Substantial Similarity

195 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• KEY Publ'ns, Inc. v. Chinatown Today Publ'g Enters., Inc.
  945 F.2d 509· 2d Cir.· 1991-09-23 ·cited 20×
  The 1989-90 Key Directory is copyrightable due to original selection and arrangement, but the Galore Directory does not infringe its copyright because its arrangement and selection of businesses are not substantially similar.
• Abkco Music, Inc. v. Harrisongs Music, Ltd.
  722 F.2d 988· 2d Cir.· 1983-11-03 ·cited 19×
  The court held that ABKCO breached its fiduciary duty to Harrison by using confidential information and its position as former agent to acquire the copyright claim, justifying a constructive trust. However, the constructive trust was modified to exclude foreign rights already set
• Ford Motor Co. v. Hall-Edwards
  997 So. 2d 1148· Fla. 3d DCA· 2008-12-03 ·cited 18×
  Ford Motor Company sought a writ of certiorari to quash trial court orders requiring disclosure of its LMMS database and suspension orders in a products liability case involving a fatal Ford Explorer rollover. The appellate court quashed both orders, holding that the database and
• Cowens v. Siemens-Elema AB & Elema Schonander, Inc.
  837 F.2d 817· 8th Cir.· 1988-01-26 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding expert and technician testimony due to dissimilar conditions and that the jury instructions and admission of evidence were proper.
• Hale v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.
  820 F.2d 928· 8th Cir.· 1987-06-04 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the videotape demonstration and evidence of other accidents, but that the punitive damages award was excessive and required a remittitur or a new trial.
• Cal Williams v. Kaag Mfrs., Inc.
  338 F.2d 949· 9th Cir.· 1964-12-02 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the trial court's finding of no copyright infringement was not clearly erroneous, as the similarities between the figurines were not substantial enough to support infringement.
• Bradbury v. Columbia Broad. Sys., Inc.
  287 F.2d 478· 9th Cir.· 1961-01-20 ·cited 18×
  The dissenting judge argues that the majority improperly substituted its judgment for the trial court's on the issue of plagiarism, finding insufficient similarity to warrant reversal.
• Comptone Co., Ltd. v. Rayex Corp.
  251 F.2d 487· 2d Cir.· 1958-01-09 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the contempt finding was not appealable as it was not a final decision and no penalty had been imposed, but affirmed the preliminary injunction.
• Hardy v. Chemetron Corp.
  870 F.2d 1007· 5th Cir.· 1989-04-25 ·cited 17×
  The court held that the exclusion of evidence of subsequent remedial measures offered for impeachment purposes was reversible error.
• Autoskill Inc. v. Nat'l Educ. Support Sys., Inc.
  994 F.2d 1476· 10th Cir.· 1993-05-19 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the notice of appeal was timely filed within the extended period provided by 11 U.S.C. § 108(b)(2) and that the appeal was not voided by the automatic bankruptcy stay due to Bankruptcy Rule 6009. The court also affirmed the preliminary injunction, finding Auto
• Educ. Testing Servs. v. Katzman
  793 F.2d 533· 3d Cir.· 1986-06-20 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the district court's preliminary injunction was supported by a likelihood of success on the merits for copyright infringement, despite procedural deficiencies in the findings of fact.
• Franklin Mint Corp. v. Nat'l Wildlife ART Exch., Inc.
  575 F.2d 62· 3d Cir.· 1978-04-17 ·cited 16×
  The court held that an artist painting a new work using similar source material and subject matter does not constitute copyright infringement if there is no actual copying and the new work is a separate artistic expression.
• Herbert Rosenthal Jewelry Corp. v. Honora Jewelry CO, Inc.
  509 F.2d 64· 2d Cir.· 1974-12-20 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the defendant's jeweled turtle pin did not infringe the plaintiff's copyrighted design because the similarities were not substantial enough to be recognized by the average lay observer as appropriated expression.
• Alberto-Culver Co. v. Andrea Dumon, Inc.
  466 F.2d 705· 7th Cir.· 1972-08-29 ·cited 16×
  The court held that while a label's commercial aspects may be copyrightable, a short, descriptive phrase within the text is not, even if it is similar to copyrighted material.
• Elec. Pipe Line, Inc. v. Fluid Sys.
  250 F.2d 697· 2d Cir.· 1957-12-30 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the plaintiff's modified systems infringed the defendant's patent and that the damages calculation, including lost profits on unpatented components, was proper.
• Irena Narell v. Freeman
  872 F.2d 907· 9th Cir.· 1989-04-17 ·cited 15×
• Worth v. Selchow & Righter Co.
  827 F.2d 569· 9th Cir.· 1987-09-08 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the Trivial Pursuit game did not infringe the copyright of Fred L. Worth's trivia encyclopedias because the similarities were confined to unprotectible facts and ideas, not protectible expression.
• Benson v. The Coca-Cola Co.
  795 F.2d 973· 11th Cir.· 1986-08-08 ·cited 15×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to present substantial evidence of copyright infringement, specifically regarding the defendant's access to the plaintiff's song and the lack of independent creation.
• Walker v. Univ. Books, Inc.
  602 F.2d 859· 9th Cir.· 1979-06-18 ·cited 15×
  The court held that blueprints can constitute an infringing copy under copyright law, but affirmed that the plaintiff's alleged improvements to I Ching cards did not qualify as protectible trade secrets.
• Thornton v. J Jargon Co.
  580 F. Supp. 2d 1261· M.D. Fla.· 2008-07-08 ·cited 14×
  Disputed issues of material fact preclude summary judgment on the copyright infringement claim, but the court grants summary judgment for defendants on plaintiff's claim for actual damages.
• Am. Med. Sys., Inc. v. Osborne
  651 So. 2d 209· Fla. 2d DCA· 1995-03-01 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the discovery order compelling answers regarding the AMS 700 Penile Implant was overbroad because the plaintiffs failed to establish substantial similarity between the implant used and other models.
• Lou Shaw v. Lindheim
  919 F.2d 1353· 9th Cir.· 1990-07-17 ·cited 14×
  The court held that satisfaction of the extrinsic test in a copyright infringement case involving literary works creates a triable issue of fact, precluding summary judgment.
• O'Neill v. Dell Publ'g Co., Inc.
  630 F.2d 685· 1st Cir.· 1980-11-18 ·cited 14×
  The court held that there was no substantial similarity of expression between the plaintiff's manuscript and the defendant's published book, thus affirming summary judgment for the publisher.
• Renfro Hosiery Mills Co. v. Nat'l Cash Register Co.
  552 F.2d 1061· 4th Cir.· 1977-03-30 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the trial judge did not err in excluding evidence of pre-delivery tests and performance goals, as the proponent failed to establish substantial similarity to the actual leased equipment and its operating conditions, or that the evidence was relevant and not un
• Int'l Luggage Registry v. Avery Prods. Corp.
  541 F.2d 830· 9th Cir.· 1976-08-24 ·cited 14×
  The court held that there was a substantial similarity between the labels, precluding summary judgment for the defendant on copyright infringement.
• Soptra Fabrics Corp. v. Stafford Knitting Mills, Inc.
  490 F.2d 1092· 2d Cir.· 1974-01-10 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the accused design was substantially similar to the copyrighted design as a matter of law, and that the copyright was valid.
• Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp. v. Stonesifer
  140 F.2d 579· 9th Cir.· 1944-02-10 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the similarities between the plaintiff's copyrighted play and the defendant's motion picture were substantial enough to constitute copyright infringement, and affirmed the award of damages and attorney's fees.
• Ponder v. Warren Tool Corp. & Patch Rubber Co.
  834 F.2d 1553· 10th Cir.· 1987-12-10 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the trial court erred in limiting expert testimony regarding the cause of the accident and the existence of alternative safer designs for the product.
• Aliotti v. R. Dakin & Co.
  831 F.2d 898· 9th Cir.· 1987-11-04 ·cited 13×
  The court held that summary judgment was appropriate because there was no substantial similarity of protectable expression for copyright claims, and the state law claims failed due to lack of evidence of an implied contract or breach of confidence.
• Data E. USA, Inc. v. Epyx, Inc.
  862 F.2d 204· 9th Cir.· 1988-11-30 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court erred in finding substantial similarity between the video games, as the similarities identified were either inseparable from the idea of a karate game or constituted unprotectable elements of expression.
• Robert R. Jones Assocs., Inc. v. Nino Homes
  858 F.2d 274· 6th Cir.· 1988-09-20 ·cited 12×
  The court held that damages for copyright infringement of architectural plans can include losses from the infringer's subsequent use of the copied plans, but attorneys' fees and prejudgment interest are not recoverable if infringement began before registration.
• Concrete Mach. Co., Inc. v. Classic Lawn Ornaments, Inc.
  843 F.2d 600· 1st Cir.· 1988-04-05 ·cited 12×
  The denial of a preliminary injunction was based on an incorrect analysis of the likelihood of success on the merits, requiring remand for reconsideration.
• Evans Newton Inc. v. Chicago Sys. Software
  793 F.2d 889· 7th Cir.· 1986-06-19 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the defendants infringed the plaintiff's copyright in the user's manual, affirming the injunction and actual damages, but reversed the awards for punitive damages and attorneys' fees due to the plaintiff's failure to register the copyright before the infringem
• Mattel, Inc. v. Azrak-Hamway Int'l, Inc.
  724 F.2d 357· 2d Cir.· 1983-12-23 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying Mattel's request for a preliminary injunction because Mattel failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on its copyright and trademark claims, or that serious questions were raised for litigation.
• Atari Games Corp. & Tengen, Inc. v. Nintendo OF Am. Inc.
  975 F.2d 832· Fed. Cir.· 1992-09-10 ·cited 11×
  The court affirmed the preliminary injunction, finding Nintendo likely to succeed on its copyright infringement claim for unauthorized copying of its IONES program.
• Bus. Trends Analysts, Inc. v. The Freedonia Grp.
  887 F.2d 399· 2d Cir.· 1989-10-05 ·cited 11×
  The court held that while TFG infringed BTA's copyright and was liable for actual profits, the award for 'value of use' or lost market share was not authorized by the Copyright Act when statutory damages were unavailable due to late registration.
• Olson v. Nat'l Broad. Co., Inc.
  855 F.2d 1446· 9th Cir.· 1988-09-01 ·cited 11×
  The court held that "The A-Team" and "Cargo" were not substantially similar under the extrinsic test, and therefore affirmed the grant of judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
• Compulife Software, Inc. v. Binyomin Rutstein
  111 F.4th 1147· 11th Cir.· 2024-08-01 ·cited 10×
  The Eleventh Circuit held that the district court erred by failing to consider the copyrightability of the entire arrangement of Compulife's source code, requiring remand for new findings on the copyright infringement claim. However, the court affirmed the district court's judgme
• Alvarez v. Cooper Tire & Rubber Co.
  75 So. 3d 789· Fla. 4th DCA· 2011-11-30 ·cited 10×
  Mario Alvarez, as personal representative of his brother's estate, appealed a products liability judgment in favor of Cooper Tire & Rubber Company, challenging the trial court's limitation of discovery to tires with the same or substantially similar Green Tire Specification numbe
• Ford Motor Co. v. Hall-Edwards
  971 So. 2d 854· Fla. 3d DCA· 2007-11-07 ·cited 10×
  Ford Motor Company appeals a $60 million jury verdict in a product liability case arising from a rollover accident involving a 1996 Ford Explorer that killed passenger Lance Hall. The appellate court reversed and remanded, finding that the trial court abused its discretion by adm
• Evelyn and Jack Lewy v. Remington Arms Co., Inc.
  836 F.2d 1104· 8th Cir.· 1988-03-14 ·cited 10×
• Arnstein v. Broad. Music, Inc.
  137 F.2d 410· 2d Cir.· 1943-07-28 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the district court's decision, finding no copyright infringement due to lack of proof of access and substantial similarity.
• Becker v. Loew's, Inc.
  133 F.2d 889· 7th Cir.· 1943-02-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that neither copyright infringement nor unfair competition occurred because the motion picture did not copy the protected expression of the book, and the title had not acquired secondary significance.
• Detroit Marine Eng'g, Inc. v. Maloy
  419 So. 2d 687· Fla. 1st DCA· 1982-09-01 ·cited 9×
  In this wrongful death product liability case, Detroit Marine Engineering and Sheller-Globe Corporation appealed a jury verdict finding them liable for the death of Aubrey Maloy, who drowned after a defective steering wheel allegedly broke while he was operating a boat. The appel
• Twin Peaks Prods., Inc. v. Publ'ns Int'l, Ltd.
  996 F.2d 1366· 2d Cir.· 1993-06-07 ·cited 8×
  A book that extensively summarizes the plot of a copyrighted television program, even if intended as commentary, is not a fair use if it significantly impairs the market for the original work or its derivative works.
• Brown BAG Software v. Symantec Corp.
  960 F.2d 1465· 9th Cir.· 1992-04-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in issuing a protective order restricting in-house counsel's access to trade secrets, and that summary judgment for copyright infringement was appropriate.
• Ill. Bell Tel. Co. v. Haines & Co., Inc.
  905 F.2d 1081· 7th Cir.· 1990-06-25 ·cited 8×
  The court held that telephone directories are copyrightable compilations and that copying them constitutes infringement, and that the defendant failed to prove an antitrust violation.
• Evans v. Wallace Berrie & Co., Inc.
  681 F. Supp. 813· S.D. Fla.· 1988-03-15 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate access or substantial similarity, thus granting summary judgment for the defendants.
• Granite Music Corp. v. United Artists Corp.
  532 F.2d 718· 9th Cir.· 1976-03-10 ·cited 8×
  The court held that evidence of prior musical compositions containing a common four-note sequence was properly admitted to show independent creation, and that the jury instructions regarding the burden of proof were not plainly erroneous.
• Smith v. Little
  360 F.2d 928· 2d Cir.· 1966-05-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the evidence of possibility of access combined with substantial similarities between the plaintiff's unpublished manuscript and the defendant's published book was sufficient to support the trial court's finding of copyright infringement.