Folsom v. Marsh Case Brief

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts1841Docket #65916832
9 F. Cas. 342 2 Story 100 Intellectual Property Property

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

3 min read

tl;dr: A publisher of George Washington’s collected letters sued the author of a new biography for copying hundreds of those letters verbatim. The court found this was copyright infringement, establishing the foundational test for the “fair use” doctrine in American law.

Legal Significance: This case established the foundational principles of the “fair use” doctrine in American copyright law, outlining a multi-factor analysis focusing on the nature, quantity, value, and market effect of the appropriation, which was later codified in the Copyright Act.

Folsom v. Marsh 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

The plaintiffs held the copyright to “The Writings of President Washington,” a twelve-volume collection edited by Jared Sparks that included many of Washington’s letters published for the first time. The defendants published a two-volume biography of Washington, authored by Rev. Charles W. Upham. The defendants’ work was an original narrative, but it incorporated 353 pages copied verbatim from the plaintiffs’ collection, representing over one-third of the defendants’ book. This copied material included 319 pages of Washington’s letters that had never been published prior to the plaintiffs’ work. The defendants contended that the letters were not proper subjects of copyright and, alternatively, that their use constituted a fair abridgment or selection for the purpose of creating a new, valuable biography. The plaintiffs sought an injunction, arguing the copying diminished the value of their original work and constituted infringement.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Does the verbatim copying of entire letters from a copyrighted collection to form a substantial and valuable part of a new biographical work constitute copyright infringement, or is it a permissible fair use?

Yes, the defendants’ copying constituted copyright infringement. The court held 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

Read the full analysis

The complete holding, rule, and analysis for this case are available to LSD+ subscribers.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

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 the verbatim copying of entire letters from a copyrighted collection to form a substantial and valuable part of a new biographical work constitute copyright infringement, or is it a permissible fair use?

Conclusion

This seminal case created the fair use doctrine in U.S. copyright law, Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam

Legal Rule

To determine if the use of copyrighted material constitutes an infringement, a 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 volupt

Legal Analysis

Justice Story, writing for the court, first established that an author and 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 i

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • The author of a letter, whether literary or personal, holds 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 i

Read the full analysis

The complete holding, rule, and analysis for this case are available to LSD+ subscribers.

Start 14-Day Free Trial