ABSTRACT
The analysis of legal arguments begins with the description of the general frames and theories used by the legal actors. This chapter examines how the legal actors use the structural rules in relation to their resources in their arguments, and how the judges respond to the ways in which the parties use their communicative resources in their legal arguments. The judge's arguments tended to be made in favor of broadening the scope of copyright protection than limiting the scope. In the arguments that decided on the merits and the arguments in summary judgment cases, the public interest or policy considerations were only occasionally argued as a rationale for a decision. The considerations of the public interest and marketplace in the arguments that decided on the merits and in the arguments in preliminary injunction cases are separately analyzed. The public policy argument was made in the context of other legal rules such as fair use and the functionality theory.
