Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate ·

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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “1. A method of conducting distributed learning among a plurality of computer systems coupled to a network, the method comprising the steps of: providing instructions to a first computer system coupled to the network for: creating a graphical display representative of a classroom; creating a graphical display illustrating controls for selecting first and second data streams; creating a first window for displaying the first selected data stream; and creating a second window for displaying the second selected data stream, wherein the first and second windows are displayed simultaneously; and providing instructions to a second computer system coupled to the network for: creating a graphical display representative of the classroom; creating a third window for displaying the first selected data stream; and creating a fourth window for displaying the second selected data stream, wherein the third and fourth windows are displayed simultaneously. 8. A system for conducting distributed learning among a plurality of computer systems coupled to a network, the system comprising: a presenter computer system of the plurality of computer systems coupled to the network and comprising: a content selection control for defining at least one remote streaming data source and for selecting one of the remote streaming data sources for viewing; and a presenter streaming data viewer for displaying data produced by the selected ■■ remote streaming data source; an audience member computer system of the ”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC

2. “Additionally, [the prior art] does not dis-' close the claimed feature of “creating a graphical display representative of the classroom” on a second computer system coupled to the network. The present invention allows both a first computer system (for example, the presenter computer system) and a second computer system (for example, an audience member) to view a graphical display of the classroom. This claimed feature of the present invention allows the audience members to interact in a visual virtual classroom, environment with both the presenter and other audience members. By contrast, [the prior art] merely discloses “[as] the ■ students log in, their seating locations in the classroom are shown by a highlighted icon in the classroom map on the teacher’s screen.” ... [The prior art] does not teach or suggest displaying a graphical display representative of a classroom on a student’s screen.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC

3. “The IBM Corporation, IBM Dictionary of Computing 439 (1st ed.1994) defines “module” as a “packaged functional hardware unit designed for use with other components” 'and a “part of a program that usually performs a particular function of related functions.” See also Alan Freedman, The Computer Glossary 268 (8th ed.1998) (defining “module” as a “self-contained hardware or software component that interfaces with a larger system”); John Daintith & Edmund Wright, Dictionary of Computing 315 (4th ed.1996) (defining “module” as a “programming or specification construct that defines a software component” and a “component of a hardware system that can be subdivided”).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Guitar Apprentice, Inc. v. Ubisoft, Inc.