59 Cited authorities

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes
564 U.S. 338 (2011) Cited 6,613 times 504 Legal Analyses
Holding in Rule 23 context that “[w]ithout some glue holding the alleged reasons for all those decisions together, it will be impossible to say that examination of all the class members' claims for relief will produce a common answer”
Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Tel. Service Co.
499 U.S. 340 (1991) Cited 3,348 times 44 Legal Analyses
Holding "it is beyond dispute that compilations of facts are within the subject matter of copyright" even though "copyright protects only the author's original contributions—not the facts or information conveyed"
Community for Creative Non-Violence v. Reid
490 U.S. 730 (1989) Cited 1,149 times 17 Legal Analyses
Holding that "In determining whether a hired party is an employee under the general common law of agency, we consider the hiring party's right to control the manner and means by which the product is accomplished" and listing several factors relevant to this inquiry
Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enterprises
471 U.S. 539 (1985) Cited 1,212 times 14 Legal Analyses
Holding that if a new work "supersede the use of the original," it is probably not a fair use
Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc.
510 U.S. 569 (1994) Cited 626 times 71 Legal Analyses
Holding that “[i]t was error for the Court of Appeals to conclude that the commercial nature of [a secondary work] rendered it presumptively unfair”
Myers v. Hertz Corp.
624 F.3d 537 (2d Cir. 2010) Cited 1,217 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that district courts have the discretion to certify a collective action by facilitating notice to potential plaintiffs of the "pendency of the action and of their opportunity to opt-in as represented plaintiffs"
Warren v. Fox Family Worldwide, Inc.
328 F.3d 1136 (9th Cir. 2003) Cited 1,138 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding the court is "not required to accept as true conclusory allegations which are contradicted by documents referred to in the complaint."
Miles v. Merrill Lynch & Co.
471 F.3d 24 (2d Cir. 2006) Cited 767 times 20 Legal Analyses
Holding that district court must make a "definitive assessment of Rule 23 requirements" and "resolve[] . . . factual disputes relevant to each Rule 23 requirement"
Castano v. the Am. Tobacco Co.
84 F.3d 734 (5th Cir. 1996) Cited 1,009 times 29 Legal Analyses
Holding that the district court had not engaged in a rigorous analysis of predominance—that is, whether a Rule 23(b) class type was appropriate
Baffa v. Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette Secs. Corp.
222 F.3d 52 (2d Cir. 2000) Cited 685 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that "class certification is inappropriate where a putative class representative is subject to unique defenses which threaten to become the focus of the litigation"
Rule 23 - Class Actions
Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 Cited 34,815 times 1232 Legal Analyses
Holding that, to certify a class, the court must find that "questions of law or fact common to class members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members"
Section 101 - Definitions
17 U.S.C. § 101 Cited 6,311 times 174 Legal Analyses
Recognizing the United States' adherence to provisions of the Berne Convention of 1886
Section 501 - Infringement of copyright
17 U.S.C. § 501 Cited 3,151 times 26 Legal Analyses
Granting a cause of action to "[t]he legal or beneficial owner of an exclusive right under a copyright"
Section 410 - Registration of claim and issuance of certificate
17 U.S.C. § 410 Cited 1,493 times 12 Legal Analyses
Finding that production of a certificate of copyright registration gave rise to a rebuttable presumption that copyright was valid
Section 107 - Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use
17 U.S.C. § 107 Cited 1,010 times 177 Legal Analyses
Designating “criticism” and “comment” as fair use
Section 201 - Ownership of copyright
17 U.S.C. § 201 Cited 947 times 25 Legal Analyses
Providing that copyright in a work "vests initially in the author"

The Authors Guild et al v. Google Inc.

59 Cited authorities

Holding in Rule 23 context that “[w]ithout some glue holding the alleged reasons for all those decisions together, it will be impossible to say that examination of all the class members' claims for relief will produce a common answer”

Holding "it is beyond dispute that compilations of facts are within the subject matter of copyright" even though "copyright protects only the author's original contributions—not the facts or information conveyed"

Holding that "In determining whether a hired party is an employee under the general common law of agency, we consider the hiring party's right to control the manner and means by which the product is accomplished" and listing several factors relevant to this inquiry

Holding that if a new work "supersede the use of the original," it is probably not a fair use

Holding that “[i]t was error for the Court of Appeals to conclude that the commercial nature of [a secondary work] rendered it presumptively unfair”

Holding that district courts have the discretion to certify a collective action by facilitating notice to potential plaintiffs of the "pendency of the action and of their opportunity to opt-in as represented plaintiffs"

Holding the court is "not required to accept as true conclusory allegations which are contradicted by documents referred to in the complaint."

Holding that district court must make a "definitive assessment of Rule 23 requirements" and "resolve[] . . . factual disputes relevant to each Rule 23 requirement"

Holding that the district court had not engaged in a rigorous analysis of predominance—that is, whether a Rule 23(b) class type was appropriate

Holding that "class certification is inappropriate where a putative class representative is subject to unique defenses which threaten to become the focus of the litigation"

Holding that, to certify a class, the court must find that "questions of law or fact common to class members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members"

Recognizing the United States' adherence to provisions of the Berne Convention of 1886

Granting a cause of action to "[t]he legal or beneficial owner of an exclusive right under a copyright"

Finding that production of a certificate of copyright registration gave rise to a rebuttable presumption that copyright was valid

Designating “criticism” and “comment” as fair use

Providing that copyright in a work "vests initially in the author"