What is codified as legally fair use is extremely limited, and the limited changes to account for digital copies has mostly favored publishers. The terms of fair use should be updated and broadened.
What is codified as legally fair use is extremely squishy. It's the kind of multi-factor balancing test that lets the courts do whatever they think is right.
The problem is that's also the sort of thing corporations abuse to set bad precedents, by constantly nibbling away at the edges with expensive lawyers, and filing suit against defendants with far fewer resources.
This is why "according to corporate PR, what the defendant did was bad and wrong" should always be viewed with heavy skepticism. They're always going to choose a case where they can try to paint the defendant as the villain. And yet, we know who are the ones twirling their mustache.
