Blehm v. Jacobs’s Empirical Analysis
702 F.3d 1193 · 2012
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 17 U.S.C. § 102 (§ 101 of the Copyright Act of 1976) · 28 U.S.C. § 1291
Relies on Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co. · Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enterprises · Peter Pan Fabrics, Inc. v. Martin Weiner Corp. · Nichols v. Universal Pictures Corp. · Walker v. Time Life Films, 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'Even if the compilation is deemed original, what kind of copying will be held to infringe it?' The answer [after Feist ] appears to be: 'Virtually none, short of extensive verbatim copying.' "). As with the substantial similarity test, the court finds that the supersubstantial similarity test is "a mixed question of law and fact ... [for determining] whether a defendant's factual copying constitutes actionable infringement.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The essence of [the substantial similarity] test is whether the ordinary observer, unless he set out to detect the disparities, would be disposed to overlook them, and regard their aesthetic appeal as the same.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the protectable expression in the copyrighted work and the allegedly infringing work is so dissimilar ... that no reasonable jury could find for the plaintiff”
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.