I'll let Greg jump in as well, but I think the CCH case was a very specific case about a very specific kind of content with a very specific role that the publisher played in that instance.
Our concern with CCH is that it does not make the primacy of the market first and foremost. In fact, it quite blatantly states that “fair” isn't really defined by the commercial impact on the work. For us, that's absolutely antithetical to the notion of copyright: how can it be fair if it undermines the commercial prospects for the work? We just don't understand that.
That's why we feel CCH does not elevate the marketplace to the first priority.