The court refused to consider the process by which the second play had been created, but chose to simply compare the end results.

The district court refused to view the finished Fear of Acting, since it had not been alleged that the defendant copied from that version.

The court denied that Sid & Marty Krofft Television Productions Inc. v. McDonald's Corp. said there should be no summary judgment if there is substantial similarity of ideas, and denied that summary judgment could only be granted if the similarities are "trifling".

The court said summary judgment was appropriate if reasonable people would not disagree over whether or not there was substantial similarity of expression.

The court defended the district court's decision to compare the plays "as a whole" in looking for substantial similarity, citing Sid & Marty Krofft and Roth Greeting Cards v. United Card Co.[2] The axiom "Copying deleted or so disguised as to be unrecognizable is not copying" has been quoted in various textbooks and works on copyright law.