Why wouldn't a judge throw this out as spurious if it clearly falls under fair use? (procedural question; not asserting that it does or does not meet fair use in this case).
While people here are making an argument that this is fair use, it's not quite so simple. You have to pay money to argue in front of a judge, and unless no counter-argument is provided, summary judgement is far from an inevitability.
> Why wouldn't a judge throw this out as spurious if it clearly falls under fair use?
If there is no colorable argument against fair use, then it would presumably be thrown out at summary judgment on a motion by the defendant.
But fair use analysis is rarely cut-and-dried, unless the fact pattern and context very closely mirrors something that has been previously litigated, and typically involves disputed questions of fact regarding impact, which would call for a trial.
The goal of the plaintiff's lawyer is to make dozens and dozens of claims, so that hopefully one of them sticks while the others are thrown out. This is the common practice.
