In the 1938 case of James v. United Artists Corp., the U.S. Supreme Court dealt with a dispute over copyright infringement in relation to motion pictures. The plaintiff, Stephen James, claimed that United Artists Corporation had infringed upon his copyrighted play by producing and distributing a film which was substantially similar to his work without obtaining permission or providing compensation. However, the court ruled in favor of United Artists Corporation after determining that there were no substantial similarities between James' play and the defendant's film beyond general themes and ideas - elements which are not protected under copyright law as they cannot be owned by any individual or entity. Therefore, it was concluded that no violation of copyright laws had occurred.

In the dissenting opinion for James v. United Artists Corp., it was argued that the majority's decision to dismiss the case on grounds of lack of jurisdiction was incorrect. The dissenting justices believed that there were substantial federal questions involved in this case, which warranted Supreme Court review. They contended that a state court's interpretation of a federal statute should not be final and binding without any possibility for Supreme Court review, especially when such an interpretation could potentially infringe upon constitutional rights or liberties. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's assertion that no significant public interest was at stake in this case; rather, they saw potential implications for freedom of speech and artistic expression if film producers could be held liable for perceived negative impacts their films might have on individuals or communities.