The Williams & Wilkins Co v. United States case in 1974 revolved around the issue of copyright infringement. The plaintiff, Williams & Wilkins Company, a publisher of medical journals, sued the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Library of Medicine (NLM), both federal entities under the U.S., for photocopying their copyrighted articles without permission or payment. They argued that this constituted an infringement on their exclusive rights as copyright holders. However, NIH and NLM contended that such copying was fair use because it was done for scientific research purposes only - not commercial gain. In a landmark decision by Judge Robinson at trial court level which was affirmed by Court Of Claims with equal division vote but no opinion issued; Supreme Court denied certiorari review due to lack of majority agreement among judges thus leaving lower court's judgement intact- It held that libraries could make single copies without infringing copyrights if they were used for private study or research purpose. This ruling significantly impacted future interpretations and applications of "fair use" doctrine within Copyright Law especially concerning educational institutions and libraries.

In the dissenting opinion for Williams & Wilkins Co v. United States, it was argued that photocopying articles from a copyrighted journal constitutes copyright infringement. The dissenters believed that allowing such practices would undermine the economic viability of publishing companies and discourage authors from creating new works due to lack of compensation. They contended that libraries' ability to make copies should be limited only to instances where an original document is at risk of being lost or damaged, not as a means for mass distribution or avoiding purchase costs. Furthermore, they disagreed with the majority's view on "fair use," arguing instead that repeated and systematic copying goes beyond what could reasonably be considered fair use under copyright law.