to replace part of a damaged copy; -reproduction by a teacher or student of a small part of a work to illustrate a lesson; -reproduction of a work in legislative or judicial proceedings or reports; -incidental and fortuitous reproduction, in a newsreel or broadcast, of a work located in the scene of an event being reported.'' I do not think that a court would find copying of a book would fall into any category of "fair use." Mike