The Fair Use Doctrine

[Carol]

Alla wrote:
><snip> I just do not get the she should stop playing the 
> victim part of Carol's remark.
> 
> Of course she is not a victim in a sense that her last money is
being stolen, or that she is being physically hurt (although it must
be upsetting at least emotionally), but I still do not see how if she
truly feels that she is being taken advantage of, what is she playing of.
 
> Now of course the emotional remarks have nothing to do with the 
issues of the case and judge will not pay attention to them I am 
sure, just as Steve's tears, etc, but at least I can believe that she
is truly upset, even if lawyer told her to play it for all it is 
worth. And that I dislike if it is so.

Carol responds:

Your last paragraph here relates to the point I was trying to make in
my sign-off. The emotionalism isn't helping her case, and if the
lawyers are encouraging it, I think they're making a mistake. (Photos
like the one that appeared with the article--and I probably was out of
line with my joke about Bertie Botts beans--don't help her, either. I
don't mean that they have any effect on the case, but they don't help
the public perception of her.)

The testimony, if it continues (I get the impression from your post
that the trial is over, which I hadn't realized) should focus on solid
evidence relating to the Fair Use doctrine. Everything else, from the
amount of work involved to the emotional strain on both the defendant
and the plaintiff, is irrelevant.

Steve's tears may have helped him or hurt him in the public eye; I
don't know. But I don't think his lawyers coached him to cry on the
witness stand. But JKR's lawyers are apparently encouraging her to
vent her anger and resentment rather than helping her to see the facts
of the case. I don't think she's made a single, supportable or
relevant claim in her testimony. She neither wrote all the words nor
did all the work.

I'm starting to feel that I'm repeating myself.

Carol, apologizing again for being mean-spirited about that photograph
(maybe it's catching <g>)