Stuart Y. Silverstein v. Penguin Putnam, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• ruling that “Complete Poems does not appropriate Silverstein's arrangement”
• determining that any protectible interest Silverstein may have in his compilations of Dorothy Parker’s unpublished poems “would be so slight that it cannot properly be enforced by a preliminary or permanent injunction”
• “One transcribes the words, and then, he presumably ... would have modernized the spelling and the punctuation.”
• “[T]he only copyright claimed by Silverstein that Penguin arguably infringed is in the selection.”
• “And if the selection process imbues a compilation with the requisite creative spark, the compilation may be protected so long as there are indicia that principles of selection (other than all-inclusiveness) have been employed.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).