article thumbnail

Prince, Prince, Prints: Will the Supreme Court Revisit Fair Use?

LexBlog IP

But unbeknownst to Goldsmith, he also created fifteen additional works (including silkscreen prints and pencil drawings) using the Prince Photograph for his own artistic purposes. It found that all four fair use factors weighed against fair use. [12]

article thumbnail

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

Technology & Marketing Law Blog

Legal Background: Copyright and Derivative Works Copyright law protects original works of authorship, including “pictorial, graphic, and sculptural works,” 17 U.S.C. For obvious reasons, the copyright in a photograph does not include the right to publicly perform the copyrighted work.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

Does Transformative Matter? No, At Least Where Use Is Commercial

LexBlog IP

The case began after Prince died in 2016, when Vanity Fair magazine’s parent company, Condé Nast, published a special commemorative magazine celebrating his life. Goldsmith did not know about the Prince Series until 2016, when she saw Orange Prince on the cover of Condé Nast’s magazine. .” ” Id.

article thumbnail

The clash of artistic rights: Warhol, Goldsmith, and the boundaries of copyright in Brazil and in the U.S.

Kluwer Copyright Blog

In 2016, Condé Nast acquired a license from the Warhol Foundation to use the Prince Series as illustrations for a new magazine. A third reflection emerges: undoubtedly, Warhol’s work was created based on Goldsmith’s. 3] Regardless of the creative level of a work, copyright comes with limitations.