Q: If content on a copyrighted site can be put into your notes verbatim, how is that different from copyrighted image copy?

A: There are some key differences between copying textual website content into private notes versus copying images or videos without permission:

1. Purpose and character of use: Taking verbatim notes for private study purposes is more likely to be considered fair use than pure entertainment copying of images/videos. Study notes advance education/scholarship.

2. Nature of work: Fact-based textual works get less protection than creative visual works like images or videos. Quoting factual website text is less concerning.

3. Amount copied: Notes quoting small relevant portions of text are favored over copying full images or videos. But notes that use a substantial portion or the "heart" of a work weigh against fair use.

4. Market effect: Private textual notes for self-study rarely displace the market for the original text, unlike distributing full copies of copyrighted visual media.

5. Legal access to original work: Fair use applies only to legally accessed content - notes based on hacking/stolen information don't qualify.

In summary, while wholesale copying of website text into notes is not automatically fair use either and still carries copyright infringement risk if excessive, taking verbatim notes for personal education purposes tends to have a stronger fair use case than entertainment copying of visual media like images and videos without permission. The specific facts of each use would still need to be analyzed for fair use compliance. Consulting an attorney is best for evaluating any copyright concerns over website content reuse.