Mike, isn’t it a little disingenuous to take the moral high-road of agreeing with Fox’s invocation of fair use, then immediately condemn Murdoch as “astoundingly hypocritical” by misrepresenting the circumstances? I certainly don’t have any love for Murdoch and his grab-bag of delusions of entitlement, but come on. Are we really going to start irrationally demonizing opponents of fair use in the same hysterical fashion that would fit in well at Fox News?

While it is certainly entertaining to imagine Rupert in front of his computer, giggling in demonic glee and emailing Bill O’Reilly the video – its irrational to believe that he should be personally accountable for the actions of some anonymous segment producer. If we’re going to play the “Murdoch-is-a-hypocrite” card, we, as champions of the virtue and benevolence of fair use, might look kind of stupid if we can’t even get the basic definition of “fair” right.

Murdoch is a hypocrite, without doubt. As chief executive, he is infinitely more involved with his operation’s legal representation than for the day-to-day activities of some video jockey; fair use being a legal matter, it is difficult to justify how his position could be lost in translation. But a low-level corporate drone? If we’re going to try to blame Murdoch for the video AND for the legal defense simultaneously, we’re put in a logically precarious position where News Corp is staffed top to bottom by worshipers of the Scripture According to Murdoch.

And honestly, that scenario is so disturbing that upon noticing, the Universe would immediately collapse in on itself, bewildered at how badly it misjudged it’s scheduled appointment with The End and profoundly apologetic for this terribly unfortunate termination of service.