Warren Publishing, Inc. v. Microdos Data Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
115 F.3d 1509 · 1997
Citation profile
25 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently August 2022 · most notably Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc. (2004), Ty, Inc. v. GMA Accessories, Inc. (1997)
25 federal appellate · 2 district ·
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
Applies 17 U.S.C. § 101 (§ 101 of the Copyright Act of 1976) · 17 U.S.C. § 102 (§ 101 of the Copyright Act of 1976) · 17 U.S.C. § 103 (§ 101 of the Copyright Act of 1976) · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1292 · 28 U.S.C. § 46
Relies on Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co. · Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission · Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enterprises · Kregos v. Associated Press · Zardui-Quintana v. Richard
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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a work formed by the collection and assembling of preexisting materials . . . that are selected, coordinated, or arranged in such a way that the resulting work as a whole constitutes an original work of authorship.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“original works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression . . . [.]”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“derivative” because it is based on a preexisting work that has been recast, transformed, or adapted. An example of a compilation is [the floor plans at issue in this case.] The [Copyright] Act has created a hierarchy in terms of the protection afforded to these different types of copyrights. A creative work is entitled to the most protection, followed by a derivative work, and finally by a compilation. This is why the Feist Court emphasized that the copyright protection in a factual compilation is”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.