5 ms·
https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107 https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107 It was not for a purpose specifically mentioned, other fa
by rrobukef 7y ago
https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107 https://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107
It was not for a purpose specifically mentioned, other fair uses require lawyers. The use was commercial, and it was the whole (?, I did not see the poster) image. Since pepe is now associated with far-right, conspiracies and fake news, it's easy to argue a loss of value. Why do you feel this is fair use?