Medi, did you miss when I wrote: "as Medi says, Fair Use is a defense, so we don't want anyone to get sued to prove they are right," in my last post?

I never said you didn't have to go to court.

I've never been disagreeing with you about that (you seem to think that maybe I am?). But yeah, not disagreeing

And the YouTube case I was referring to did go to court.

Oh, It's in that Wikipedia article in fact: "In August 2008 U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel of San Jose, California ruled that copyright holders cannot order a deletion of an online file without determining whether that posting reflected "fair use" of the copyrighted material." The material referred to above was taken down under the DMCA. Therefore, following this ruling, material cannot be taken down under the DMCA without determining whether it's Fair Use. Hence, my understanding, is that Fair Use trumps DMCA in established court cases. But I could very easily be wrong.

But yeah, for Fair Use to triumph you have to go to court. Which you said, then I said, then you said again and now I've said again. I think we've established, you have to go to court.

But as noted, I just think as users we are in an odd situation where we will keep quoting things until we're specifically told not to. And that's a bit of a weird netherworld. But I don't see any other way around it. That's what I really am seeking a response to here.