Ok, sure, but that's not what I was asking for. I'm not surprised that there is one (or even two or three or a handful) of examples where this happened. But is it common?

Also I'm looking for a case where the judge acknowledged that copyright infringement was occurring, but decided not to do anything about it. From the bit you quoted, it sounds to me like it's implying that the judge believed there was a valid fair-use defense? Or even stronger, that the judge just did not believe the use was infringing at all?