Three academic publishers challenged Georgia State University officials’ digital distribution of excerpts from copyrighted books. After a bench trial, the district court found no prima facie infringement in 26 instances, fair use in 43, and infringement in five; it nevertheless awarded the defendants fees and costs and granted the publishers declaratory and injunctive relief. In consolidated appeals, the Eleventh Circuit held that the district court properly assessed alleged infringement work by work but erred by mechanically weighing the four fair-use factors equally and by applying a 10-percent-or-one-chapter benchmark to the amount copied. The court explained that educational purpose favored fair use; the nature factor could be neutral or weigh against fair use when excerpts contained evaluative, analytical, or subjective descriptive material; and the amount copied required a contextual assessment. Nontransformative copying for a purpose for which the works were marketed also posed a severe market-substitution risk. Because the flawed fair-use analysis underlay the infringement findings, injunction, declaratory relief, and prevailing-party award, the court reversed the judgment, vacated that relief and the defendants’ fees and costs, and remanded for further proceedings under the correct analysis. Judge Vinson concurred specially, emphasizing the broader substitution of unpaid digital course materials for licensed coursepacks.