Within a boundary necessary for reporting, a person who reports a current event by newspaper may use any work accessed during her reporting and distribute such work. This is a fair use provision about reporting current events. So called an accessed work means a work felt, or recognized as, existing by sense organs during the reporting. And, reporting of a current event means a report of what is occurring or has occurred lately, which the public in the society care about. It does not matter whether the targeted subject is about politics, society, economy, culture, and sports. It is a news report for simply delivering facts. According to the process of reporting the disputed report, the reporter as Appellant, after knowing a suicide news at a police station, then followed investigators to go to a funeral home and asked the deceased’s family how they felt about the suicide incident and the following funeral arrangement, which was done as reporting of a current event. What was felt, or recognized as, existing by sense organs in the scene during the reporting of the suicide incident by Appellant was the scene where the funeral home was located. The disputed picture was not the deceased’s picture placed in the funeral home. Obviously, the disputed picture cannot be felt, or recognized, by sense organs so as to access. As a result, it is sufficient to say that the disputed picture is not a work accessed for reporting. Article 49 of the Copyright Act, providing the elements of fair use for using other’s work for reporting, is not satisfied.

Copyright infringement, limitations on Copyright, fair use, reproduction, distribution