by lawful means, trade secrets of another, however valuable, and then use the knowledge so acquired gainfully, although it cost the original owner much in effort and in money to collect or produce. He objected to the majority's saying that "INS cannot be heard to say" such and such "in a court of equity, where the question is one of unfair competition." He said there was no basis to invoke equity: The case presents no elements of equitable title or of breach of trust. The only possible reason for resort to a court of equity in a case like this is that the remedy which the law gives is inadequate. If the plaintiff has no legal cause of action, the suit necessarily fails. There is nothing in the situation of the parties which can estop [INS] from saying so. Brandeis closed his dissent with an argument that the Court was ill-suited to act as a legislature and the matter should be left to the wisdom of Congress: Implications and aftermath Although a landmark case when it was decided, subsequent developments have diminished its significance. A leading copyright law scholar has commented: It has been suggested that the credence due the International News Service case today is minimal: that subsequent decisions have restricted its doctrine to the news context and that, in any event, it is but a derelict of the federal common law, untenable after Erie R.R. v. Tompkins. Seventh Circuit Judge Posner similarly remarked that INS is "a decision no longer authoritative because it was based on the federal courts' subsequently abandoned authority to formulate common law principles in suits arising under state law though litigated in federal court." "Hot news" cases In Twentieth Century Sporting Club, Inc. v. Transradio Press Service, the court found misappropriation when a press service stationed "spotters" on rooftops who watched a boxing match in a nearby stadium; the defendant combined that information with information broadcast by plaintiff's exclusive licensee (NBC) to produce a simulated ringside, blow-by-blow broadcast of a boxing match. The narrowest implication of INS was that there was now a "hot news" doctrine that protected first comers in their creation of an ephemeral, time-sensitive information asset at appreciable expense against "free riders." Thus, in National Basketball Association v. Motorola, Inc. (NBA), the Second Circuit held that under New York State law, a "hot-news" INS-like claim exists in "cases where: (i) a