The question of whether the library or Sam has violated the terms of the data bank license that prohibits copying of the licensed information elicits two different answers under the current legal standards. This outcome depends on whether the Uniform Computer Information Transaction Act (UCITA) is used in the analysis, or whether the analysis is conducted under the traditional notions of copyright fair use. This paper will answer the question of whether the library or Sam have violated the terms of the data bank license. It will analyze their actions under the traditional notions of fair use and copyright law, and under the terms proposed by the UCITA.
             Under the fair use test, four factors are used by the courts in making their determination. The first factor involves the purpose and character of the use, where educational use, such as the library's and Sam's type of use, receives preference. The second factor involves the nature of work, whether it is non-fiction or fiction. In this factor, non-fiction and published works receive preference. In Sam's case, the work is an e-commerce article, which falls under non-fiction. The third factor is how much of the work is being used; Sam has printed the entire article, but is not reproducing it anywhere. His use only involves the printing of the article. The fourth factor is the effect of the use on the market for the material, where spontaneous classroom use of out-of-print material is favored over an assigned reading from an in-print-textbook. In this case the article is for a class of Sam's, so it is an assigned reading, but this falls into the fair use for educational materials. Under the traditional fair use test for copyrighted works, the library has a license to provide copyrighted works to students for an educational purpose. Sam is printing the article for an educational purpose, his class. Fair use "permits reproduction and other use of co...