Is this morally wrong?

[Larz60+]

When I was a young programmer, I worked for a well known (and very old -- Little Brown, founded in 1837 --) publisher. While there, I helped design their royalties system. The copyright and royalties at that time were all dependent on how good the author's lawyer was. Some books carried copyright and royalties for generations. Some expired at death. Today, the government decides the longevity of copyrights. In 1976, Revision of the U.S. Copyright Act extended copyright to 75 years. I thought this ridiculous when the bill was passed, this was done in anticipation of adherence to the Berne Convention rules (Paris, url: https://www.law.cornell.edu/treaties/ber...rview.html ).
Included in that bill is the following clause:

It states that "the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright." To determine whether the use of a work is a fair use, the following four factors are to be considered: purpose and character of the use, nature of the copyrighted work, the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the whole, and the effect of the use on the potential market.