Assessment Technologies of WI, LLC v. Wiredata, Inc. Case Brief
Complete case briefs with LSD+
Every LSD.Law brief pairs a full IRAC analysis with opinion summaries at three levels of depth, written by a team of Harvard Law and MIT graduates - a quick synopsis when you are pressed for time, the complete reasoning when you need to go deep.
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 software company with a copyright on its database program sued to block access to the public domain data stored within it. The court held that extracting uncopyrightable raw data is not infringement, as copyright protects the program’s structure, not the data itself.
Legal Significance: This case strongly affirms that copyright in a compilation does not extend to the underlying uncopyrightable facts. A copyright holder cannot leverage its copyright to create a de facto monopoly over public domain data contained within the copyrighted work.
Assessment Technologies of WI, LLC v. Wiredata, Inc. 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
Assessment Technologies (AT) owns the copyright for “Market Drive,” a software program used by municipal tax assessors in Wisconsin. The program organizes real estate data into a specific, original structure of 456 fields grouped into 34 tables. The underlying data—such as property address, owner’s name, and assessed valuation—are collected by the assessors, not by AT, and are considered public domain information under Wisconsin’s open records law. WIREdata, Inc. sought to obtain this raw data from several municipalities to use for its real estate information services. The municipalities, as licensees of AT’s software, refused WIREdata’s request, fearing that providing the data would constitute copyright infringement. AT sued WIREdata to enjoin it from seeking the data from the municipalities, arguing that the data could not be extracted without infringing its copyright on the Market Drive program’s compilation structure. The district court granted a permanent injunction in favor of AT.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does a copyright on a computer program for compiling data prevent third parties from extracting the uncopyrightable, public-domain data contained within the program’s database?
No. The court reversed the injunction, holding that extracting uncopyrightable raw data 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,
IRAC Legal Analysis
About IRAC analysis
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the structure professors expect in exam answers. Each LSD.Law brief states the issue, the governing rule with citations, the court's application of that rule, and the conclusion - the same reasoning pattern you will use on exams and in practice.
Legal Issue
Does a copyright on a computer program for compiling data prevent third parties from extracting the uncopyrightable, public-domain data contained within the program’s database?
Conclusion
The decision serves as a crucial limitation on the power of database 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 aliq
Legal Rule
Copyright protection for a factual compilation is "thin" and extends only to 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 ali
Legal Analysis
The Seventh Circuit, applying the principles of Feist, drew a sharp distinction 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
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Summary unavailable
No flash summary is available for this opinion.