The case law regarding copyright infringement is complex and involves weighing various factors to determine whether an instance of infringement falls under fair use. Notably, there are two significant cases mentioned:

1. Google Books Project (Timestamps: [00:09:06], [00:10:00], [00:10:30], [00:11:30], [00:12:00]):
Google scanned and digitized books from libraries without seeking permission from authors, many of which were still under copyright ([00:10:05]). Despite the mass copying, Judge Pierre Laval found that the creation of a searchable database of books was a fair use of the copyrighted material, considering factors such as the transformation of the material into something new and its societal value ([00:12:10], [00:12:21]).

2. Spotify and Song Licensing (Timestamps: [00:19:00]):
Songwriters sued Spotify for using their songs without obtaining proper licenses. The main plaintiffs in the consolidated lawsuit were Melissa Farrakh and David Lowery ([00:19:10]). The outcome of this case is not detailed, but it is implied that similar factors to the Google case would be considered.

Fair use is determined by four factors: the purpose of the use (including whether it's for commercial gain), the nature of the copyrighted work, the amount and substantiality of the portion used, and the effect of the use on the potential market or value of the copyrighted work ([00:11:30], [00:11:50]). Fair use is not a definitive rule but rather a subjective test that requires careful consideration by a judge ([00:11:32]).

In the context of generative AI, there is concern about the commercial use of copyrighted works to develop AI that could harm the market for creators and the financial implications of copyright infringement ([00:14:04], [00:17:30]).

Overall, case law suggests that each instance of alleged copyright infringement must be evaluated on its own merits, with particular attention to the principles of fair use and the specifics of each case ([00:10:31], [00:12:01]).