In Blackton v. Gordon, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on a dispute involving copyright infringement in relation to motion pictures. The plaintiff, J. Stuart Blackton, was a pioneer of American animation and film who claimed that his copyrighted work had been infringed upon by the defendants' use of certain scenes from his films without permission or compensation. The defendant argued that their usage constituted fair use under copyright law as they were using it for educational purposes and not for profit-making activities. The court found in favor of Blackton stating that even though the defendant's intent may have been educational rather than commercial, this did not exempt them from liability for copyright infringement since they used substantial portions of the original works without consent or payment to the owner. This case set an important precedent regarding fair use doctrine within U.S Copyright Law; emphasizing that regardless of purpose (commercial or non-commercial), unauthorized usage can still constitute as infringement if significant parts are taken directly from copyrighted material.

The dissenting opinion in the case of Blackton v. Gordon argued that the majority's decision to uphold a New York law prohibiting non-residents from serving subpoenas within the state was an infringement on federal authority and violated principles of comity among states. The dissent contended that such restrictions impeded upon interstate legal proceedings, creating unnecessary barriers for out-of-state litigants seeking justice in New York courts. They also pointed out inconsistencies with how other states treated this issue, noting many allowed non-resident service of process without any problems arising as a result. Furthermore, they believed it was not within a state’s power to dictate who could serve subpoenas issued by federal courts since it interfered with federal court procedures and operations which should be governed solely by national rules rather than individual state laws.