united-states copyright fair-use
How does the exclusive right to public display apply, e.g., to t-shirts?
<p>17 USC §106(5) says that the copyright holder of work holds the exclusive right to display the work publicly:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>(5) in the case of literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works, including the individual images of a motion picture or other audiovisual work, to display the copyrighted work publicly</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Yet I publicly wear shirts with copyrighted designs all the time, on clothing I legally purchased from the copyright holder.</p>

<ul>
<li>Is this a <em>prima facie</em> case of infringement defensible via fair use?</li>
<li>Or is it allowed by some other legal mechanism?</li>
<li>Or is it flatly illegal and merely a terrible business idea to litigate?</li>
</ul>

<p>I understand the first sale doctrine of §109 allows the owner of a copy to <em>distribute</em> their own copy, but it doesn't seem to allow display.</p>

<p>To add a few other examples beyond a t-shirt, what about displaying sculptures or other works of art in my yard? If I wanted to publicly display the entire text of a short story in my yard, would that be different (perhaps due to the "nature of the work" fair use factor)?</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Yet I publicly wear shirts with copyrighted designs all the time.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>I'm unclear about this; do you mean T-shirts you have made yourself using copyrighted images or T-shirts you have bought? </p>

<p>If the former then it is a <em>prima facie</em> breach and you could be sued by the copyright holder. You would probably not be as it would be impracticable.</p>

<p>If the latter then there are 2 possibilities:</p>

<ol>
<li>The manufacturer/distributer/retailer chain all hold valid licences to put the image on a T-shirt and display it in the usual way so there is no breach involved.</li>
<li>The manufacturer/distributer/retailer chain does not hold a valid licence in which case there is a breach and the copyright holder would target, say Wall-Mart rather than you.</li>
</ol>

<blockquote>
  <p>what about displaying ... works of art in my yard?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Notwithstanding that it can be viewed from a public space, your yard is not public; therefore this is not public display.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>I understand the first sale doctrine of §109 allows the owner of a copy to <em>distribute</em> their own copy, but it doesn't seem to allow display.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>In fact §109 <em>does</em> allow this use: such a limited display of a copyrighted work is enabled by <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/109" rel="nofollow">17 USC §109(c)</a>, which is a specific exemption to §106(5) quoted in the question above:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>(c) Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106(5), the owner of a particular copy lawfully made under this title, or any person authorized by such owner, is entitled, without the authority of the copyright owner, to display that copy publicly, either directly or by the projection of no more than one image at a time, to viewers present at the place where the copy is located.)</p>
</blockquote>

<p>That is, if I am the lawful owner of a copy of a copyrighted work, the exclusivity of the copyright holder's right to public display is limited by my right under §109(c) to display my personally-owned copy of the work to physically nearby viewers.</p>
