Fairness Doctrine

This is a gray area for me. In terms of what one can use and what one can't use, the fairness doctrine comes into play as a measuring tool for fair use. Some examples are using copyrighted materials for educational purposes, using an image for parody or commenting on an original. This all stems from problems of monetary loss and the ever alluring "deep pockets". I think that artists tend to get a little sue crazy sometimes. It usually happens after the pinnacle of the career but before the Casino concert tours. One day and artist wakes up and says, "Crap. I can't afford to buy wal-mart oatmeal this month... I wonder if I can find a Christina Aguillera song that sounds like something I hummed in the shower about 20 years ago." I think that there are legitimate reasons for some copyright infringements and sometimes there are no excuses period. It all stems back to a character issue of the perp. Moral and ethical values are disappearing in the world of media. We have developed a generation that knows where to go to get free music and movies. We have nobody to blame but ourselves. If you look at specific court cases regarding the fairness doctrine, you will find some rulings to be complicated, relying heavily on variables for truly unique situations. I think that a court should step up and offer a stronger precedent for the fairness doctrine. Give some strong guidelines that are not so broad in nature. It seems almost too easy to prove fair use in some cases and sometimes too easy to prove that you were infringed upon. This is an issue for the courts to decide, however we need to bring a legitimate case in front of the courts so that they can make a clear ruling... and that we will have to wait for.