Horgan v. Macmillan, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
789 F.2d 157 · 1986
Citation profile
16 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently November 2023 · most notably Computer Associates International, Inc. v. Altai, Inc. (1992), Castle Rock Entertainment, Inc. v. Carol Publishing Group, Inc. (1998)
16 federal appellate · 1 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 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 California State Board of Equalization v. Western Marina Corp. · ITT Continental Baking Co. v. William Inglis & Sons Baking Co. · Peter Pan Fabrics, Inc. v. Martin Weiner Corp. · Citibank Na v. Citytrust · Roy Export Co. Establishment v. Columbia Broadcasting System, 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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the standard for determining copyright infringement is not whether the original could be recreated from the allegedly infringing copy, but whether the latter is substantially similar to the former.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Even a small amount of the original, if it is qualitatively significant, may be sufficient to be an infringement.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the staged performance could not be recreated from the photographs,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.