Connection lost
Server error
ARNSTEIN v. PORTER Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A songwriter sued composer Cole Porter for copyright infringement. The court reversed summary judgment for the defendant, establishing a two-part test for infringement (copying and improper appropriation) and holding that witness credibility on the issue of access created a triable issue of fact.
Legal Significance: This case established the influential two-part test for copyright infringement: (1) evidence of copying (access plus probative similarity) and (2) improper appropriation (substantial similarity from the perspective of an ordinary lay observer). It remains a foundational precedent in copyright law.
ARNSTEIN v. PORTER Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Plaintiff Ira Arnstein, a songwriter, alleged that defendant Cole Porter, a renowned composer, infringed the copyrights on several of his musical compositions. Arnstein claimed Porter’s famous songs, such as “Night and Day” and “Don’t Fence Me In,” were copied from his works. To prove the element of access, Arnstein offered testimony, which the district court deemed “fantastic,” alleging that Porter’s agents had burglarized his apartment to steal his music. Porter, in his deposition, categorically denied ever seeing or hearing Arnstein’s compositions. Arnstein also presented evidence that his songs had been publicly performed and that over a million copies of one composition had been sold, arguing this constituted sufficient circumstantial evidence of access for a jury to infer it. The district court, finding Arnstein’s story incredible and accepting Porter’s denial of access, granted summary judgment for the defendant. Arnstein appealed, arguing he was improperly deprived of a jury trial on the factual question of copying.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: In a copyright infringement action, must a plaintiff survive summary judgment if he presents sufficient evidence of access and similarity to create a triable issue of fact as to whether the defendant copied his work, even if his testimony on access seems improbable?
Yes. The court reversed the grant of summary judgment, holding that the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla par
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
In a copyright infringement action, must a plaintiff survive summary judgment if he presents sufficient evidence of access and similarity to create a triable issue of fact as to whether the defendant copied his work, even if his testimony on access seems improbable?
Conclusion
The Arnstein test remains a cornerstone of copyright infringement analysis, defining the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco
Legal Rule
To establish copyright infringement, a plaintiff must prove two elements: (1) that Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur s
Legal Analysis
The court bifurcated the copyright infringement inquiry into two distinct factual issues: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi u
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- Establishes a two-part test for copyright infringement: (1) copying (proven by