Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 953 F.2d 731 - Wright v. Warner Books, Inc.

Wright v. Warner Books, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

953 F.2d 731 · 1991

Citation profile

73
cited by 73 later decisions
February 2024
most recently cited

31 federal appellate · 3 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 73 later decisions — most recently February 2024 · most notably Castle Rock Entertainment, Inc. v. Carol Publishing Group, Inc. (1998), Twin Peaks Productions, Inc. v. Publications International, Ltd. (1993)

31 federal appellate · 3 district ·

3801991200020102020decided

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. § 102 (§ 101 of the Copyright Act of 1976) · 17 U.S.C. § 106 (§ 101 of the Copyright Act of 1976) · 17 U.S.C. § 107 (§ 101 of the Copyright Act of 1976) · 17 U.S.C. § 410 (§ 101 of the Copyright Act of 1976)

Relies on Scharffe v. Perkins · Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enterprises · Castor v. United States · Douglas v. Alabama · Mazer v. Stein

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

  1. “(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “The fact-driven nature of the fair use determination suggests that a district court should be cautious in granting Rule 56 motions in this area; however, it does not protect the copyright holder from summary disposition of her claims where there are no material factual disputes.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[T]here is a strong presumption that factor one favors the defendant if the allegedly infringing work fits the description of uses described in section 107.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.