Again, I'm sorry to say I don't agree. 'Fair use' has not protected us in the courts so far, forcing us to 'excerpt', as you mentioned. Which is a loss for us, for the reasons you've said.
We have to excerpt the folks who have already sued us. This ruling gives aid and comfort to others who would wish to similarly follow 'suit' -- so to speak.
The only detail left is what kind of 'evidence' would FR have to supply to "prove" they aren't supportive of those of us who illegally post articles.
I'll agree with you when the copyright act is declared unconstitutional by the SCOTUS.
(for those unfamilar with "fair use", do a Google search. One reference here: http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/chapter9/9-a.html)