Could it be that the Copyright Office is a higher authority than the legislature that creates the laws.

It’s bad enogh that the judges can change the meaning of the law through their sometimes wild interpretation of it.

An illogical system for creating the rules that society must abide, to say the least.

“educational library”: are not all libraries educational?
“film or media studies department”: Surely all university departments use media to study. Surely some universities will renema their history department to “history media studies department”.
“making compilations of portions”: A portion of a video is the video minus the fbi warning? A technicality to be exploited.
“by media studies”: What’s that?
“film professors”: someone has not cought on that films are already an obsolete media, no longer used in universities? Anyway, soon or already there is will be no such thing as a “film professor” at any university.

As usual, more “fair use” confusion added. This type of patching the laws outside of the law itself make things more complicated, because it is not enough to study the law and the law’s jurisprudence, an already impossible task. You also have to be familiar with burocratic edicts that no one knows where they are to be found.

This is a pile of crap from an isolated Copyright Office (ther US Register of Copyrights) burocrat.

Rafael Venegas
http://www.gvenegas.com