From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Litchfield v. Spielberg

U.S.
Mar 18, 1985
470 U.S. 1052 (1985)

Summary

finding that the direct similarity of at least seven scenes in novels did not support finding of substantial similarity because "such a scattershot approach . . . fails to address the underlying issue: whether a lay observer would consider the works as a whole substantially similar to one another"

Summary of this case from Blakeman v. Walt Disney Company

Opinion

No. 84-1149.

March 18, 1985, OCTOBER TERM 1984.


C.A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 736 F. 2d 1352.


Summaries of

Litchfield v. Spielberg

U.S.
Mar 18, 1985
470 U.S. 1052 (1985)

finding that the direct similarity of at least seven scenes in novels did not support finding of substantial similarity because "such a scattershot approach . . . fails to address the underlying issue: whether a lay observer would consider the works as a whole substantially similar to one another"

Summary of this case from Blakeman v. Walt Disney Company

noting that a "trial judge has broad discretion to organize or limit the use of evidence to refresh recollection"

Summary of this case from Isaac v. N.Y

discussing prison cases

Summary of this case from Yvonne L. v. New Mexico Dept. of Human Services

discussing prison cases

Summary of this case from T.M. ex rel. R.T. v. Carson
Case details for

Litchfield v. Spielberg

Case Details

Full title:LITCHFIELD v. SPIELBERG ET AL

Court:U.S.

Date published: Mar 18, 1985

Citations

470 U.S. 1052 (1985)

Citing Cases

U.S. v. Wilson

Forfeiture is mandatory. United States v. Kravitz, 738 F.2d 102, 104 (3d Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S.…

Worlds of Wonder v. Veritel Learning Sys.

To prove infringement, the party claiming infringement must show substantial similarity. Litchfield v.…