It actually is an immunity (maybe not from suit, since as we know you can sue for anything, but it is an immunity). It's a limitation set on the copyright holde

It actually is an immunity (maybe not from suit, since as we know you can sue for anything, but it is an immunity). It's a limitation set on the copyright holder to protect the party using the work fairly: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use It's a major reason for the outrage; even if Baio's use of the image was fair use to the letter, fair use law couldn't have protected him from the weight of the financial burden needed to protect his rights. Your insanity defense analogy doesn't validate because fair use isn't supposed to simply act as a plea when you're forced to defend yourself. It's a protection that we all have currently.