Motta v. Samuel Weiser, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
768 F.2d 481 · 1985
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 21 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently September 2021 · most notably Gamma Audio & Video, Inc. v. Ean-Chea (1993), Community for Creative Non-Violence v. Reid (1988)
7 federal appellate · 21 district · 2 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 17 U.S.C. § 201 (§ 101 of the Copyright Act of 1976) · 17 U.S.C. § 501 (§ 101 of the Copyright Act of 1976)
Relies on National Association for Advancement of Colored People v. State of Alabama Patterson · South Dakota v. Nebraska · Reynolds v. Stockton · Ferguson v. National Broadcasting Co. · Eden Toys, Inc. v. Florelee Undergarment Co.
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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“... no person claiming by virtue of a transfer to be the owner of copyright or of any exclusive right under a copyright is entitled to institute an infringement action under this Title until the instrument of transfer under which this person claims has been recorded in the Copyright Office, but suit may be instituted after such recordation on a cause of action that arose before recording.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[The common-law rule] is not absolute. Courts may determine that ownership vests in the individuals who comprise the organization.... In Byam v. Bickford, [ 140 Mass. 31 , 2 N.E. 687 (1885)], real property was permitted to vest in an unincorporated association’s members because all of the members could be ascertained. In contrast, where membership is not fixed and new members are continually being added and lost, such vesting has not been allowed. State v. Sunbeam Rebekah Lodge No. 180, 169 Or. 253 , 127 P.2d 726 (1942). Without this limitation of an ascertainable membership, the public, or even the members of the association, would not have notice or be cognizant of who claimed ownership in a particular property.”
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.