Continental Cablevision, Inc. v. Poll’s Empirical Analysis
124 F.3d 1044 · 1997
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently July 2010 · most notably Molski v. Evergreen Dynasty Corp. (2007), General Instrument Corporation of Delaware at No 98-1502 v. Nu-Tek Electronics & Manufacturing Inc at No 98-1424 (1999)
11 federal appellate · 3 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 47 U.S.C. § 553 · 47 U.S.C. § 605
Relies on Consumer Product Safety Commission v. GTE Sylvania, Inc. · Webster v. Reproductive Health Services · International Cablevision, Inc. v. Sykes · Nintendo of America, Inc. v. Dragon Pacific International · International Cablevision, Inc. v. Sykes
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“No person shall intercept or receive or assist in intercepting or receiving any communications service offered over a cable system, unless specifically authorized to do so by a cable operator or as may otherwise be specifically authorized by law.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“language must ordinarily be regarded as conclusive”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“By removing addressability from its converter-decoder devices and modifying them to descramble constant pay-per-view programming, Poll effectively defeated all of Continental’s security measures, thereby allowing the user to receive unlimited premium and pay-per-view programming free of charge.”
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.