F.2d at 843. 27. In the instant case, SCC’s identical copying of Lexmark’s Toner Loading Programs went beyond that which was necessary for compatibility because SCC could have achieved a valid authentication sequence and a valid checksum operation without engaging in the verbatim copying of Lexmark’s Toner Loading Programs. 2. The Fair Use Exception does not Apply 28. SCC’s wholesale copying of Lexmark’s Toner Loading Programs does not constitute fair use. 29. The cases relied upon by SCC do “ 8 F.Supp. 1409, 1419-21 (S.D.Tex.1995) (issuing judgment for the plaintiff and permanent injunction and holding that the defendants’ verbatim copying of copyrighted “threshold values” was not fair use); Princeton Univ. Press v. Mich. Document Servs., 99 F.3d 1381, 1385-92 (6th Cir.1996) (en banc) (<HOLDING>). 30. The fair use doctrine requires the
holding that copying all or substantial portions of microcode was not fair use holding that substantial verbatim copying by a copy service of materials to be used in coursepacks for college students was not fair use holding that fair use is an affirmative defense holding that unauthorized use of faa supplemental type certificate was more than simple copying of intellectual property holding that nominative fair use is an affirmative defense to a prima facie case of likelihood of confusion similar to the fair use defense