Engineering Dynamics, Inc. v. Structural Software, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
26 F.3d 1335 · 1994
Citation profile
28 federal appellate · 6 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 83 later decisions — most recently April 2023 · most notably Apple Computer, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp. (1994), Alcatel USA, Inc. v. DGI Technologies, Inc. (1999)
28 federal appellate · 6 district · 1 state decisions
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 15 U.S.C. § 1125 (§ 43 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act)) · 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. § 106 (§ 101 of the Copyright Act of 1976)
Relies on Carnegie v. United States · Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co. · Two Pesos, Inc. v. Taco Cabana, Inc. · Wrenn v. McFadden · Texas State Commission for the Blind v. United States
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 83 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[c]opying as a factual matter typically may be inferred from proof of access to the copyrighted work and 'probative similarity.'”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[C]opyright protection for an original work of authorship [does not] extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The Lanham Act prohibits passing off goods or services as those of a competitor by employing substantially similar trade dress which is likely to confuse consumers as to the sources of the product.”
2 later decisions 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.