Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 111 U.S. 53 - Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony

Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony’s Empirical Analysis

111 U.S. 53 · 1884

Citation profile

544
cited by 544 later decisions
61
cited 61 times by the Supreme Court
4
states following
March 2025
most recently cited

182 federal appellate · 60 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 544 later decisions (61 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2025 · most notably Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co. (1991), Eisner v. Macomber (1920)

182 federal appellate · 60 district · 4 state decisions

1130188418901900191019201930194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Crane Iron Co. v. Hoagland

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 544 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “An author in that sense is 'he to whom anything owes its origin; originator; maker; one who completes a work of science or literature.' ”). 18 .Both the terms”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[The court below found that the photograph was] a “useful, new, harmonious, characteristic, and graceful picture, and that plaintiff made the same ... entirely from his own original mental conception, to which he gave visible form by posing the said Oscar Wilde in front of the camera, selecting and arranging the costume, draperies, and other various accessories in said photograph, arranging the subject so as to present graceful outlines, arranging and disposing the light and shade, [and] suggesting and evoking the desired expression....” These findings, we think, show this photograph to be an original work of art, the product of plaintiff’s intellectual invention, of which plaintiff is the author”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[The Congress shall have Power] ... To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.