All of the factors involved trended towards fair use.
Brown et al. 23 – Intellectual Property Attorney and Corporate Partner at Seyfarth, J.D. from the University of California, Berkeley.
Arnold E. Brown, II, Kenneth Wilton, Intellectual Property Attorney at Seyfarth, J.D. from the University of California College of the Law, Joseph Myers, Director of Innovation for the Intellectual Property Practice Group at Seyfarth, J.D. from Vanderbilt University, “The District of Columbia Court of Appeals’ Recent Significant Legal Precedent Carries Implications for Standards Organizations,” Seyfarth, 12-19-2023, https://www.seyfarth.com/news-insights/the-district-of-columbia-court-of-appeals-recent-significant-legal-precedent-carries-implications-for-standards-organizations.html
Nature of the Copyrighted Work: The court emphasized that standards fall on the factual end of the “fact-fiction” spectrum, which favors fair use. Moreover, standards that are incorporated by reference into law without modification become virtually indistinguishable from the situation where the text of the standard was copied into the law. Because government documents (.e.g. laws) are not protected by copyright, this factor heavily favored PRO’s fair use argument.
Amount and Substantiality of Use: Despite PRO’s copying the entirety of the plaintiffs’ standards, the court considered this reasonable because it aligned with PRO's purpose of informing the public about standards that have been incorporated into law. This factor also favored fair use.