[Note: This is the second part to the first tag of this article. This is the part that didn't fit in the original box.]

<!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} -->

The main use of this article for my thesis is the exploration of tolerated use as it would apply to The Eagles and potential play publishers. The article highlights various reasons the copyright owner (The Eagles in this case) may practice tolerated use in respect to the possible infringer (me, in this case).  It seems that my play is a small and insignificant one that even if published by one of the amateur playwright companies, would be read by few and most likely never bring in any form of revenue.  In this sense it offers no harm towards The Eagles or their song Hotel California.  In fact, if my play were published and acted out, those producing the play would need to purchase a copy of Hotel California, which in theory would increase sales for The Eagles.  This is a clear example of what is explained in the article and would be a reason why The Eagles might potentially tolerate my use of their song and its lyrics.  This article is also helpful in understanding why the publishers act as they do in their roles as gatekeepers in regards to the fuzzy line between tolerated use and fair use. 

<!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} -->

This paper defines tolerated use and discusses the reasons it exists.  Tolerated use is defined as “infringing usage of a copyrighted work of which the copyright owner

may be aware, yet does nothing about.”  There are many different reasons, why this may be.  Some examples include “simple laziness or enforcement costs, a desire to create goodwill, or a calculation that the infringement creates an economic complement the copyrighted work -- it actually benefits the owner.”  Tolerated use is compared to implicitly licensed use as well as fair use.  It explains how the difference between tolerated use and implicitly licensed use is legal, whereas the difference between tolerated use and fair use is fuzzy.  This is because of a lack of fair use trials against casual mass infringements that leaves fair use not completely “mapped out.”