TreatiseTreatise

Substantial Similarity in Copyright Law

 by Robert C. Osterberg, Eric C. Osterberg
 
 Copyright: 2003-2016
 Last Updated: May 2016

 Product Details >> 

Product Details

  • ISBN Number: 1402403410
  • Page Count: 814
  • Number of Volumes: 1
  •  
  • The purchase of PLI titles may include Basic Upkeep Service, whereby supplements, replacement pages and new editions may be shipped to you immediately upon publication for a 30-day examination. This service is cancelable at any time.

“Deserves a prominent place on the shelf of any copyright specialist.” - Texas Bar Journal

"[a] first rate resource for teachers, students and practitioners." -The Journal of the Copyright Society of the USA

"Major Treatise…Comprehensive reference on the subject of substantial similarity." - University of Colorado Law Library


The first and only treatise to fully discuss this pivotal subject, Substantial Similarity in Copyright Law remains the clearest and most comprehensive reference on the topic.

Substantial Similarity in Copyright Law gives you in-depth insight into the types of similarities that trigger findings of infringement and those that do not. You’ll learn how substantial similarity tests apply to specific kinds of copyrightable subject matter—from fiction to computer programs, and from sound recordings to architectural works, analysis you cannot find anywhere else.

Substantial Similarity in Copyright Law is unique in that it identifies and explains circuit by circuit the substantial similarity tests used in each U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, enabling you to tailor your analysis to the specific region in which your case will be heard.. You’ll learn how substantial similarity is addressed at different stages in litigation in each circuit, on a motion to dismiss, at summary judgment and at trial. You also will learn how and when expert witnesses can be used in copyright infringement cases, and when they cannot.

Packed with illustrations from litigated cases, this comprehensive reference enables you to see how this vital concept is applied in your jurisdiction to the type of copyrightable work involved in your case, enhancing your ability to analyze, predict and litigate copyright disputes.

Substantial Similarity in Copyright Law is a practical, hard-working tool for copyright specialists and other intellectual property attorneys, an important guide for generalists who handle copyright cases, and useful reading for plaintiffs and defendants in copyright litigation. It is updated annually, ensuring that you will have the most current information to inform your analysis. 
  Table of Contents
  Preface
Chapter 1: The Meaning and Significance of Substantial Similarity
  • § 1:1 : Substantial Similarity As an Element of Copyright Infringement1-1
  • § 1:2 : Probative Similarity Distinguished1-5
  • § 1:3 : Striking Similarity Distinguished1-8
Chapter 2: Principles of Substantial Similarity
  • § 2:1 : De Minimis Threshold2-2
  • § 2:2 : Similarities Must Be Found in Protected Material2-4
  • § 2:3 : Unprotected Material2-6
    • § 2:3.1 : Ideas2-6
    • § 2:3.2 : Facts2-11
    • § 2:3.3 : Scènes à Faire2-12
    • § 2:3.4 : Clichés, Slogans, and Other Short Passages2-14
    • § 2:3.5 : Uncopyrighted Copyrightable Materials2-17
    • § 2:3.6 : Titles2-18
    • § 2:3.7 : Quotations and Other Copied Material2-19
    • § 2:3.8 : Elements Found in Nature2-19
  • § 2:4 : Quantitative–Qualitative Standard2-20
  • § 2:5 : Two Kinds of Similarities2-23
    • § 2:5.1 : Verbatim Similarities and Paraphrases2-24
    • § 2:5.2 : Total Concept and Feel2-29
  • § 2:6 : Dissimilarities2-35
  • § 2:7 : Intermediate Copying2-37
Chapter 3: Tests for Substantial Similarity
  • § 3:1 : Ordinary Observer and More Discerning Ordinary Observer3-3
    • § 3:1.1 : Second Circuit3-3
      • [A] : Ordinary Observer Test3-4
      • [B] : More Discerning Ordinary Observer Test3-5
      • [C] : The Sliding Scale of Access and Probative Similarity3-7
      • [D] : Summary Judgment, Motion to Dismiss, and Preliminary Injunction3-8
    • § 3:1.2 : First Circuit3-10
      • [A] : Summary Judgment, Motion to Dismiss, and Preliminary Injunction3-12
    • § 3:1.3 : Third Circuit3-13
      • [A] : Summary Judgment, Motion to Dismiss, and Preliminary Injunction3-16
      • [B] : Special Test for Complex Subjects Including Computer Programs3-17
    • § 3:1.4 : Fifth Circuit3-17
      • [A] : Summary Judgment, Motion to Dismiss, and Preliminary Injunction3-19
    • § 3:1.5 : Seventh Circuit3-20
      • [A] : The Role of Access and the Inverse Ratio Rule3-22
      • [B] : Summary Judgment, Motion to Dismiss, and Preliminary Injunction3-23
  • § 3:2 : Extrinsic/Intrinsic Test3-23
    • § 3:2.1 : Ninth Circuit3-23
      • [A] : Origin of the Extrinsic/Intrinsic Test3-23
      • [B] : Evolution of the Extrinsic/Intrinsic Test3-25
      • [C] : Analytic Dissection As Part of the Extrinsic Test3-26
      • [D] : Intermediate Steps Between Krofft and Shaw3-27
      • [E] : The Role of Access and the Inverse Ratio Rule3-28
      • [F] : Summary Judgment Under the Extrinsic/Intrinsic Test3-29
      • [G] : Preliminary Injunctions Under the Ninth Circuit Test3-32
      • [H] : Difficulties in Applying the Extrinsic/Intrinsic Test3-33
      • [I] : Motion to Dismiss3-34
    • § 3:2.2 : Fourth Circuit3-34
      • [A] : Intended Audience Test3-35
      • [B] : Intended Audience in Computer Cases3-37
      • [C] : Intended Audience for Works Marketed to Children3-39
      • [D] : Intended Audience Versus Ordinary Observer3-41
      • [E] : Advantages and Disadvantages of the Intended Audience Test3-41
      • [F] : Summary Judgment, Motion to Dismiss, and Preliminary Injunction3-42
    • § 3:2.3 : Eighth Circuit3-42
      • [A] : Summary Judgment, Motion to Dismiss, and Preliminary Injunction3-43
  • § 3:3 : Abstraction/Filtration/Comparison3-44
    • § 3:3.1 : Tenth Circuit3-44
      • [A] : Summary Judgment and Preliminary Injunction3-48
    • § 3:3.2 : Sixth Circuit3-49
      • [A] : Summary Judgment, Motion to Dismiss, and Preliminary Injunction3-52
    • § 3:3.3 : D.C. Circuit3-53
      • [A] : Summary Judgment, Motion to Dismiss, and Preliminary Injunction3-54
  • § 3:4 : Eleventh Circuit3-55
    • § 3:4.1 : Summary Judgment, Motion to Dismiss, and Preliminary Injunction3-58
  • § 3:5 : Federal Circuit3-59
  • § 3:6 : Preliminary Injunction Standards3-59
Chapter 4: Fictional Literary and Dramatic Works
  • § 4:1 : Unprotectable Elements4-2
  • § 4:2 : Plot and Sequence of Events4-4
  • § 4:3 : Dialogue4-8
  • § 4:4 : Characters4-9
  • § 4:5 : Theme4-10
  • § 4:6 : Mood4-11
  • § 4:7 : Setting4-11
  • § 4:8 : Pace4-12
  • § 4:9 : Total Concept and Feel4-12
Chapter 5: Characters
  • § 5:1 : Character Copyrightability5-1
  • § 5:2 : Visual Depictions Versus Descriptions5-3
  • § 5:3 : Proper Test for Infringement5-5
  • § 5:4 : Abstract Similarities Are Not Sufficient5-7
  • § 5:5 : Dissection Is Improper5-9
  • § 5:6 : Trivial Similarities Are Not Substantial Similarities5-10
  • § 5:7 : Characters May Be Split or Combined5-11
Chapter 6: Nonfiction
  • § 6:1 : Factual Works Generally6-1
  • § 6:2 : Textbooks, Tests, and Other Educational Materials6-4
    • § 6:2.1 : Textbooks6-4
    • § 6:2.2 : Tests6-5
  • § 6:3 : Docudramas and Other Fact-Based Works6-7
  • § 6:4 : Television Game Shows and Other Unscripted Programs6-8
  • § 6:5 : Reality Television6-10
Chapter 7: Audiovisual Works
  • § 7:1 : General Principles7-1
  • § 7:2 : Similarities Among Story Elements7-3
  • § 7:3 : Similarities Among Audiovisual Elements7-5
  • § 7:4 : Similarities Among Both Story and Audiovisual Elements7-8
Chapter 8: Computer Programs
  • § 8:1 : Computer Programs: Literary and Audiovisual Works8-1
  • § 8:2 : Infringement of the Literary Work8-2
  • § 8:3 : Infringement of the Audiovisual Work8-3
  • § 8:4 : Infringement of the Compilation8-4
  • § 8:5 : Test for Infringement: Abstraction/Filtration/Comparison8-6
    • § 8:5.1 : Abstraction8-7
    • § 8:5.2 : Filtration8-9
      • [A] : Distinguishing Between the Process and the Expression of the Process8-11
      • [B] : Commands and Sequences: Process or Expression?8-12
      • [C] : Idea-Expression Merger8-13
      • [D] : Elements Dictated by Efficiency8-14
      • [E] : Elements Dictated by Extrinsic Concerns8-15
      • [F] : Public Domain and Scènes à Faire8-16
    • § 8:5.3 : Comparison8-18
  • § 8:6 : Third Circuit’s Whelan Test8-19
  • § 8:7 : Ordinary Observer Test and Computer Expert’s Role8-20
  • § 8:8 : Intended Audience Test8-22
  • § 8:9 : Applying Abstraction/Filtration/Comparison to Other Types of Works8-22
  • § 8:10 : Computer Games8-23
Chapter 9: Musical Works and Sound Recordings
  • § 9:1 : Musical Works9-2
    • § 9:1.1 : Lyrics9-3
    • § 9:1.2 : Music9-6
  • § 9:2 : Sound Recordings9-13
  • § 9:3 : Sampling9-14
    • § 9:3.1 : Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films9-17
      • [A] : The Facts in Bridgeport9-18
      • [B] : The District Court Opinion9-19
      • [C] : The Sixth Circuit Opinion9-20
        • [C][1] : The Reason Substantial Similarity Is Not a Requirement9-20
        • [C][2] : The Reason the De Minimis Principle Does Not Apply9-21
        • [C][3] : Other Factors Contributing to the Panel’s Decision9-21
      • [D] : Analysis9-23
        • [D][1] : Case Law9-23
        • [D][2] : Statutory Construction9-26
          • [D][2][a] : Significant History9-26
          • [D][2][b] : The Relevant Provisions of the Copyright Act9-28
            • [D][2][b][i] : Section 101 (17 U.S.C. § 101)9-28
            • [D][2][b][ii] : Section 102 (17 U.S.C. § 102)9-30
            • [D][2][b][iii] : Section 106 (17 U.S.C. § 106)9-33
            • [D][2][b][iv] : Section 114 (17 U.S.C. § 114)9-34
        • [D][3] : Policy and Other Concerns9-36
          • [D][3][a] : Perceived Benefit to the Music Industry9-36
          • [D][3][b] : Effect on Creativity9-37
          • [D][3][c] : Perceived Benefit to Musicians9-37
          • [D][3][d] : Sampler Culpability9-38
        • [D][4] : Commentator’s Views9-38
        • [D][5] : Fair Use Implications9-39
Chapter 10: Works of Visual Art
  • § 10:1 : Photographs10-1
  • § 10:2 : Illustrations and Paintings10-11
  • § 10:3 : Sculpture10-15
  • § 10:4 : Jewelry10-17
  • § 10:5 : Fabric, Carpet, and Wallcovering Designs10-20
    • § 10:5.1 : Overall Appearance10-21
    • § 10:5.2 : Individual Shapes and Items10-23
    • § 10:5.3 : Layout10-24
    • § 10:5.4 : Color10-24
    • § 10:5.5 : Selection, Coordination, and Arrangement10-26
    • § 10:5.6 : Proper Scrutiny10-28
  • § 10:6 : Dolls10-29
  • § 10:7 : Stuffed Animals10-34
  • § 10:8 : Maps10-39
Chapter 11: Architectural Works
  • § 11:1 : Generally11-1
  • § 11:2 : Treatment of Specific Elements11-7
  • § 11:3 : Limits on Protection of Architectural Works11-10
Chapter 12: Choreography
Chapter 13: Compilations and Collective Works
  • § 13:1 : Definitions and Parameters of Protection13-1
  • § 13:2 : “Narrowed” Substantial Similarity13-3
  • § 13:3 : Selection13-4
  • § 13:4 : Arrangement13-8
  • § 13:5 : Computer Databases13-10
  • § 13:6 : Short-Cut Proof13-11
  • § 13:7 : Common Defenses13-12
  • § 13:8 : Various Types of Compilations13-12
Chapter 14: Works in Different Media and Different Formats
Chapter 15: Derivative Works
  • § 15:1 : Definition of Derivative Work15-2
  • § 15:2 : Comparison of Accused Work to Derivative Work15-5
  • § 15:3 : Comparison of Accused Derivative Work to a Preexisting Work15-7
Chapter 16: Useful Articles
Chapter 17: Selected Trial Issues
  • § 17:1 : Expert Opinion17-1
  • § 17:2 : Lay Opinion and Audience Reaction17-8
  • § 17:3 : Surveys17-9
  • § 17:4 : Issue Preclusion17-10
Chapter 18: Appellate Review
Appendix A: Works Compared
Appendix B: Jury Instructions
  Table of Cases
  Defendant-Plaintiff Table
  Index

  Please click here to view the latest update information for this title: Last Update Information  
 


  Please click here to view the Table of Authorities: Table of Authorities  
 

Print Share Email

  • FOLLOW PLI:
  • facebook
  • twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • GooglePlus
  • RSS

All Contents Copyright © 1996-2016 Practising Law Institute. Continuing Legal Education since 1933.