LexBlog IP

MAY 19, 2023

On May 18, 2023, the Supreme Court found that artistic changes to a pre-existing work, alone, not necessarily sufficient to make a derivative work fair use. Applying a new lens on how to view the purpose of a derivative work under U.S. copyright law. Copyright law in the U.S.

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Derivative Work Copyright Law Art 52

LexBlog IP

JULY 7, 2023

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.

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Art Licensing Copyright Infringement 52

LexBlog IP

MAY 19, 2023

Clarifying Copyright Fair Use in Commercialized and Licensed Visual Arts: Insights from Warhol v. Goldsmith by Jaime Chandra Clarifying Fair Use in Commercialized & Licensed Visual Arts: Insights from the Warhol v. We’re talking about Andy Warhol Foundation for Visual Arts, Inc. Table of Contents: Warhol v.

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Art Licensing Derivative Work 52

LexBlog IP

JUNE 5, 2023

’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] for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching.

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Licensing Cease and Desist Derivative Work 52

LexBlog IP

MAY 26, 2023

’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] for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching.

Fair Use 52

Fair Use Licensing Cease and Desist Derivative Work 52

IIPRD

APRIL 8, 2024

This article delves into the ongoing debate around the issue of right of ownership of copyright by AI generators for their novel artwork. 2] This shift i.e. from assisting work to generating it has taken the legal regime of IPR by a storm of confusion and questions.

Art 52

Art Artwork Intellectual Property Copyright Law 52

LexBlog IP

MAY 19, 2023

In 1984, Vanity Fair sought to license the photograph for an “artist reference” in a story about the musician. Goldsmith agreed to license a one-time use of the photograph with full attribution. The first factor of fair use considers the nature of and reasons for a copier’s use of an original work. [4]

Licensing 52

Licensing Fair Use Copyright Derivative Work 52

Kluwer Copyright Blog

MAY 9, 2023

The biggest copyright law question in the EU and US is probably whether using in-copyright works to train generative AI models is copyright infringement or falls under the transient and temporary copying and TDM exceptions (in the EU) or fair use (in the US). In the aftermath of cases like Authors Guild v.

Copyright 137

Copyright Fair Use Copyright Law Law 137

Kluwer Copyright Blog

JULY 16, 2023

.” 3) How to Distinguish Transformative Fair Uses From Infringing Derivative Works? Supreme Court agreed to review the Second Circuit’s ruling that Andy Warhol’s series of colorful prints and drawings of Prince were not transformative fair uses of Lynn Goldsmith’s photograph.

Blogging 52

Blogging Law IP Fair Use 52

LexBlog IP

MARCH 18, 2022

NFTs can be based on three-dimensional items or artwork, or can be purely digital creations—for example, a collectable digital sneaker or a token used in a videogame. Most NFTs are protected under US Copyright Law as creative works and/or may be derivative works based on pre-existing copyright-protected works.

Trademark 52

Trademark Non-Fungible Tokens Intellectual Property Branding 52

IP Tech Blog

MARCH 18, 2022

NFTs can be based on three-dimensional items or artwork, or can be purely digital creations—for example, a collectable digital sneaker or a token used in a videogame. Most NFTs are protected under US Copyright Law as creative works and/or may be derivative works based on pre-existing copyright-protected works.

Trademark 62

Trademark Non-Fungible Tokens Branding Brands 62

LexBlog IP

APRIL 13, 2022

According to Miramax, the creation of the NFTs constituted copyright infringement because they were unauthorized derivative works of Pulp Fiction. [23] StockX asserted several affirmative defenses, including fair use and the first sale doctrine, claiming that Nike’s suit “threatens the legitimate use of NFTs.

Non-Fungible Tokens 52

Non-Fungible Tokens Social Media Contracts Branding 52