Remove 2021 Remove Copying Remove Fair Use Remove Licensing
article thumbnail

Supreme Court Finds Warhol’s Commercial Licensing of “Orange Prince” to Vanity Fair Is Not Fair Use and Infringes Goldsmith’s Famed Rock Photo

Intellectual Property Law Blog

s (AWF), [1] in a long-awaited decision impacting fair use under Section 107(1) of the Copyright Act. Goldsmith and, as a result, did not constitute fair use. [2] Goldsmith and, as a result, did not constitute fair use. [2] Goldsmith was not paid or credited for this use.

Fair Use 130
article thumbnail

Fourth Circuit Issues a Bummer Fair Use Ruling–Philpot v. IJR

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

In 2013, Philpot uploaded the photo to Wikimedia Commons, which is governed by the standard Creative Commons license requiring attribution. Philpot claims his standard photo licensing fee is $3,500, but reuses of the photo from Wikipedia Commons didn’t require any payment (just attribution). Amount Taken. ” Market Effect.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

The Art Critic’s Role in Fair Use

Patently-O

Although Warhol is dead, his art, legacy, copyrights, and potential copy-wrongs live on. Apparently Vanity Fair commissioned Warhol to make an illustration for its 1984 article on Prince. Those have been sold and also reproduced in various forms in ways that go well beyond the original license. by Dennis Crouch. 17 U.S.C. §

Fair Use 118
article thumbnail

When is it Fair Use to Use a Photo to “Illustrate” an Article?

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

One of the practices that has generated a sizeable number of disputes and rulings is the use of photos to illustrate articles. These three cases address fair use in this context. McGucken moved for summary judgment on the fair use defense. The second factor weighs slightly against fair use.

Fair Use 130
article thumbnail

U.S. Supreme Court Vindicates Photographer But Destabilizes Fair Use — Andy Warhol Foundation v. Goldsmith (Guest Blog Post)

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Supreme Court affirmed the Second Circuit’s ruling that the reproduction of Andy Warhol’s Orange Prince on the cover of a magazine tribute was not a fair use of Lynn Goldsmith’s photo of the singer-songwriter Prince, on which the Warhol portrait was based. By Guest Blogger Tyler Ochoa By a 7-2 vote, the U.S. Goldsmith , No. 569 (1994).

article thumbnail

Fair Use: Graham v. Prince and Warhol v. Goldsmith

LexBlog IP

A pair of copyright decisions issued in May, one involving the appropriation artist Richard Prince [1] and the other involving works portraying the musician known as Prince, explore and expand on the “fair use” defense to copyright infringement. On May 11, the U.S. 2] A week later, the U.S. 3] Graham v.

article thumbnail

Copy and Paste – Supreme Court Holds Copying Software Function Calls Was Fair Use

TraskBritt Intellectual Property

Supreme Court issued a decision in litigation involving Google’s Android operating system for mobile devices on April 5, 2021. When developing Android, Google had copied the text and format of function calls from Oracle’s Java SE Application Programming Interface (API). 18-956, 2021 U.S. In Google LLC v.