JuralogiumThe Architecture of Law
CANONICAL REPORTER · LANDMARK DECISIONS & DOSSIERS

The Reporter

From Campbell v. Acuff-Rose to Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith, explore curated case dossiers complete with procedural postures, core holdings, judicial reasoning, and downstream precedential influence.

Supreme Court of the United StatesGOOD LAW

A commercial parody may qualify as fair use under 17 U.S.C. § 107. The commercial nature of a secondary use does not create an automatic presumption against fair use; rather, the more transformative the new work, the less will be the significance of commercialism under Factor 1.

Commerciality does not bar fair use if the secondary work is transformative.
Parody provides social commentary by targeting the original work.
17 U.S.C. § 107(1)
Read Dossier
Supreme Court of the United StatesGOOD LAW

The Andy Warhol Foundation's commercial licensing of 'Orange Prince' to Condé Nast does not qualify as fair use under Factor 1. When an original work and a secondary use share substantially the same commercial purpose, Factor 1 weighs against fair use unless there is an independent transformative justification.

Factor 1 turns on the specific commercial use, not the general artistic merit.
New meaning or message alone does not guarantee fair use if the secondary work shares the same commercial purpose.
17 U.S.C. § 107(1)
Read Dossier
Supreme Court of the United StatesGOOD LAW

Google's copying of the Java API declaring code was fair use as a matter of law. Reimplementation of declaring code to enable programmer skill portability in a novel computing environment satisfies the transformative purposes of copyright.

Declaring code is thin in copyright protection due to its functional interface nature.
Copying headers to allow developer portability is transformative fair use.
17 U.S.C. § 107
Read Dossier
United States Court of Appeals for the Second CircuitCAUTION

Authors Guild v. Google, Inc.

804 F.3d 202 (2d Cir. 2015)

Google's mass scanning of books to create a full-text searchable database and display snippets is transformative fair use. Non-expressive computational indexing provides enormous public benefit without creating a market substitute.

Non-expressive computational scanning is highly transformative.
Search indexes do not create commercial market substitutes for books.
17 U.S.C. § 107(1)
Read Dossier
Supreme Court of the United StatesGOOD LAW

The claims are patent-ineligible because they target an abstract idea (intermediated settlement) and fail to provide an 'inventive concept' that transforms the abstract idea into a patent-eligible application.

Two-step test: (1) Abstract idea? (2) Inventive concept?
Generic computer hardware cannot save abstract mathematical or economic claims.
35 U.S.C. § 101
Read Dossier
Supreme Court of the United StatesGOOD LAW

A single color can be registered as a trademark under the Lanham Act if it has acquired secondary meaning identifying product source and does not serve a functional purpose.

Single colors are registrable upon proof of secondary meaning.
Functionality doctrine strictly bars utilitarian or competitively essential colors.
15 U.S.C. § 1127
Read Dossier
California Superior Court (San Mateo County)GOOD LAW

Scola v. Facebook, Inc.

No. 18-CIV-05135 (Cal. Super. Ct. 2020)

The $52 million settlement established an industry benchmark for content moderation occupational safety, requiring platforms to fund psychiatric diagnosis/treatment and mandate software mitigations (grayscale display, audio muting, 4-hour daily exposure limits).

$52M settlement establishes platform accountability for digital sanitation trauma.
Requires algorithmic UI tools (blurring, grayscale) and clinical support for data workers.
29 U.S.C. § 654(a)(1) (OSHA General Duty)
Read Dossier
United States District Court for the Northern District of CaliforniaGOOD LAW

Mobley v. Workday, Inc.

No. 23-cv-00770 (N.D. Cal. 2024)

Workday can be held directly liable as an 'employment agency' and 'agent' under federal anti-discrimination laws because its AI software exercises delegated decision-making authority over job applicants.

AI screening vendors are legally 'employment agencies' under Title VII.
Algorithmic filtering software is directly liable for disparate impact discrimination.
42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2 (Title VII)
Read Dossier
Supreme Court of the United StatesGOOD LAW

A naturally occurring DNA segment is a product of nature and not patent eligible merely because it has been isolated. However, complementary DNA (cDNA) is patent eligible because it is synthetic and does not occur naturally in the human genome.

Isolated natural DNA sequences cannot be patented.
Synthetically engineered cDNA remains fully patent eligible.
35 U.S.C. § 101
Read Dossier
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal CircuitGOOD LAW

Substantial evidence supported the PTAB's determination of no interference-in-fact. Eukaryotic application of CRISPR-Cas9 was a non-obvious inventive leap requiring separate patent claims from generic prokaryotic gene editing.

Eukaryotic gene editing is patentably distinct from prokaryotic discovery.
Unpredictability in human biological translation defeats obviousness rejections.
35 U.S.C. § 103
Read Dossier
United States District Court for the Middle District of North CarolinaGOOD LAW

United States v. RealPage, Inc.

No. 1:24-cv-00710 (M.D.N.C. 2024)

The DOJ complaint establishes the modern enforcement theory of algorithmic horizontal price fixing: sharing data through a centralized algorithmic hub substitutes collective algorithmic pricing for independent market competition.

Sharing private data with a pricing algorithm creates Sherman Act § 1 liability.
Algorithms cannot be used to coordinate price increases between competitors.
15 U.S.C. § 1
Read Dossier
Federal Communications Commission Enforcement BureauGOOD LAW

The FCC issued its first-ever space debris enforcement penalty, finding DISH failed to properly deorbit EchoStar-7, imposing a $150,000 civil penalty, and establishing precedent for orbital debris regulatory enforcement.

FCC enforces binding civil penalties for orbital debris disposal failures.
Satellite operators must reserve sufficient propellant for graveyard deorbit maneuvers.
47 U.S.C. § 308 (Communications Act)
Read Dossier