Sony Computer Entertainment, Inc. v. Connectix Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
203 F.3d 596 · 2000
Citation profile
22 federal appellate · 5 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 54 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2024 · most notably Stormans, Inc. v. Selecky (2009), Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc. (2004)
22 federal appellate · 5 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
Relies on Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co. · Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enterprises · Sony Corporation of America v. Universal City Studios Inc · Bonito Boats, Inc. v. Thunder Craft Boats, Inc. · Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc.
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 54 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[The copyright holder] understandably seeks control over the market for devices that play games [the copyright holder] produces or licenses. The copyright law, however, does not confer such a monopoly.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[A]n attempt to monopolize the market by making it impossible for others to compete runs counter to the statutory purpose of promoting creative expression and cannot constitute a strong equitable basis for resisting the invocation of the fair use doctrine.”
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.