Hacker News Reader

No, she claims she is covered under fair use because she doesn't make any money from it, blah blah blah.

No, she claims she is covered under fair use because she doesn't make any money from it, blah blah blah.

Plus, her claim of being a lawyer makes the whole matter quite baffling.

Actually, there have been fair use decisions when an entire work was used non-commercially:

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/06/fair-use-defense/

I'm not saying that's the case here, but whether the use was commercial or not is one of the four factors considered when deciding fair use.

I don't think "commercial" requires you to "make money" from the use. I think using the photo as an illustration on your business website qualifies as "commercial" even if you can't show that it brought you any business. (Of course, IANAL.)

There are different degrees "commercial." It's not a binary distinction.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com