User:Absentminded/Draft of copyright cases: Difference between revisions
Appearance
Content deleted Content added
Absentminded (talk | contribs) ←Created page with '{| class="wikitable sortable" border="1" |- ! align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''Case''' ! align="center" style="background:#f0f0f0;"|'''Citation''' !...' |
(No difference)
|
Revision as of 21:10, 9 March 2014
Case | Citation | Year | Vote | Classification | Subject Matter | Opinion | Dissents (Joined by) | Concurrences (Joined by) | Statute Interpreted | Summary |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Wheaton v. Peters | 33 U.S. (8 Pet.) 591 | 1834 | 5 - 2 | Substantive | Copyrightability/Common law Copyright/Formalities | McLean | Thompson, Baldwin | There is no such thing as common law copyright and one must observe the formalities to secure a copyright. | ||
Trade-Mark Cases | 100 U.S. 82 | 1879 | 9 - 0 | Non-Copyright | Constitutional basis for Trademark regulation | Miller (unanimous) | Copyright Clause does not give Congress the power to regulate trademarks | |||
Baker v. Selden | 101 U.S. 99 | 1879 | 9 - 0 | Substantive | Idea/Expression Dichotomy | Bradley (unanimous) | Idea-expression divide; differences between copyright & patent law | |||
Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony | 111 U.S. 53 | 1884 | 9 - 0 | Substantive | Copyrightability of photography | Miller (unanimous) | Extended copyright protection to photography. | |||
Banks v. Manchester | 128 U.S. 244 | 1888 | 9 - 0 | Substantive | Copyrightability of laws | Blatchford (unanimous) | No copyright in state Supreme Court opinions. | |||
Bleistein v. Donaldson Lithographing Company | 188 U.S. 239 | 1903 | 7 - 2 | Substantive | Copyrightability of commercial art | Holmes | Harlan (McKenna) | Copyright protection of illustrations made for advertisements | ||
United Dictionary Co. v. G. & C. Merriam Co. | 208 U.S. 260 | 1908 | 9 - 0 | Substantive | Formalities | Holmes (unanimous) | ||||
White-Smith Music Publishing Company v. Apollo Company | 209 U.S. 1 | 1908 | 9 - 0 | Substantive | Public performance right in music | Day (unanimous) | Holmes | Reproduction of the sounds of musical instruments playing music for which copyright granted not a violation of the copyright. | ||
Bobbs-Merrill Co. v. Straus | 210 U.S. 339 | 1908 | 9 - 0 | Substantive | First Sale | Day (unanimous) | No license to use copyrighted material. License cannot extend holder's rights beyond statute defined by Congress. | |||
Kalem Co. v. Harper Bros. | 222 U.S. 55 | 1911 | 9 - 0 | Substantive | Derivative works and secondary liability | Holmes (unanimous) | ||||
Ferris v. Frohman | 223 U.S. 424 | 1912 | 9 - 0 | Substantive | Publication and Public Performance | Hughes (unanimous) | ||||
Bauer & Cie. v. O'Donnell | 229 U.S. 1 | 1913 | 5 - 4 | Non-Copyright | Intersection of patents and first sale | Day | Holmes (McKenna, Lurton, Van Devanter) | Differences between patent and copyright defined also prohibits a license from extending rightsholders' rights beyond statute. Rights of copyright holder regarding “use” of copyrighted works. | ||
Herbert v. Shanley Co. | 242 U.S. 591 | 1917 | 9 - 0 | Substantive | Public performance of live music in business establishments | Holmes (unanimous) | ||||
International News Service v. Associated Press | 248 U.S. 215 | 1918 | 5 - 3 | Non-Copyright | Hot News | Pitney | Holmes (McKenna), Brandeis | |||
Buck v. Jewell-LaSalle Realty Co. | 283 U.S. 191 | 1931 | 9 - 0 | Substantive | Public performance right in radio broadcasts in business establishments | Brandeis (unanimous) | A hotel operator which provided headphones connected to a centrally-controlled radio receiver was guilty of copyright infringement, because "reception of a radio broadcast and its translation into audible sound is not a mere audition of the original program. It is essentially a reproduction." NB: Gene Buck, plaintiff, was president of ASCAP. | |||
Fox Film Corp v. Doyal | 286 U.S. 123 | 1932 | 9 - 0 | Substantive | Taxation of royalties | Hughes (unanimous) | ||||
Washingtonian Pub. Co. v. Pearson | 306 U.S. 30 | 1938 | 6 - 3 | Substantive | Formalities | McReynolds | Black (Roberts, Reed) | |||
Sheldon v. Metro-Goldwyn Pictures Corp. | 309 U.S. 390 | 1940 | 8 - 0 | Procedural | Damages | Hughes (unanimous) | ||||
Fred Fisher Music Co. v. M. Witmark & Sons | 318 U.S. 643 | 1943 | 9 - 0 | Substantive | Renewal terms and assignment | Frankfurter (unanimous) | ||||
United States v. Paramount Pictures, Inc. | 334 U.S. 131 | 1948 | 7 - 1 | Non-Copyright | Antitrust | Douglas | Frankfurter (in part) | |||
F. W. Woolworth Co. v. Contemporary Arts, Inc. | 344 U.S. 227 | 1952 | 7 - 2 | Procedural | Election of remedies (Statutory Damages) | Jackson | Black (Frankfurter) | Provided wide latitude to judges when determining legal remedies based on the facts of the case. | ||
Mazer v. Stein | 347 U.S. 201 | 1954 | 7 - 2 | Substantive | Copyrightability of sculpture and Idea/expression dichotomy | Reed | Douglas (Black) | Extended copyright protection to applied art. | ||
De Sylva v. Ballentine | 351 U.S. 570 | 1956 | 9 - 0 | Substantive | Renewal terms and beneficiaries | Harlan (unanimous) | ||||
Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. v. Loew's, Inc. | 356 U.S. 43 | 1958 | 4 - 4 | Substantive | Fair use in parody | aff'd 4-4 sub. nom., Benny v. Loew's, 239 F.2d 532 (9th Cir. 1956) | ||||
Fortnightly Corp. v. United Artists Television, Inc. | 392 U.S. 390 | 1968 | 5 - 1 | Substantive | Public performance of broadcast television | Stewart | Fortas | Receiving a television broadcast (of a licensed work) does not constitute a "performance" | ||
Goldstein v. California | 412 U.S. 546 | 1973 | 5 - 4 | Non-Copyright | Federal pre-emption of state criminal copyright law | Burger | Douglas (Brennan, Blackmun), Marshall (Brennan, Blackmun) | |||
Teleprompter Corp. v. Columbia Broadcasting | 415 U.S. 394 | 1974 | 6 - 3 | Substantive | Public performance of broadcast television | Stewart | Blackmun (in part), Douglas (Burger) | Receiving a television broadcast does not constitute a "performance" | ||
Twentieth Century Music Corp. v. Aiken | 422 U.S. 151 | 1975 | 7 - 2 | Substantive | Public performance of radio broadcasts in business establishments | Stewart | Burger (Douglas) | Blackmun | Receiving a radio broadcast of a licensed work does not constitute a "performance". This effectively overruled Buck v. Jewel-LaSalle Realty Co. (1931) | |
Williams & Wilkins Co. v. United States | 420 U.S. 376 | 1976 | 4 - 4 | Substantive | Fair use in photocopies | aff'd by an equally divided court, 420 U.S. 376, 95 S.Ct. 1344 (1975) | ||||
Broadcast Music v. Columbia Broadcasting System | 441 U.S. 1 | 1979 | 8 - 1 | Non-Copyright | Anti-trust and copyright collective rights organizations | White | Stevens | |||
Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc. | 464 U.S. 417 | 1984 | 5 - 4 | Substantive | Secondary liability and fair use in home recordings | Stevens | Blackmun (Marshall, Powell, Rehnquist) | The Betamax Case | ||
Mills Music, Inc. v. Snyder | 469 U.S. 153 | 1985 | 5 - 4 | Substantive | Termination | Stevens | White (Brennan, Marshall, Blackmun) | Assignment of royalties under the Copyright Act | ||
Harper & Row v. Nation Enterprises | 471 U.S. 539 | 1985 | 6 - 3 | Substantive | Fair use in excerpts | O'Connor | Brennan (White, Marshall) | The interest served by republication of a public figure's account of an event is not sufficient to permit nontransformative fair use. | ||
Dowling. v. United States | 473 U.S. 207 | 1985 | 6 - 3 | Non-Copyright | Criminal law impact of infringement | Blackmun | Powell (Burger, White) | Copyright infringement is not theft, conversion, or fraud; illegally-made copies are not stolen goods. | ||
Community for Creative Non-Violence v. Reid | 490 U.S. 730 | 1989 | 9 - 0 | Substantive | Work-made-for-hire | Marshall (unanimous) | Works for hire. | |||
Stewart v. Abend | 495 U.S. 207 | 1990 | 6 - 3 | Substantive | Derivative works | O'Connor | Stevens (Rehnquist, Scalia) | White | Rights of the successor of a copyright interest | |
Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co. | 499 U.S. 340 | 1991 | 9 - 0 | Substantive | Copyrightability of Facts | O'Connor | Blackmun | Affirmed the need for a minimal amount of creativity before a work is copyrightable. "Sweat of the brow" alone is not sufficient to bestow copyright. | ||
Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc. | 510 U.S. 517 | 1994 | 9 - 0 | Procedural | Attorneys Fees | Rehquist | Thomas | Attorney's fees in copyright litigation may be awarded to successful defendants, as well as to successful plaintiffs | ||
Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. | 510 U.S. 569 | 1994 | 9 - 0 | Substantive | Fair Use in Commercial Parody | Souter | Kennedy | Commercial parody can be fair use. | ||
Lotus Dev. Corp. v. Borland Int'l, Inc. | 516 U.S. 233 | 1995 | 4 - 4 | Substantive | Copyrightability of software program interfaces | Scope of software copyrights. | ||||
Quality King Distributors, Inc. v. L'anza Research Int'l, Inc. | 523 U.S. 135 | 1998 | 9 - 0 | Substantive | Reimportation | Stevens | Ginsburg | First sale doctrine applies to reimported goods | ||
Feltner v. Columbia Pictures Television, Inc. | 523 U.S. 340 | 1998 | 9 - 0 | Procedural | Right to Jury Trial on Statutory Damages | Thomas | Scalia | Seventh Amendment right to jury trial in a copyright infringement case | ||
New York Times Co. v. Tasini | 533 U.S. 483 | 2001 | 7 - 2 | Substantive | Collective works | Ginsburg | Stevens (Breyer) | Freelance journalists did not grant electronic republication rights for collective work. | ||
Eldred v. Ashcroft | 537 U.S. 186 | 2003 | 7 - 2 | Substantive | Term Extension | Ginsburg | Stevens, Breyer | Congress may retroactively extend the duration of works still under copyright, as long as the extension is limited. | ||
Dastar Corp. v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp. | 539 U.S. 23 | 2003 | 8 - 0 | Non-Copyright | Intersection of TM law with public domain works | Scalia (unanimous) | Trademark cannot preserve rights to a public domain work. | |||
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd. | 545 U.S. 913 | 2005 | 9 - 0 | Substantive | Secondary liability | Souter (unanimous) | Ginsburg (Rehnquist, Kennedy), Breyer (Stevens, O'Connor) | Distributors of peer-to-peer file-sharing software can be liable for copyright infringement if there are "affirmative steps taken to foster infringement". | ||
Reed Elsevier, Inc. v. Muchnick | 559 U.S. 154 | 2010 | 8 - 0 | Procedural | Registration | Thomas | Ginsburg (Stevens, Breyer) | Settlement of copyright infringement claims relating to an electronic database | ||
Omega S.A. v. Costco Wholesale Corp. | 562 U.S. ___ | 2010 | 4 - 4 | Substantive | First Sale | aff'g 541 F.3d 982 (9th Cir. 2008) | ||||
Golan v. Holder | 565 U.S. ___, 132 S. Ct. 873 | 2012 | 6 - 2 | Substantive | Restoration of copyright in public domain works | Ginsburg | Breyer (Alito) | The Constitution gives broad discretion to Congress to decide how best to promote the "progress of science and the useful arts", including restoring copyright in public domain works | ||
Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. | 568 U.S. ___, 133 S. Ct. 1351 | 2013 | 6 - 3 | Substantive | First Sale | Breyer | Ginsburg (Scalia (in part)), Kennedy) | Kagan (Alito) | The first-sale doctrine applies to copyrighted works made lawfully overseas. |