> there is precedent for for copying whole works ...

Yes, true, but that is not what is called "fair use".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use

"Fair use is a limitation and exception to the exclusive right granted by copyright law to the author of a creative work. In United States copyright law, fair use is a doctrine that permits limited use of copyrighted material without acquiring permission from the rights holders. Examples of fair use include commentary, search engines, criticism, news reporting, research, teaching, library archiving and scholarship. It provides for the legal, unlicensed citation or incorporation of copyrighted material in another author's work under a four-factor balancing test."

> A fair use defence of printing a copy of a PDF for personal consumption would probably hold up fine, in the same way that the Audio Home Recording Act establishes that it is legal in some circumstances to make copies of audio recordings for non-commercial personal use.

Again, yes, but you're describing another appropriate exception, not "fair use".

You can't distribute it, but you certainly can print pages for yourself from an ebook. You can't distribute that, but if you bought it then you can back it up. The same with most software and music. You can't distribute, but you can create copies to prevent your own loss. A printed copy prevents against loss in the case of loss of any digital playback device.